Epistemic bubbles and echo chambers in the progress of science

Ulysses Albuquerque

doi:10.15451/ec2025-11-14-38-1-19

Autores

Ulysses Albuquerque Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8131-8429

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15451/ec2025-11-14-38-1-19

Palavras-chave:

Cognitive barriers, Critical epistemology, Epistemic resistance, Institutional constraints, Knowledge production, Scientific community

Resumo

A diversidade epistêmica promove necessariamente o avanço científico, ou essa ideia persiste mais como princípio normativo do que como constatação empírica? Neste ensaio, proponho a hipótese de que o pluralismo científico não implica, por si só, fluidez epistêmica. Comunidades científicas distintas podem compartilhar espaços de publicação e compromissos retóricos, mantendo-se, contudo, epistemicamente isoladas. Com base em debates recentes sobre bolhas epistêmicas e câmaras de eco, sustento que, mesmo na ciência, tradicionalmente concebida como empreendimento autocorretivo, mecanismos de exposição seletiva e filtragem institucional podem restringir a permeabilidade entre perspectivas. Frequentemente apresentada como uma disciplina intrinsecamente diversa, a etnobiologia oferece um contexto para investigar se a pluralidade declarada se traduz em abertura dialógica ou se estabiliza como paralelismo. A argumentação trata a etnobiologia não como um caso comprovado, mas como um campo no qual essa hipótese de pluralismo sem fluidez pode ser examinada. Eu convido a reconsiderar como o contato epistêmico, a reflexividade e o desenho institucional moldam a arquitetura moral e cognitiva do progresso científico.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Referências

Albuquerque UP (2022a) What is the métier of ethnobiology or why should this science be busy? Ethnobotany Research and Applications 24:9. doi:10.32859/era.24.9.1-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32859/era.24.9.1-7

Albuquerque UP (2022b) How to become an ethnobiologist: against the cultural monopoly. Ethnobotany Research and Applications 24:1–8. doi:10.32859/era.24.6.1-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32859/era.24.6.1-8

Albuquerque UP, Ferreira Júnior WS (2023) Hypothesis Testing in Ethnobotany: 30 years After Phillips and Gentry’s Seminal Work. Ethnobiology and Conservation 12:14. doi:10.15451/ec2023-06-12.14-1-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15451/ec2023-06-12.14-1-3

Albuquerque UP, Alves RRN (2024) Integrating depth and rigor in ethnobiological and ethnomedical research. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 20:6. doi:10.1186/s13002-023-00643-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-023-00643-y

Albuquerque UP (2025) The Ethnobiology of Absurdities. Ethnobiology and Conservation 14:01. doi:10.15451/ec2025-09-14.01-1-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15451/ec2025-04-14.17-1-2

Albuquerque UP, Alves RRN, Ferreira Júnior WS (2025) The contemporary challenge for ethical research involving the knowledge of indigenous peoples and local communities and afro-descendants and other marginalized, minority, or minoritized groups. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 21:29. doi:10.1186/s13002-025-00774-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-025-00774-4

Albuquerque UP, Magalhães AR, Gusmão RAF (2024a) Niche construction. Reference Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences 1: 1–9. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-443-21964-1.00026-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-21964-1.00026-4

Albuquerque UP, Alves RRN, Carmo RFR (2024b) Is there a neocolonial stance in ethnobiology? Ethnobiology and Conservation. doi:10.15451/ec2024-01-13.06-1-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15451/ec2024-01-13.06-1-4

Albuquerque UP, Maroyi A, Ladio AH, Pieroni A, Abbasi AM, Toledo BA, Dahdouh-Guebas F, Hallwass G, Soldati GT, Odonne G, Vandebroek I (2024c) Advancing ethnobiology for the ecological transition and a more inclusive and just world: a comprehensive framework for the next 20 years. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 20:18. doi:10.1186/s13002-024-00661-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-024-00661-4

Al-Omoush KS, Lassala C, Al-Debei MM, Ribeiro-Navarrete S (2023) Social innovations during unprecedented crises: the roles of crowd wisdom, echo chambers, and social trust. Transformations in Business and Economics 22(3A):787–808

Arguedas AR, Robertson CT, Fletcher R, Nielsen RK (2022) Echo chambers, filter bubbles, and polarisation: a literature review. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. doi:10.60625/risj-etxj-7k60

Arruda HF, Benatti A, Silva FN, Comin CH, Costa LF (2021) Contrarian effects and echo chamber formation in opinion dynamics. Journal of Physics: Complexity 2(1):025010. doi:10.1088/2632-072X/abe561 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/2632-072X/abe561

Bakshy E, Messing S, Adamic LA (2015) Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science 348(6239):1130–1132. doi:10.1126/science.aaa1160 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1160

Blancke S (2022) Science as a moral system. Synthese 200:454. doi:10.1007/s11229-022-03877-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-022-03877-7

Bussmann RW, Paniagua Zambrana NY, De Meyer E (2025) What are the most significant challenges that ethnobiology and ethnomedicine have faced so far, and how were they dealt with? Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 21:63. doi:10.1186/s13002-025-00814-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-025-00814-z

Campbell JL, Pedersen OK (2008) Knowledge regimes and comparative political economy. Department of Business and Politics, Copenhagen Business School.

Campos JLA, Sobral A, Silva JS, Araújo TAS, Ferreira Júnior WS, Santoro FR, Santos Gc, Albuquerque UP (2016) Insularity and citation behavior of scientific articles in young fields: the case of ethnobiology. Scientometrics 109: 1037–1055. doi: 10.1007/s11192-016-2067-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2067-2

Cinelli M, De Francisci Morales G, Galeazzi A, Quattrociocchi W, Starnini M (2021) The echo chamber effect on social media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118(9):e2023301118. doi:10.1073/pnas.2023301118 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2023301118

Crivos MA (2014) Mario Bunge y la etnografía. In: Denegri GM (Ed.), Elogio de la Sabiduría: Ensayos en homenaje a Mario Bunge en su 95° aniversario, pp. 143–148. Buenos Aires: Eudeba.

Fernández-Llamazares Á, Teixidor-Toneu I (2025) Towards a forward-looking ethnobiology: envisioning and co-creating biocultural futures. J Ethnobiology Ethnomedicine 21: 72. doi: 10.1186/s13002-025-00820-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-025-00820-1

Flachs A (2025) Ethnobiology and degrowth: a review of the opportunities for collaboration, generative inquiry, and solidarity in socio-ecological research. Journal of Ethnobiology. doi:10.1177/02780771251374886 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02780771251374886

Gantt EE, Holmes B (2025) The structure of nonscientific revolutions: Evolutionary psychology, explanation, and the ruination of reason. The Humanistic Psychologist (Advance online publication). doi: 10.1037/hum0000405 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/hum0000405

Garimella K, De Francisci Morales G, Gionis A, Mathioudakis M (2018) Political discourse on social media: echo chambers, gatekeepers, and the price of bipartisanship. In: Proceedings of the 2018 World Wide Web Conference (WWW ’18), New York: ACM, pp. 913–922. doi:10.1145/3178876.3186139 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3178876.3186139

Güngör A (2023) Echo chambers and friendship. Episteme 20(3):1–13. doi:10.1017/epi.2023.57 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2023.41

Hull DL (1988) Science as a process: an evolutionary account of the social and conceptual development of science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226360492.001.0001

Lackey RT (2007) Science, scientists, and policy advocacy. Conservation Biology 21(1):12–17. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00639.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00639.x

Laland KN, Uller T, Feldman MW, Sterelny K, Müller GB, Moczek A, Jablonka E, Odling-Smee J (2015) The extended evolutionary synthesis: its structure, assumptions, and predictions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 282(1813):20151019. doi:10.1098/rspb.2015.1019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.1019

López-Castellano F (2024) Neoliberalism, institutional change and the new culture of the university professoriate: the Spanish case. Studies in Higher Education 50(1):140–154. doi:10.1080/03075079.2024.2331071 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2331071

Łuczaj Ł (2023) Descriptive ethnobotanical studies are needed for the rescue operation of documenting traditional knowledge. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 19:37. doi:10.1186/s13002-023-00604-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-023-00604-5

Ludwig D (2018) Does cognition still matter in ethnobiology? Ethnobiology Letters 9: 269-275. doi:10.14237/ebl.9.2.2018.1350 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14237/ebl.9.2.2018.1350

Ludwig D, Ruphy S (2024) Scientific pluralism. In: Zalta EN, Nodelman U (eds) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2024 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2024/entries/scientific-pluralism/

Ludwig D, El-Hani CN (2025) Transformative Transdisciplinarity: An Introduction to Community-Based Philosophy. Oxford University Press, New York. doi: 10.1093/ 9780197815281.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/9780197815281.001.0001

McAlvay AC, Armstrong CG, Baker J, Elk LB, Bosco S, Hanazaki N, Joseph L, Martínez-Cruz TE, Nesbitt M, Palmer MA, Priprá de Almeida WC (2021) Ethnobiology phase VI: decolonizing institutions, projects, and scholarship. Journal of Ethnobiology 41:170–191. doi: 10.2993/0278-0771-41.2.17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-41.2.170

McKinnon S (2005) Neo-liberal genetics - the myths and moral tales of evolutionary psychology. Prickly Paradigm Press

Martin BR (2016) What is happening to our universities? Prometheus 34(1):7–24. doi:10.1080/08109028.2016.1222123 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2016.1222123

Matviyenko S, Kirtz JL (2023) Echo chambers of paranoid knowledge: on cyberwar epistemology. Discourse 45(3):381–403. doi:10.1353/dis.2023.a923675 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/dis.2023.a923675

Messling L, Lu Y, van Eck CW (2025) Advocacy – defending science or destroying it? Interviews with 47 climate scientists about their fundamental concerns. Public Understanding of Science 34(4):479–494. doi:10.1177/09636625251314164 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625251314164

Nguyen CT (2020) Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles. Episteme 17(2):141–161. doi:10.1017/epi.2018.32 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2018.32

Nickles T (2021) Historicist theories of scientific rationality. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2021 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2021/entries/rationality-historicist/

Oliveira DVB, Albuquerque UP (2021) Cultural evolution and digital media: diffusion of fake news about COVID-19 on Twitter. SN Computer Science 2:430. doi:10.1007/s42979-021-00836-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-021-00836-w

Pigliucci M, Müller GB (2010) Evolution – the extended synthesis. The MIT Press, Cambridge DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262513678.001.0001

Rathje S, Van Bavel JJ (2025) The psychology of virality. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 29: 914-927. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2025.06.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2025.06.014

Reyes-García V (2023) Beyond artificial academic debates: for a diverse, inclusive, and impactful ethnobiology and ethnomedicine. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 19:36. doi:10.1186/s13002-023-00611-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-023-00611-6

Römer F (2020) Evolving knowledge regimes: economic inequality and the politics of statistics in the United Kingdom since the postwar era. KNOW: A Journal on the Formation of Knowledge 4: 325–352. doi: 10.1086/710513. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/710513

Savy T, Flanders L, Karpanasamy T, Sun M, Gerlinger M (2025) Cancer evolution: from Darwin to the extended evolutionary synthesis. Trends in Cancer 11(3):204–215. doi:10.1016/j.trecan.2025.01.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trecan.2025.01.001

Sheeks M (2023) The myth of the good epistemic bubble. Episteme 20(3):685–700. doi:10.1017/epi.2022.52 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2022.52

Shields M (2025) On the value of changing your mind. Episteme 1–23. doi:10.1017/epi.2024.54 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2024.54

Simon G (2025) Neoliberalism in academia—what we can learn from physiology. In: Essop F (ed) Fundamentals of physiology, truth unveiled. Academic Press, pp. 63–82. doi:10.1016/B978-0-443-23655-6.00004-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-23655-6.00004-6

Sîrbu A, Giannotti F (2019) Algorithmic bias amplifies opinion fragmentation and polarization: a bounded confidence model. PLoS ONE 14(3):e0213246. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0213246 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213246

Soldati GT, Almada ED (2024) Political ethnobiology. Ethnobiology and Conservation 13. doi:10.15451/ec2024-07-13.20-1-18 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15451/ec2024-07-13.20-1-18

Stein S, Ahenakew C, Valley W, Sherpa PY, Crowson E, Robin T, Mendes W, Evans S (2024) Toward more ethical engagements between Western and Indigenous sciences. FACETS 9:1–14. doi:10.1139/facets-2023-0071 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2023-0071

Sun M, Ma X, Huo Y (2022) Does social media users’ interaction influence the formation of echo chambers? social network analysis based on vaccine video comments on YouTube. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19(23):15869. doi:10.3390/ijerph192315869 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192315869

Sun Y, Gao Y, Tobias-Webb J, Wang R, Liu F (2025) Fractal property: a tool for understanding the generation mechanism of echo chambers. Expert Systems with Applications 274:127036. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2025.127036 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2025.127036

Tomassi A, Falegnami A, Romano E (2024) Mapping automatic social media information disorder: the role of bots and AI in spreading misleading information in society. PLoS ONE 19(5):e0303183. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0303183 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0303183

Teixidor-Toneu I, Odonne G, Leonti M, Hudson M, Jordan FM, Mattalia G, Pankararu CGJ, Silva MT, Silva LS, Ulian T, Vandebroek I, Wall J, Hanazaki N (2026) Improving visibility for knowledge holders in ethnobiological and ethnopharmacological publications. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 355(Part A): 120632. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2025.120632. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2025.120632

Turner C (2023) Online echo chambers, online epistemic bubbles, and open-mindedness. Episteme 1–26. doi:10.1017/epi.2023.52 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2023.52

van Eck CW, Messling L, Hayhoe K (2024) Challenging the neutrality myth in climate science and activism. npj Climate Action 3: 81. doi:10.1038/s44168-024-00171-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44168-024-00171-9

Varella MAC (2018) Mal-entendidos sobre a psicologia evolucionista. In: Yamamoto ME, Valentova JV (Org.) Manual de psicologia evolucionista. EDUFRN, Natal, 142–166.

Veigl SJ (2021) Notes on a complicated relationship: scientific pluralism, epistemic relativism, and stances. Synthese 199:3485–3503. doi:10.1007/s11229-020-02943-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02943-2

Wu D, Yuan L, Li R, Li J (2018) Decomposing inequality in research funding by university-institute sub-group: a three-stage nested Theil index. Journal of Informetrics 12(4):1312–1326. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.10.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.10.007

Wu J, O’Connor C, Smaldino PE (2023) The cultural evolution of science. In: Tehrani JJ, Kendal J, Kendal R (eds) The Oxford handbook of cultural evolution. Oxford Academic. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198869252.013.78 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198869252.013.78

Zank S, Julião CG, Lima AS, Silva MT, Levis C, Hanazaki N, Peroni N. (2025) Ethnobiology! Until when will the colonialist legacy be reinforced? Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 21:1. doi:10.1186/s13002-024-00750-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-024-00750-4