Pluralistic ignorance
In social psychology, pluralistic ignorance is a situation in which a majority of group members privately reject a norm, but go along with it because they incorrectly assume that most others accept it. This is also described as "no one believes, but everyone thinks that everyone believes". In short, pluralistic ignorance is a bias about a social group, held by the members of that social group.
David John Farmer
The book explains and illustrates how public administration can benefit from epistemic pluralism – just as can any other action or social science discipline, currently operating essentially within its own disciplinary cul-de-sac. "Public Administration in Perspective" (2010) explains that epistemic refers to knowing; pluralism refers to more than one way. The book offers an example of a grand strategy of epistemic pluralism. It examines public administration theory and practice from perspectives that include a traditional, a business, an economic, a political, a critical theory, a post-structural, a psychoanalytic, a neuroscience, a feminist, an ethical, and a data lens. It begins by quoting Dwight Waldo’s claim that “administrative thought must establish a working relationship with every major province in the realm of human learning.” Dr. Breena Coates (California State University, San Bernardino) writes about "Public Administration in Perspective" that the “author provides unique and, hitherto, unexplored perspectives from which to view the multiple faces of public administration… The book’s scholarship is compelling and hard to resist… Today in our networked, globalized environment we are more than ever coming to the realization that there is an interdisciplinary basis for understanding truth, and that each discrete branch of knowledge studies a mere subset of particularized knowledge streams” (B. Coates, 2012, p. 133.)