Search results

Leveraging autoethnography and conceptual syntheses, the author stake the claim that supporting people to empower themselves in the naming and description of their lived realities beyond assumed incompleteness constitutes a resistant form of critical praxis the author name as epistemic (de)centering. Through these engagements of varying proximity with the other, meaning those Lives-Hopes-Dreams often outside researchers' personal and professional standpoints, the author aims to argue that critical, reflexive praxes where historically marginalized people, including those living/surviving/thriving with impairments-disabilities, can be afforded place, space, time and respect to visibilize their experiences.

In this paper, the author dreams of radical possibilities afforded by epistemic disobedience to value those Body-Mind-Spirits often elided among social justice work. Interrogating nuances among pieces in a recently published special issue named as “Disability Justice,” the author rearticulates a reality of possibility where the rhetoric that sustains invisibilizations of disabled people via racial-capitalist-ableist-coloniality is disrupted to explicitly position these identities as valuable to inform how to transform society in more just ways.

Analyses from this work further conversations on disabled subjectivities, post-oppositional logics of centers-margins, and resistant knowledge projects to illuminate how to approach the questions of who gets to decide when justice is achieved, and how abled Body-Mind-Spirits can meet their commitments to justice, especially among those that work in social justice circles.

Infusing across this work the voices of multiply marginalized, and disabled, folks provides a cognitive-systemic architecture where research moves from “what if” as abstraction to engage with “how to” center disability justice in education (DJE). In doing so, this research pushes our approaches to social justice praxis, in education and beyond, to think about our individual and collective proximities to self and other, and more specifically disabled Lives-Hopes-Dreams.

This chapter draws on data from two studies, one in Canada and another in the United States, focused on the experiences of pedagogical partnership as described by students traditionally underrepresented and underserved in higher education. These students argue that such collaborations with faculty hold promise for creating more inclusive and responsive practices. Using the concept of epistemic justice, the authors explore how partnerships can facilitate epistemological forms of equity and inclusion by (1) creating more equitable conceptions of knowing and knowledge that open possibilities for (2) fostering students’ confidence in their knowledge and willingness to share it with others. The authors argue that partnerships – in their epistemic, relational, and affective impacts – are one powerful way to recognize underrepresented and underserved students as “holders and creators of knowledge” (Delgado-Bernal, 2002, p. 106) and bring about greater epistemic justice in higher education.

The support of host country nationals (HCNs) is a key determinant of expatriate adjustment and performance. The purpose of this paper is to explore underlying motivations for their support to expatriates. Previous research has shown that HCNs with pro-social motivation are more likely to help expatriates. Drawing upon motivated information processing in groups (MIP-G) theory, the authors test whether epistemic motivation moderates the observed relationship between pro-social motivation and HCNs’ support toward expatriates.

The authors ran two correlational studies (N = 267) in the USA (Study 1) and South Korea (Study 2). Across two studies, epistemic motivation and social motivation were measured using their multiple proxies validated in previous research. The authors also measured HCNs’ willingness to offer role information and social support to a hypothetical expatriate worker.

Results lend support to our hypotheses that pro-social HCNs are more willing than pro-self HCNs to provide role information and social support to the expatriates, but this occurs only when they have high rather than low epistemic motivation.

The current paper contributes the literature on HCNs helping expatriates by qualifying the prior results that a pro-social motivation (e.g. agreeableness and collectivism) increases the willingness of HCNs to help expatriates. As hypothesized, this study found that that case is only true when HCNs have high, rather than low, epistemic motivation. Also, previous research on MIP-G theory has mainly focused on the performance of small groups (e.g. negotiation, creativity and decision-making). To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is the first attempt to test MIP-G theory in the context of HCNs helping expatriates.

In the past few years, research focusing on misinformation, referred to broadly as fake news, has experienced revived attention. Past studies have focused on explaining the ways in which people correct it online and on social media. However, fewer studies have dealt with the ways in which people are able to identify fake news (i.e. fake news literacy). This study contributes to the latter by theoretically connect people’s general social media use, political knowledge and political epistemic efficacy with individuals’ fake news literacy levels.

