Order:
  1.  44
    A co-citation analysis of cross-disciplinarity in the empirically-informed philosophy of mind.Karen Yan & Chuan-Ya Liao - 2023 - Synthese 201 (5):1-35.
    Empirically-informed philosophy of mind (EIPM) has become a dominant research style in the twenty-first century. EIPM relies on empirical results in various ways. However, the extant literature lacks an empirical description of how EIPM philosophers rely on empirical results. Moreover, though EIPM is essentially a form of cross-disciplinary research, it has not been analyzed as cross-disciplinary research so far. We aim to fill the above two gaps in the literature by producing quantitative and qualitative descriptions of EIPM as a kind (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  2. Knowledge, certainty, and skepticism: A cross-cultural study.John Philip Waterman, Chad Gonnerman, Karen Yan & Joshua Alexander - 2018 - In Masaharu Mizumoto, Stephen P. Stich & Eric S. McCready (eds.), Epistemology for the rest of the world. Oxford University Press. pp. 187-214.
    We present several new studies focusing on “salience effects”—the decreased tendency to attribute knowledge to someone when an unrealized possibility of error has been made salient in a given conversational context. These studies suggest a complicated picture of epistemic universalism: there may be structural universals, universal epistemic parameters that influence epistemic intuitions, but that these parameters vary in such a way that epistemic intuitions, in either their strength or propositional content, can display patterns of genuine cross-cultural diversity.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  3. A Scientometric Approach to the Integrated History and Philosophy of Science: Entrenched Biomedical Standardisation and Citation-Exemplar.Karen Yan, Meng-Li Tsai & Tsung-Ren Huang - 2023 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 36 (2):143-165.
    1. Biomedical sciences are fast-growing fields with unprecedented speed of research outputs, especially in the quantities of papers. Philosophers aiming to study ongoing biomedical changes face cha...
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  29
    Mourning a death foretold: memory and mental time travel in anticipatory grief.Christopher Jude McCarroll & Karen Yan - forthcoming - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences:1-19.
    Grief is a complex emotional experience or process, which is typically felt in response to the death of a loved one, most typically a family member, child, or partner. Yet the way in which grief manifests is much more complex than this. The things we grieve over are multiple and diverse. We may grieve for a former partner after the breakup of a relationship; parents sometimes report experiencing grief when their grown-up children leave the family home. We can also experience (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Integrating Scientonomy with Scientometrics.Karen Yan, Meng-Li Tsai & Tsung-Ren Huang - 2021 - In Hakob Barseghyan, Jamie Shaw, Paul Edward Patton & Gregory Rupik (eds.), Scientonomy: The Challenges of Constructing a Theory of Scientific Change. Wilmington: Vernon Press. pp. 67-82.
    Scientonomy is the field that aims to develop a descriptive theory of the actual process of scientific change (Barseghyan, 2015). Scientometrics is the field that aims to employ statistical methods to investigate the quantitative features of scientific research, especially the impact of scientific articles and the significance of scientific citations (Leydesdorff & Milojević, 2013). In this paper, we aim to illustrate how to methodologically integrate scientonomy with scientometrics to investigate both qualitative and quantitative changes of a scientific community. We will (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6.  41
    Improving the quality of case-based research in the philosophy of contemporary sciences.Karen Yan, Meng-Li Tsai & Tsung-Ren Huang - 2020 - Synthese 198 (10):9591-9610.
    This paper aims to address some methodological issues related to case-based research in the philosophy of contemporary sciences. We focus on the selection processes by which philosophers pick or generate a particular set of papers to conduct their case-based research. We illustrate how to use various quantitative and qualitative methods to improve the epistemic features of the selection processes, and help generate some potential case-based hypotheses for further philosophical investigation.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7.  8
    Philosophy of Neuroscience.Karen Yan - 2020 - 《華文哲學百科》.
    神經科學哲學 (philosophy of neuroscience) 是科學哲學下的一個新興子領域,主要在探討神經科學研究活動中所牽涉的哲學問題。這裡指的研究活動包含設計實驗、使用特定研究技術、工具或方法、建構模型、推理模式、與科學說明等。本條目首先將簡述神經科學哲學興 起的背景,而後詳述二十一世紀神經科學哲學的發展重點。.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8.  65
    Brain Networks, Structural Realism, and Local Approaches to the Scientific Realism Debate.Karen Yan & Jonathon Hricko - 2017 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 64:1-10.
    We examine recent work in cognitive neuroscience that investigates brain networks. Brain networks are characterized by the ways in which brain regions are functionally and anatomically connected to one another. Cognitive neuroscientists use various noninvasive techniques (e.g., fMRI) to investigate these networks. They represent them formally as graphs. And they use various graph theoretic techniques to analyze them further. We distinguish between knowledge of the graph theoretic structure of such networks (structural knowledge) and knowledge of what instantiates that structure (nonstructural (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  9. Pluralistic Epistemic Values in Neuroscientific Modeling.Karen Yan - 2022 - Taiwanese Journal for Studies of Science, Technology and Medicine 34:103-140.
    Philosophers of neuroscience have been employing scientific explanation as an epistemic value to evaluate neuroscientific models for the past twenty years. Consequently, they have developed mechanistic and non-mechanistic accounts of neuroscientific explanation. These two types of accounts explicate how to use a specific kind of explanatory value to evaluate the epistemic value of neuroscientific models. This paper presents a case study involving the canonical models from mathematical and computational neuroscience. This case study will show that the above mechanistic and non-mechanistic (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark