Cliometric metatheory II: Criteria scientists use in theory appraisal and why it is rational to do so

Psychological Reports 91:339--404 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,388

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Cliometric metatheory III: Peircean consensus, verisimilitude, and asymptotic method.Paul E. Meehl - 2004 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (4):615-643.
Note: Cliometric Metatheory III: Peircean Consensus, Verisimilitude and Asymptotic Method.David Miller - 2005 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (2):419 -.
Experimental Skills and Experiment Appraisal.Xiang Chen - 1994 - In Peter Achinstein & Laura J. Snyder, Scientific methods: conceptual and historical problems. Malabar, Fla.: Krieger Pub. Co.. pp. 45--66.
Why is beauty a road to the truth?Paul Thagard - 2005 - Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 84 (1):365-370.
How to judge scientific research articles.Hennie Lotter - 2000 - South African Journal for Language Teaching 34.
Hume's non-instrumental and non-propositional decision theory.Robert Sugden - 2006 - Economics and Philosophy 22 (3):365-391.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-10-31

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?