A diverse and representative two-wave panel survey in the United States was conducted (June 2019 for Wave 1, October 2019 for Wave 2). We performed cross-sectional, lagged and autoregressive regression analyses to examined how social media us, people’s political knowledge and political epistemic efficacy are related to their fake news literacy.

Results suggest that the more people used social media, were politically knowledgeable and considered they were able to find the truth in politics (i.e. epistemic political efficacy), the more likely they were to discern whether the news is fake. Implications of helping media outlets and policy makers be better positioned to provide the public with corrective action mechanisms in the struggle against fake news are discussed.

The measurement instrument employed in the study relies on subjects’ self-assessment, as opposed to unobtrusive trace (big) digital data, which may not completely capture the nuances of people’s social media news behaviors.

This study sheds light on how the way people understand politics and gain confidence in finding political truth may be key elements when confronting and discerning fake news. With the help of these results, journalists, media outlets and policymakers may be better positioned to provide citizens with efficient, preemptive and corrective action mechanisms in the struggle against misinformation.

Recent literature highlights the importance of literacy education to contest fake news, but little is known about what specific mechanisms would contribute to foster and reinvigorate people’s fake news literacy. This study helps address this gap.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-03-2024-0140

The current study aims to explore the role of stories in organizational sensemaking processes. Rather than positioning stories as one among many different sensemaking mechanisms, it is argued that stories allow a particular kind of sensemaking that is inherently open‐ended, distinguishing it from theoretical and propositional explanations for organizational phenomena. Drawing on previous Foucaultian discussions of epistemes, the paper aims to introduce the notions of epistemic impasse and epistemic spillover, arguing that cross‐functional interaction can cause tensions between incompatible epistemic bases, and that stories can act as a mechanism to overcome such tensions.

A qualitative methodology is used to illustrate the above mechanism in an ethnographic, participant‐observer study of a university student‐support center.

The results show how storytelling led to an increasingly open and ultimately universalizing tendency with the center, thus demonstrating both the potentials and limits of using stories within organizations.

The current paper adds to the storytelling literature by showing how stories not only act as a sensemaking mechanism, but also reimagine the definition of sense in a way that makes it more polyvalent and open to multiple epistemic standpoints.

The immersion of global higher education in a competitive, economy-oriented paradigm calls for perspectives on internationalisation that are explicitly aimed at shaping cooperative, sustainable and alternative/decolonial futures. The authors of this chapter recognise the relevance of research perspectives that – epistemologically aligned with critical internationalisation studies – emphasise the dilemmas and contradictions of internationalisation of higher education (IHE). In this chapter, the authors therefore present reflections that confront the hegemonic discourse that portrays the phenomenon of IHE as an unconditional good. The authors dialogue with the idea of promoting a perspective of IHE from and for the Global South – that is, one that instead of suppressing, recognises the epistemic plurality of the world. To do so, the authors assume that any critical efforts to address internationalisation in the context of the Global South can be enriched when explicitly situated within colonial history. The authors argue that looking towards the future of IHE requires a look towards its past. Specifically, the authors bring together four interrelated lines of argument: (i) recognising the university as a historical producer and reproducer of colonial hierarchies; (ii) conceiving the Global South as a field of epistemic challenges; (iii) having a non-myopic view of South–South cooperation; and (iv) spreading the epistemological horizon of internationalisation. Such reflections might contribute to envisioning new horizons for IHE in the Global South and its relation with those who have been relegated to a status of invisibility.

Team autonomy is thought to be important for team innovation performance. However, the theoretical basis of the relationship between team autonomy and team innovation performance is not well understood, and previous studies have found inconsistent relations between them. Based on motivated information processing in groups (MIP-G) theory, this paper aims to explain how and when team autonomy could influence team innovation performance from a new team-level perspective.

Using a two-wave, time-lagged survey design, the authors collected data from 340 members of 86 teams in China. PROCESS 3.0 for SPSS was used to test hypothesized relationships.

