Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Simulation of Trial Data to Test Speculative Hypotheses about Research Methods.Hamed Tabatabaei Ghomi & Jacob Stegenga - 2023 - In Kristien Hens & Andreas De Block (eds.), Advances in experimental philosophy of medicine. New York: Bloomsbury Academic. pp. 111-128.
    We simulate trial data to test speculative claims about research methods, such as the impact of publication bias.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Modeling the Past: Using History of Science to predict alternative scenarios on science-based legislation.José Ferraz-Caetano - 2021 - Hypothesis Historia Periodical 1 (1):60-70.
    In an ever-changing world, when we search for answers on our present challenges, it can be tricky to extrapolate past realities when concerning science-based issues. Climate change, public health or artificial intelligence embody issues on how scientific evidence is often challenged, as false beliefs could drive the design of public policies and legislation. Therefore , how can we foresee if science can tip the scales of political legislation? In this article, we outline how models of historical cases can be used (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Conditionals, Causal Claims and Objectivity.Michał Sikorski - 2020 - Dissertation, Università di Torino
    In my thesis, I develop two distinct themes. The first part of my thesis is devoted to indicative conditionals and approaching them from an empirically informed perspective. In the second part, I am developing classical topics of philosophy of science, specifically, scientific objectivity and the role of values in science, in connection to recent methodological developments, revolving around the Replication Crisis.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Goal-directed Uses of the Replicability Concept (Preprint).Eden Tariq Smith, Hannah Fraser, Steven Kambouris, Fallon Mody, Martin Bush & Fiona Fidler - forthcoming - In Corrine Bloch-Mullins & Theodore Arabatzis (eds.), Concepts, Induction, and the Growth of Scientific Knowledge.
    The replicability of a research claim is often positioned as an important step in establishing the credibility of scientific research. This expectation persists despite ongoing disagreements over how to characterise replication practices in various contexts. Rather than attempt to explain or resolve these disagreements, we propose that there is value in exploring the variable uses of the replicability concept. To this end, we treat the replicability concept as a goal-directed tool for studying scientific practices. This approach extends scholarship on the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (1 other version)Understanding the Replication Crisis as a Base Rate Fallacy.Alexander Bird - 2021 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 72 (4):965-993.
    The replication (replicability, reproducibility) crisis in social psychology and clinical medicine arises from the fact that many apparently well-confirmed experimental results are subsequently overturned by studies that aim to replicate the original study. The culprit is widely held to be poor science: questionable research practices, failure to publish negative results, bad incentives, and even fraud. In this article I argue that the high rate of failed replications is consistent with high-quality science. We would expect this outcome if the field of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Scientific self-correction: the Bayesian way.Felipe Romero & Jan Sprenger - 2020 - Synthese 198 (S23):5803-5823.
    The enduring replication crisis in many scientific disciplines casts doubt on the ability of science to estimate effect sizes accurately, and in a wider sense, to self-correct its findings and to produce reliable knowledge. We investigate the merits of a particular countermeasure—replacing null hypothesis significance testing with Bayesian inference—in the context of the meta-analytic aggregation of effect sizes. In particular, we elaborate on the advantages of this Bayesian reform proposal under conditions of publication bias and other methodological imperfections that are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Objectivity for the research worker.Noah van Dongen & Michał Sikorski - 2021 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 11 (3):1-25.
    In the last decade, many problematic cases of scientific conduct have been diagnosed; some of which involve outright fraud others are more subtle. These and similar problems can be interpreted as caused by lack of scientific objectivity. The current philosophical theories of objectivity do not provide scientists with conceptualizations that can be effectively put into practice in remedying these issues. We propose a novel way of thinking about objectivity for individual scientists; a negative and dynamic approach.We provide a philosophical conceptualization (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Replicability Crisis and Scientific Reforms: Overlooked Issues and Unmet Challenges.Mattia Andreoletti - 2020 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 33 (3):135-151.
    Nowadays, almost everyone seems to agree that science is facing an epistemological crisis – namely the replicability crisis – and that we need to take action. But as to precisely what to do or how...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Scientific Conclusions Need Not Be Accurate, Justified, or Believed by their Authors.Haixin Dang & Liam Kofi Bright - 2021 - Synthese 199:8187–8203.
