学术出版中的认知非正义

出版科学 ›› 2025, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (4): 14-22.

学术出版中的认知非正义

中国科协学会服务中心

浙江大学哲学学院

收稿日期:2025-03-13 修回日期:2025-06-16 出版日期:2025-07-29 发布日期:2025-07-29
作者简介:郑泉，中国科协学会服务中心、中国自然辩证法研究会副编审；白惠仁，浙江大学哲学学院“百人计划”研究员、博士生导师。
基金资助:
本文系国家社会科学基金青年项目“当代科学中的认知非正义问题研究”（22CZX026）的阶段性成果。

Epistemic Injustice in Academic Publishing

Service Center of China Association for Science and Technology

School of Philosophy, Zhejiang University

Received:2025-03-13 Revised:2025-06-16 Online:2025-07-29 Published:2025-07-29

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

弗里克（Fricker）的认知非正义理论考察了知识传递过程中因身份偏见和解释资源缺乏导致的认知压迫。学术出版作为全球知识生产与传播的基础制度之一，其知识流通的结构性失衡引发了深层的认知非正义问题，主要表现为语言非正义（英语霸权降低非英语母语学者的理论可信度与解释框架）和引用非正义（忽视特定性别、地域、学科群体的认知贡献）。其根源在于知识殖民遗产、西方学术中心主义的制度化知识霸权以及由此形成的评价体系。这不仅阻碍边缘学者参与、扭曲知识可信度判断、压制多元解释框架，更导致人类公共知识体系的单一化、本土知识边缘化，并最终加剧知识分配的不公。而一个朝向认知正义的学术出版制度应着重考虑以下结构性改进：构建多元化学术评价体系、人工智能赋能知识民主化、建设包容性学术共同体文化，以构建更良序的全球知识生态。

关键词:

学术出版, 认知非正义, 学术评价体系

Abstract:

Fricker’ s theory of epistemic injustice examines the epistemic oppression arising from identity prejudice and the lack of interpretative resources within knowledge transmission. Academic publishing, as a fundamental institution of global knowledge production and dissemination, exhibits deep-seated epistemic injustice due to structural imbalances in knowledge circulation. This manifests primarily as linguistic injustice （where English hegemony systematically undermines the credibility and interpretive frameworks of non-native Englishspeaking scholars） and citation injustice （involving the systemic neglect of cognitive contributions from scholars based on gender, geographic location, and disciplinary affiliation）. These injustices are rooted in the legacy of epistemic colonialism, the institutionalized hegemony of Western academic centrism, and the resultant evaluation systems. Consequently, they not only hinder participation by marginalized scholars, distort judgments of knowledge credibility, and suppress pluralistic interpretive frameworks, but also lead to the homogenization of humanity’ s public knowledge systems, the marginalization of indigenous knowledge, and ultimately exacerbate inequities in knowledge distribution. To advance towards epistemic justice, academic publishingrequires the following structural reforms: constructing academic evaluation system, empowering knowledge democratization through artificial intelligence, and cultivating an inclusive academic community culture. These measures are essential for constructing a more well-ordered global knowledge ecosystem.

Key words:

Academic publishing, Epistemic injustice, Academic evaluation system

中图分类号:

G230

郑泉, 白惠仁.

学术出版中的认知非正义

[J]. 出版科学, 2025, 33(4): 14-22.

Zheng Quan, Bai Huiren.

Epistemic Injustice in Academic Publishing

[J]. Publishing Journal, 2025, 33(4): 14-22.

参考文献

[1][25] Dadze‐Arthur A， Mangai M S. The journal and the quest for epistemic justice[J]. Public Administration and Development， 2024， 44（4）：326-341

[2]Fricker M. Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing[M].Oxford University Press， 2007

[3] Báez-Vizcaíno K. Exploring epistemic injustice: A bibliometric analysis of academic production and its evolution[J]. Publishing Research Quarterly， 2024， 40（1）：11-29

[4] Goyanes M， Demeter M. How the geographic diversity of editorial boards affects what is published in JCR-ranked communication journals[J]. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly， 2020， 97（4）：1123-1148

[5]Meneghini R， Packer A L.Is there science beyond English? Initiatives to increase the quality and visibility of non-English publications might help to break down language barriers in scientific communication.[J]. Embo Reports， 2007， 8（2）：112-116

[6] Collyer F M. Global patterns in the publishing of academic knowledge: Global North， globalSouth[J]. Current Sociology， 2018， 66（1）：56-73

[7] Mills D. Decolonial perspectives on global higher education: Disassembling data infrastructures， reassembling the field[J]. Oxford Review of Education， 2022， 48（4）：474-491

[8] Cochrane L. Foreign Fictions:‘Research’about Ethiopian Legal Reform in a Top-Tier Academic Journal[J]. Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy （The）， 2022， 13（1）：64-84

[9] Cummings S， Hoebink P. Representation of academics from developing countries as authors and editorial board members in scientific journals: does this matter to the field of development studies?[J]. The European Journal of Development Research， 2017， 29（2）：369-383

[10] Ang P H， Knobloch-Westerwick S， Aguaded I， et al. Intellectual balkanization or globalization: The future of communication research publishing[J]. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly， 2019， 96（4）：963-979

[11] Vučković A， Sikimić V. How to fight linguistic injustice in science: Equity measures and mitigating agents[J]. Social Epistemology， 2023， 37（1）：80-96

[12] Catala A. Academic migration， linguistic justice， and epistemic injustice[J]. Journal of Political Philosophy， 2022， 30（3）：324-346

[13] Hyland K. Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic injustice[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing， 2016， 31 ：58-69

[14] Politzer-Ahles S， Holliday J J， Girolamo T， et al. Is linguistic injustice a myth? A response to Hyland （2016)[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing， 2016， 34 ：3-8

[15] Lillis T， Curry M J. The politics of English， language and uptake: The case of international academic journal article reviews[J]. Aila Review， 2015， 28（1）：127-150

[16] Kozlowski D， Larivière V， Sugimoto C R， et al. Intersectional inequalities in science[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences， 2022， 119（2）：e2113067119

[17] Milard B， Tanguy L. Citations in scientific texts: do social relations matter?[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology， 2018， 69（11）：1380-1395

[18] Mason S， Merga M K， Canché M S G， et al. The internationality of published higher education scholarship: How do the ‘top’journals compare?[J]. Journal of Informetrics， 2021， 15（2）：1-15

[19] Kwon D. The Rise of Citational Justice[J]. Nature， 2022， 603 ：568-571

[20] Bacevic J. Epistemic injustice and epistemic positioning: towards an intersectional political economy[J]. Current Sociology， 2023， 71（6）：1122-1140

[21] King E B， Avery D R， Hebl M R， et al. Systematic subjectivity: How subtle biases infect the scholarship review process[J]. Journal of Management， 2018，44（3）： 843–853

[22] 张艳霜 . 学术出版中的语言公正问题及对中国的启示 [J]. 出版科学，2024，32（5）：93-102

[23] Helm P， Bella G ， Koch G， et al. Diversity and Language Technology: How Techno-Linguistic Bias Can Cause Epistemic Injustice[J]. arXiv ：2307.13714

[24] Longino H. Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry[M]. Princeton ：Princeton University Press， 1990 ：76