The results show that team autonomy is positively related to team information exchange. Team information exchange mediates the positive relationship between team autonomy and team innovation performance. Furthermore, the positive relationship between team autonomy and team information exchange is stronger with less task conflict, which runs contrary to the hypothesis. Additionally, relationship conflict does not adjust the impact of team autonomy on team information exchange.

This study provides a new perspective to explain the mechanism between team autonomy and team innovation performance at team level from the information processing approach, specifically, MIP-G theory. It also incorporates team conflicts as important contextual factors to answer the call for a wider study of boundary conditions in the team autonomy research.

The purpose of the article is to show the regime of truth in the institutional commissions that have the objective of restoring history by establishing a democratic, equitable, comprehensive, inclusive and fair criterion against the attempts of re-victimization and suppression of memory that Western political and cultural traditions have installed through their mechanisms of power.

Based on the analysis of the cases of Inés Fernández Ortega and Valentina Rosendo Cantú, they establish the material conditions from which prejudices and hegemonic stereotypes are intertwined to reproduce serious violations of human rights in democratic political and epistemic frameworks. The colonial function of the truth commissions in Mexico is analyzed, which are presented as mechanisms for social development, political and colonial reproduction of liberal democracy.

The qualitative results allow considering the way in which the different truth commissions in Mexico have been strongly linked to epistemic mechanisms in which truth and justice favor the reproduction of established relationships based on race, social class and gender. Especially in the so-called democratic transition, violence, truth and justice come together to highlight power relations in situations that have been disavowed by the intelligentsia.

The limitations of the research are found in the historical configuration of the truth commissions in Mexico. The data, references and assessments are crossed by the initial function of the truth commissions and the establishment of apparatuses and mechanisms based on transitional justice. Based on this, it can be considered a methodological oversight to shift the analysis of truth commissions toward a critical assessment of the truth as a regime of government and hegemonic and colonization criteria from two very specific cases.

The originality of the work is found in the critical discernment of truth as a political category and the coloniality of power.

A growing interdisciplinary literature explores how people can simultaneously hold strong convictions and remain open to the possibility of learning from others with whom they disagree. This tension impacts not only knowledge development but also public discourse within a diverse and disagreeing democracy. This volume of Political Power and Social Theory considers the specific question of how religious convictions inform how people engage in democratic life, particularly across deep political divides. In this introduction, I begin by discussing how a narrow vision of religious citizens as dogmatic believers has led observers to frame religion as a concerning source of democratic distortion – encouraging too much arrogance and not enough humility. Yet this dogmatic believer narrative captures only one aspect of American religion. Juxtaposing a snapshot of dogmatic believers alongside two other snapshots of religious groups engaging in political life raises complex questions about the relationship between religious conviction, humility, and democracy in a time of deep political polarization. I argue that answering these questions requires a sociological approach that is attuned to power, context, culture, institutions, and history. At the same time, I show how attention to the tension between conviction and humility has the potential to enrich the sociological study of religion and democracy, and particularly ethnographic research across the moral/political divide.

It was not until the late 1960s that housing attracted much attention from academic social scientists. Since that time the literature has expanded widely and diversified, establishing housing with a specialised status in economics, sociology, politics, and in related subjects. As we would expect, the new literature covers a technical, statistical, theoretical, ideological, and historical range. Housing studies have not been conceived and interpreted in a monolithic way, with generally accepted concepts and principles, or with uniformly fixed and precise methodological approaches. Instead, some studies have been derived selectively from diverse bases in conventional theories in economics or sociology, or politics. Others have their origins in less conventional social theory, including neo‐Marxist theory which has had a wider intellectual following in the modern democracies since the mid‐1970s. With all this diversity, and in a context where ideological positions compete, housing studies have consequently left in their wake some significant controversies and some gaps in evaluative perspective. In short, the new housing intellectuals have written from personal commitments to particular cognitive, theoretical, ideological, and national positions and experiences. This present piece of writing takes up the two main themes which have emerged in the recent literature. These themes are first, questions relating to building and developing housing theory, and, second, the issue of how we are to conceptualise housing and relate it to policy studies. We shall be arguing that the two themes are closely related: in order to create a useful housing theory we must have awareness and understanding of housing practice and the nature of housing.