    We argue that the main results of scientific papers may appropriately be published even if they are false, unjustified, and not believed to be true or justified by their author. To defend this claim we draw upon the literature studying the norms of assertion, and consider how they would apply if one attempted to hold claims made in scientific papers to their strictures, as assertions and discovery claims in scientific papers seem naturally analogous. We first use a case study of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • E-Synthesis: A Bayesian Framework for Causal Assessment in Pharmacosurveillance.Francesco De Pretis, Jürgen Landes & Barbara Osimani - 2019 - Frontiers in Pharmacology 10.
    Background: Evidence suggesting adverse drug reactions often emerges unsystematically and unpredictably in form of anecdotal reports, case series and survey data. Safety trials and observational studies also provide crucial information regarding the (un-)safety of drugs. Hence, integrating multiple types of pharmacovigilance evidence is key to minimising the risks of harm. Methods: In previous work, we began the development of a Bayesian framework for aggregating multiple types of evidence to assess the probability of a putative causal link between drugs and side (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • What Is a Replication?Edouard Machery - 2020 - Philosophy of Science 87 (4):545-567.
    This article develops a new, general account of replication. I argue that a replication is an experiment that resamples the experimental components of an ori...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   30 citations  
  • Reliability: an introduction.Stefano Bonzio, Jürgen Landes & Barbara Osimani - 2020 - Synthese (Suppl 23):1-10.
    How we can reliably draw inferences from data, evidence and/or experience has been and continues to be a pressing question in everyday life, the sciences, politics and a number of branches in philosophy (traditional epistemology, social epistemology, formal epistemology, logic and philosophy of the sciences). In a world in which we can now longer fully rely on our experiences, interlocutors, measurement instruments, data collection and storage systems and even news outlets to draw reliable inferences, the issue becomes even more pressing. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Formal Models of Scientific Inquiry in a Social Context: An Introduction.Dunja Šešelja, Christian Straßer & AnneMarie Borg - 2020 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 51 (2):211-217.
    Formal models of scientific inquiry, aimed at capturing socio-epistemic aspects underlying the process of scientific research, have become an important method in formal social epistemology and philosophy of science. In this introduction to the special issue we provide a historical overview of the development of formal models of this kind and analyze their methodological contributions to discussions in philosophy of science. In particular, we show that their significance consists in different forms of ‘methodological iteration’ whereby the models initiate new lines (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Philosophy of science and the replicability crisis.Felipe Romero - 2019 - Philosophy Compass 14 (11):e12633.
    Replicability is widely taken to ground the epistemic authority of science. However, in recent years, important published findings in the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences have failed to replicate, suggesting that these fields are facing a “replicability crisis.” For philosophers, the crisis should not be taken as bad news but as an opportunity to do work on several fronts, including conceptual analysis, history and philosophy of science, research ethics, and social epistemology. This article introduces philosophers to these discussions. First, I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   36 citations  
  • Jury Theorems for Peer Review.Marcus Arvan, Liam Kofi Bright & Remco Heesen - forthcoming - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.
    Peer review is often taken to be the main form of quality control on academic research. Usually journals carry this out. However, parts of maths and physics appear to have a parallel, crowd-sourced model of peer review, where papers are posted on the arXiv to be publicly discussed. In this paper we argue that crowd-sourced peer review is likely to do better than journal-solicited peer review at sorting papers by quality. Our argument rests on two key claims. First, crowd-sourced peer (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • (1 other version)Collective responsibility and fraud in scientific communities.Bryce Huebner & Liam Kofi Bright - 2020 - In Saba Bazargan-Forward & Deborah Tollefsen (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Collective Responsibility. Routledge.
    Given the importance of scientific research in shaping our perception of the world, and our senses of what policies will and won’t succeed in altering that world, it is of great practical, political, and moral importance that we carry out scientific research with integrity. The phenomenon of scientific fraud stands in the way of that, as scientists may knowingly enter claims they take to be false into the scientific literature, often knowingly doing so in defiance of norms they profess allegiance (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • (2 other versions)How to Beat Science and Influence People: Policymakers and Propaganda in Epistemic Networks.James Owen Weatherall, Cailin O’Connor & Justin P. Bruner - 2018 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 71 (4):1157-1186.
    In their recent book, Oreskes and Conway describe the ‘tobacco strategy’, which was used by the tobacco industry to influence policymakers regarding the health risks of tobacco products. The strategy involved two parts, consisting of promoting and sharing independent research supporting the industry’s preferred position and funding additional research, but selectively publishing the results. We introduce a model of the tobacco strategy, and use it to argue that both prongs of the strategy can be extremely effective—even when policymakers rationally update (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • On the Suppression of Medical Evidence.Alexander Christian - 2017 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 48 (3):395-418.
    Financial conflicts of interest in medical research foster deviations from research standards and evidentially lead to the suppression of research findings that are at odds with commercial interests of pharmaceutical companies. Questionable research practices prevent data from being created, made available, or given suitable recognition. They run counter to codified principles of responsible conduct of research, such as honesty, openness or respect for the law. Resulting in ignorance, misrepresentation and suspension of scientific self-correction, suppression of medical evidence in its various (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Self-correction in science: Meta-analysis, bias and social structure.Justin P. Bruner & Bennett Holman - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 78:93-97.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Evaluating Formal Models of Science.Michael Thicke - 2020 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 51 (2):315-335.
    This paper presents an account of how to evaluate formal models of science: models and simulations in social epistemology designed to draw normative conclusions about the social structure of scientific research. I argue that such models should be evaluated according to their representational and predictive accuracy. Using these criteria and comparisons with familiar models from science, I argue that most formal models of science are incapable of supporting normative conclusions.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • How (not) to measure replication.Samuel C. Fletcher - 2021 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 11 (2):1-27.
    The replicability crisis refers to the apparent failures to replicate both important and typical positive experimental claims in psychological science and biomedicine, failures which have gained increasing attention in the past decade. In order to provide evidence that there is a replicability crisis in the first place, scientists have developed various measures of replication that help quantify or “count” whether one study replicates another. In this nontechnical essay, I critically examine five types of replication measures used in the landmark article (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Why Do Scientists Lie?Liam Kofi Bright - 2021 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 89:117-129.
    It's natural to think of scientists as truth seekers, people driven by an intense curiosity to understand the natural world. Yet this picture of scientists and scientific inquiry sits uncomfortably with the reality and prevalence of scientific fraud. If one wants to get at the truth about nature, why lie? Won't that just set inquiry back, as people pursue false leads? To understand why this occurs – and what can be done about it – we need to understand the social (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Who Should Do Replication Labor?Felipe Romero - 2018 - Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science 1 (4):516-537.
    . Scientists, for the most part, want to get it right. However, the social structures that govern their work undermine that aim, and this leads to nonreplicable findings in many fields. Because the social structure of science is a decentralized system, it is difficult to intervene. In this article, I discuss how we might do so, focusing on self-corrective-labor schemes. First, I argue that we need to implement a scheme that makes replication work outcome independent, systematic, and sustainable. Second, I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Varieties of Error and Varieties of Evidence in Scientific Inference.Barbara Osimani & Jürgen Landes - 2023 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 74 (1):117-170.
    According to the variety of evidence thesis items of evidence from independent lines of investigation are more confirmatory, ceteris paribus, than, for example, replications of analogous studies. This thesis is known to fail (Bovens and Hartmann; Claveau). However, the results obtained by Bovens and Hartmann only concern instruments whose evidence is either fully random or perfectly reliable; instead, for Claveau, unreliability is modelled as deterministic bias. In both cases, the unreliable instrument delivers totally irrelevant information. We present a model that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Evidence amalgamation in the sciences: an introduction.Roland Poellinger, Jürgen Landes & Samuel C. Fletcher - 2019 - Synthese 196 (8):3163-3188.
    Amalgamating evidence from heterogeneous sources and across levels of inquiry is becoming increasingly important in many pure and applied sciences. This special issue provides a forum for researchers from diverse scientific and philosophical perspectives to discuss evidence amalgamation, its methodologies, its history, its pitfalls, and its potential. We situate the contributions therein within six themes from the broad literature on this subject: the variety-of-evidence thesis, the philosophy of meta-analysis, the role of robustness/sensitivity analysis for evidence amalgamation, its bearing on questions (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • (1 other version)Understanding the replication crisis as a base rate fallacy.Alexander Bird - 2018 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:000-000.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  • In defense of meta-analysis.Bennett Holman - 2019 - Synthese 196 (8):3189-3211.
    Arguments that medical decision making should rely on a variety of evidence often begin from the claim that meta-analysis has been shown to be problematic. In this paper, I first examine Stegenga’s argument that meta-analysis requires multiple decisions and thus fails to provide an objective ground for medical decision making. Next, I examine three arguments from social epistemologists that contend that meta-analyses are systematically biased in ways not appreciated by standard epistemology. In most cases I show that critiques of meta-analysis (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Reliability: an introduction.Stefano Bonzio, Jürgen Landes & Barbara Osimani (eds.) - 2020 - Springer.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Publish without bias or perish without replications.Rafael Ventura - 2022 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 96 (C):10-17.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark