Email this article 
Hide
Show all
Epistemic authority and the post-truth phenomenon – analysis in the context of the risk and cultural trauma theories
Abstract
Introduction: The study examines authority within the 'post-truth' era and today's climate of permanent risk. The focus is on the epistemic perspective of identifying authority as a source or entity that reproduces content to which the recipient attributes reliability and credibility. The study used the method of analyzing source texts as well as the content of social diagnoses.
Research Aim: The study applies cultural and national trauma theories to examine how public discourse categorizes risky events and justifies specific risk management strategies.
Evidence-based Facts: Referring to Neal’s theory of national trauma, it was assumed that widespread exposure to risk factors and crises intensifies the need to identify authorities. In turn, referring to Alexander’s theory of cultural trauma, the importance of representatives of carrier groups in creating a discourse that describes and explains an event and defines the collective identity of its participants was pointed out. High dynamics of discourse creation in late modern society, ease of giving it public status, and deficit in recipients’ competences related to critical evaluation of information sources and reliability of content, foster dissemination of post-truth content. This phenomenon is reinforced in a situation of weakened public trust in key institutions.
Summary: From the perspective of cultural trauma theory, it is crucial to assign epistemic authority to representatives of various carrier groups. Transmitted discourses compete for social recognition and for granting authority to those who create them.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Alexander, J. C. (2004). Toward a theory of cultural trauma. In J. C. Alexander, R. Eyerman, B. Giesen, N. J. Smelser, & P. Sztompka (Eds.), Cultural trauma and collective identity (pp. 1-30). University of California Press.
Ashkenazi, S., Livni, G., Klein, A., Kremer, N., Havlin, A., & Berkowitz, O. (2020). The relationship between parental source of information and knowledge about measles / measles vaccine and vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine, 38(46), 7292–7298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.09.044
Beck, U. (2005). Władza i przeciwwładza w epoce globalnej. Nowa ekonomia polityki światowej. Scholar.
Bocheński, J. M. (1993). Co to jest autorytet? In J. Bocheński (Ed.), Logika i filozofia (pp. 187-324). Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Chapman University. (2024). Chapman survey of American fears 2024: Key findings. https://www.chapman.edu/wilkinson/research-centers/babbie-center/_files/2024-csaf-key-findings-final.pdf
Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej. (2025). Kobiety w świecie wzorów i modeli życia (Komunikat z badań jakościowych nr 2). CBOS.
https://www.cbos.pl/PL/publikacje/fokusy/pliki/2025/fk_002_2025.pdf
Colman, A. M. (2009). Słownik psychologii. Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Cologna, V., Mede, N. G., Berger, S., Besley, J., Cameron, B., Joubert, M., Maibach, E. W., Mihelj, S., Oreskes, N., Schäfer, M. S., van der Linden, S., Abdul Aziz, N. I., Abdulsalam, S., Abu Shamsi, N., Aczel, B., Adinugroho, I., Alabrese, E., Aldoh, A., Alfano, M., & Zwaan, R. A. (2025). Trust in scientists and their role in society across 68 countries. Nature Humam Behaviour, 9, 713–730. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-02090-5
de Tchorzewski, A. (2018). Autorytet i jego struktura aksjologiczna. Studia Paedagogica Ignatiana, 20(5), 187–212. https://doi.org/10.12775/SPI.2017.5.008
Eyerman, R. (2001). Cultural trauma, slavery and the formation of African American identity. Cambridge University Press.
Farkas, J., & Schousboe, S. (2024). Facts, values, and the epistemic authority of journalism: How journalists use and define the terms fake news, junk news, misinformation, and disinformation. Nordicom Review, 45(1), 137-157. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2024-0016
Glăveanu, V. P. (2017). Psychology in the post-truth era. Europe's Journal of Psychology, 13(3), 375–377. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v13i3.1509
Haugaard, M. (2017). What is authority? Journal of Classical Sociology, 18(2), 104-132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468795X17723737
Ipsos. (2022). Global trustworthiness index 2022. https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2022-07/Global%20trustworthiness%202022%20Report.pdf
Jagielska, K. (2023). Autorytet w rozumieniu przedstawicieli pokolenia Z. Szkoła – Zawód – Praca, 26, 183-194. https://doi.org/10.34767/SZP.2023.02.07
Kim, S., Capasso, A., Cook, S. H., Ali, S. H., Jones, A. M., Foreman, J, DiClemente, R. J., & Tozan, Y. (2021). Impact of COVID-19-related knowledge on protective behaviors: The moderating role of primary sources of information. PLoS ONE, 16(11), Article e0260643. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260643
Koronska, K. (2023). Mapping post-truth spaces concerning the war in Ukraine. https://www.veraai.eu/posts/mapping-post-truth-spaces-concerning-the-war-in-ukraine-dmi
Lyng, S. (2008). Edgework, risk and uncertainty. In J. O. Zinn (Ed.), Social Theories of Risk and Uncertainty (pp. 106-137). Blackwell Publishing.
Michelsen, N., & Tallis, B. (2018). Post-truth-telling in international relations. New Perspectives. International Journal of Central & East European Politics and International Relations, 26(3), 7-15. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2336825X1802600301
Neil, A. G. (2017). National trauma and collective memory. Extraordinary events in the American experience. Routledge.
Nygren, K. G., Olofsson, A., & Öhman, S. (2020). A framework of intersectional risk theory in the age of ambivalence. Palgrave Macmillan.
Pawłowski, Ł. (2017). Przedmowa. In R. Keyes (Ed.), Czas postprawdy. Nieszczerość i oszustwa w codziennym życiu (pp. 9-27). Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Rorty, R. (2003). Przygodność, ironia i solidarność. Wydawnictwo Akademii Bialskiej.
Schutz, A. (1976). Equality and the meaning structure of the social world. In A. Brodersen, (Ed.), Collected Papers II. Phaenomenologica, vol 15 (pp. 226-273). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1340-6_11
Stevanovic, M. (2021). Deontic authority and the maintenance of lay and expert identities during joint decision making: Balancing resistance and compliance. Discourse Studies, 23(5), 670–689.
Tesich, S. (1992). A government of lies. The Nation, 6(13), 12-14.
Tuziak, B. (2010). Autorytet jako zjawisko społeczne. Wymiar lokalny. Studia Socjologiczne, 2(197), 53-88.
Valladares, L. (2022). Post-truth and education. Science & Education, 31, 1311–1337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00293-0
Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2018). Thinking about ‘information disorder’: formats of misinformation, disinformation, and mal-information. In C. Ireton & J. Posetti (Eds.), Journalism, ‘fake news’& disinformation (pp. 43–54). UNESCO.
Weber, M. (2002). Gospodarka i społeczeństwo. Zarys socjologii rozumiejącej. Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
World Health Organization [WHO]. (2023). Infodemic. https://www.who.int/health-topics/infodemic#tab=tab_1
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/lrp.2026.45.3.7-20
Date of publication: 2026-09-28 10:44:42
Date of submission: 2025-12-31 20:50:24
Statistics
Indicators
Copyright (c) 2026
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.