<p>Scholars have long warned that ideological homogeneity in social science may produce theoretical and epistemic distortions. However, whether such distortions occur (and, if so, where and how) remains uncertain. In this work, I discuss the threat of field-level ideological capture to the validity of science and highlight the need for systematic efforts to identify ideologically captured fields and assess epistemic biases. I begin by outlining how ideological homogeneity may shape research practices and distort the broader knowledge-production process. Drawing on scholarship on ideological epistemology, I demonstrate how shared assumptions and normative commitments may systematically bias the collection, evaluation, and interpretation of evidence. To facilitate critical engagement with these biases, I introduce Ideological Epistemic Analysis (IEA) as an approach for identifying and evaluating ideological influences within research fields. I then conduct an IEA case study of transgender research. The analysis reveals how gender-identity ideology can permeate this literature, shaping research framing, methods, and interpretations. I argue that these ideological commitments compromise scientific rigor, with both scientific and social consequences, including the erosion of public trust in science and the development of misguided or ineffective policies that may ultimately harm the very communities the research aims to support. Although I focus on transgender research as a case study, I emphasize the broader need for heightened epistemic vigilance in the social sciences, particularly in fields characterized by ideological homogeneity and addressing politically sensitive topics.</p>