Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44 (3):363-374 (2013)
AbstractExploratory inquiry has difficulty attracting research funding because funding agencies have little sense of how to detect good science in exploratory contexts. After documenting and explaining the focus on hypothesis testing among a variety of institutions responsible for distinguishing between good and bad science, I analyze the NIH grant review process. I argue that a good explanation for the focus on hypothesis testing—at least at the level of science funding agencies—is the fact that hypothesis-driven research is relatively easy to appraise. I then explore one method by which we might gauge the epistemic merits of different styles of inquiry
Similar books and articles
The historical case against Null-hypothesis significance testing.Henderikus J. Stam & Grant A. Pasay - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):219-220.
Testing a precise null hypothesis: the case of Lindley’s paradox.Jan Sprenger - 2013 - Philosophy of Science 80 (5):733-744.
Chow's defense of Null-hypothesis testing: Too traditional?Robert W. Frick - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):199-199.
Heterogeneity and hypothesis testing in neuropsychiatric illness.Curtis K. Deutsch, Wesley W. Ludwig & William J. McIlvane - 2008 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (3):266-267.
Popper's severity of test as an intuitive probabilistic model of hypothesis testing.Fenna H. Poletiek - 2009 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (1):99-100.
Sex differences: Empiricism, hypothesis testing, and other virtues.David P. Barash - 2005 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (2):276-277.
You can't have your hypothesis and test it: The importance of utilities in theories of reasoning.Fenna H. Poletiek - 2011 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (2):87-88.
Awareness and hypothesis testing in concept and operant learning.Dianne S. Silver, Eli Saltz & Vito Modigliani - 1970 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 84 (2):198.
A new paradigm for hypothesis testing in medicine, with examination of the Neyman Pearson condition.G. William Moore, Grover M. Hutchins & Robert E. Miller - 1986 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 7 (3).
A viable alternative to Null-hypothesis testing.Bruno D. Zumbo - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):227-228.
The logic of Null hypothesis testing.Edward Erwin - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):197-198.
The influence of responsibility and guilt on naive hypothesis-testing.Dr Francesco Mancini & Amelia Gangemi - 2004 - Thinking and Reasoning 10 (3):289 – 320.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Centralized Funding and Epistemic Exploration.Shahar Avin - 2019 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 70 (3):629-656.
Centralized Funding and Epistemic Exploration.Shahar Avin - 2017 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:axx059.
The division of cognitive labor: two missing dimensions of the debate.Baptiste Bedessem - 2018 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 9 (1):3.
Ancient genetics to ancient genomics: celebrity and credibility in data-driven practice.Elizabeth D. Jones - 2019 - Biology and Philosophy 34 (2):27.
References found in this work
Entering new fields: Exploratory uses of experimentation.Friedrich Steinle - 1997 - Philosophy of Science 64 (4):74.
Exploratory Experimentation and the Role of Histochemical Techniques in the Work of Jean Brachet, 1938-1952.Richard M. Burian - 1997 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 19 (1):27 - 45.
The Nature and Context of Exploratory Experimentation: An Introduction to Three Case Studies of Exploratory Research.C. Kenneth Waters - 2007 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 29 (3):275 - 284.
Varieties of Exploratory Experimentation in Nanotoxicology.Kevin Elliott - 2007 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 29 (3):313 - 336.
Here is the evidence, now what is the hypothesis? The complementary roles of inductive and hypothesis‐driven science in the post‐genomic era.Douglas B. Kell & Stephen G. Oliver - 2004 - Bioessays 26 (1):99-105.