<i>Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach</i>

Giere, Ronald N.; French, Steven

doi:10.1119/1.15942

Cited by 116 publications

(168 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

133

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on regimes of data visualization and the specific intelligibility or cognitive accessibility of representational formats is highlighted against the abstractness of mere numerical scientific data (Delehanty, 2010;Krohn, 1991). It has even been suggested that representational formats generate a certain authority and strength of persuasiveness, which grows out of its analytical power, its power to suggest and to communicate (Giere, 1988) -a claim that has been empirically confirmed by Keener and colleagues (2011) for different types of brain images. The case has been made that the question whether representational standards or conventions bear this kind of authority has to be discussed against the background of instrumental preconditions (Lynch and Woolgar, 1990) as much as aesthetic aspects (such as symmetry or color scheme) that impact on representational formats to a significant degree, and hence might guide scientific perception and interpretation of underlying data (Huber, 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Colorful brains: 14years of display practice in functional neuroimaging

Christen¹,

Vitacco²,

Huber³

et al. 2013

NeuroImage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Colorful brains: 14years of display practice in functional neuroimaging

Christen¹,

Vitacco²,

Huber³

et al. 2013

NeuroImage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Campbell, 1920;Harré, 1976;Hesse, 1966). Contemporary studies of scientific practice, including philosophy of science, frequently accord analogical models a genuine, indispensable, cognitive role in science (e.g., Abrantes, 1999;Giere, 1988;Harré, 1988).…”

Section: Theory Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Abductive Theory of Scientific Method.

Haig

2005

Psychological Methods

258

195

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A broad theory of scientific method is sketched that has particular relevance for the behavioral sciences. This theory of method assembles a complex of specific strategies and methods that are used in the detection of empirical phenomena and the subsequent construction of explanatory theories. A characterization of the nature of phenomena is given, and the process of their detection is briefly described in terms of a multistage model of data analysis. The construction of explanatory theories is shown to involve their generation through abductive, or explanatory, reasoning, their development through analogical modeling, and their fuller appraisal in terms of judgments of the best of competing explanations. The nature and limits of this theory of method are discussed in the light of relevant developments in scientific methodology.Keywords: scientific method, phenomena detection, theory construction, abductive reasoning, research methodology[T]he attempt to understand and improve methods, and to do so via theorizing them, is at the center of an intelligently evolving cognition (Clifford Hooker, 1987, p. 291) This article is concerned with scientific method in the behavioral sciences. Its principal goal is to outline a broad theory of scientific method by making use of selected developments in contemporary research methodology. The time now seems right to intensify efforts to assemble knowledge of research methods into larger units of understanding. Currently, behavioral scientists use a plethora of specific research methods and a number of different investigative strategies when studying their domains of interest. Among this diversity, the well-known inductive and hypotheticodeductive accounts of scientific method have brought some order to our investigative practices. The former method speaks to the discovery of empirical generalizations, whereas the latter method is used to test hypotheses and theories in terms of their predictive success.However, although inductive and hypothetico-deductive methods are commonly regarded as the two main theories of scientific method (Laudan, 1981; and, in fact, are sometimes regarded as the principal claimants for the title of the definitive scientific method), they are better thought of as restrictive accounts of method that can be used to meet specific research goals (Nickles, 1987), not broad accounts of method that pursue a range of research goals. In fashioning empirical generalizations, the inductive method undoubtedly addresses an important part of scientific inquiry. However, it is a part only. Of equal importance is the process of theory construction. Here, however, the hypothetico-deductive method, with its focus on theory testing, speaks only to one, although important, part of the theory construction process (Simon, 1977).The theory of method outlined in this article is a broader account of scientific method than either the inductive or hypothetico-deductive theories of method. This more comprehensive theory of method endeavors to describe systematically how one ca...

show abstract

“…the large variety of measures of fertility), but not so common when it comes to other kinds of analysis. The idea of a 'toolbox' of theories and models is central to the model-based view of science among philosophers (see Giere 1999Giere , 1988. It is found in the work of some empirically inclined social scientists See Coleman (1964) on 'sometimes-true theory'; Meehan (1968); Keyfitz (1975).…”

Section: Analytic Tools and Their Disparate Usesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer Simulation and Statistical Modeling: Rivals or Complements?

Burch

2017

Demographic Research Monographs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach

Cited by 116 publications

References 0 publications

Colorful brains: 14years of display practice in functional neuroimaging

Colorful brains: 14years of display practice in functional neuroimaging

An Abductive Theory of Scientific Method.

Computer Simulation and Statistical Modeling: Rivals or Complements?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About