A Synthetic Theory of Socio-Epistemic Structuration: Capital, Ideology, and Agency in the Age of Digital Inequality

TL;DR

The work addresses persistent social inequality in a digitally interconnected world by arguing that social structure and individual agency are mediated by epistemic frameworks that determine what is possible and legitimate. It introduces a synthetic theory of socio-epistemic structuration and a formal dynamic model that links exposure, friending bias, and social capital to long-run outcomes through latent epistemic states. The framework specifies axioms, a state-space dynamic for epistemic evolution, local-interference estimands with partial identification, and a comprehensive measurement and calibration plan, including replication and transparency commitments. The approach offers a principled basis for designing interventions that address both structural opportunities and the epistemic barriers that sustain inequality, and it calls for reflexive public sociology and careful use of big data in policy-relevant research.

Abstract

This article proposes a synthetic theory of socio-epistemic structuration to understand the reproduction of inequality in contemporary societies. I argue that social reality is not only determined by material structures and social networks but is fundamentally shaped by the epistemic frameworks -- ideologies, narratives, and attributions of agency -- that mediate actors' engagement with their environment. The theory integrates findings from critical race theory, network sociology, social capital studies, historical sociology, and analyses of emerging AI agency. I analyze how structures (from the ``racial contract'' to Facebook networks) and epistemic frameworks (from racist ideology to personal culture) mutually reinforce one another, creating resilient yet unequal life trajectories. Using data from large-scale experiments like the Moving to Opportunity and social network analyses, I demonstrate that exposure to diverse environments and social capital is a necessary but insufficient condition for social mobility; epistemic friction, manifested as `friending bias' and persistent cultural frameworks, systematically limits the benefits of such exposure. I conclude that a public and methodologically reflexive sociology must focus on unpacking and challenging these epistemic structures, recognizing the theoretical capacity of subaltern publics (``reverse tutelage'') and developing new methods to disentangle the complex interplay of homophily, contagion, and structural causation in a world of big data.