Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Concept Videos

Inductive Reasoning00:59

Inductive Reasoning

Inductive reasoning is a form of logical thinking that uses related observations to arrive at a general conclusion. It is uncertain and operates in degrees to which the conclusions are credible. As such, inductive arguments can be weak or strong, rather than valid or invalid, and conclusions can be used to formulate testable, falsifiable hypotheses.
Inductive reasoning is common in descriptive science. A life scientist makes observations and records them. This data can be qualitative or...
Causality in Epidemiology01:21

Causality in Epidemiology

Causality or causation is a fundamental concept in epidemiology, vital for understanding the relationships between various factors and health outcomes. Despite its importance, there's no single, universally accepted definition of causality within the discipline. Drawing from a systematic review, causality in epidemiology encompasses several definitions, including production, necessary and sufficient, sufficient-component, counterfactual, and probabilistic models. Each has its strengths and...
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II01:28

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II

The Bradford Hill criteria serve as guidelines for establishing causative links in epidemiological research. Beyond Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality, key criteria also include Biological Gradient, Plausibility, Coherence, Experiment, and Analogy. These principles assist scientists in assessing the likelihood of causation in complex biological contexts. Below is a summary of these concepts:
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I01:30

Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I

The Bradford Hill criteria are a group of principles that provide a framework to determine a causal relationship between a specific factor and a disease. There are nine criteria that are pivotal in assessing causality in epidemiological studies. Here's a closer look at Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality criteria with definitions and examples:
Cause and Effect01:53

Cause and Effect

While variables are sometimes correlated because one does cause the other, it could also be that some other factor, a confounding variable, is actually causing the systematic movement in our variables of interest. For instance, as sales in ice cream increase, so does the overall rate of crime. Is it possible that indulging in your favorite flavor of ice cream could send you on a crime spree? Or, after committing crime do you think you might decide to treat yourself to a cone?
Deductive Reasoning01:16

Deductive Reasoning

Deductive reasoning, or deduction, is the type of logic used in hypothesis-based science. In deductive reasoning, the pattern of thinking moves in the opposite direction as compared to inductive reasoning, which means that it uses a general principle or law to predict specific results. From those general principles, a scientist can deduce and predict the specific results that would be valid as long as the general principles are valid.
For example, a researcher can deduce specific predictions...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Differentiation of cord blood-derived Innate Lymphoid Cells 1  into KIR+NKG2A- natural killer cells in a human stem cell niche.

Stem cells translational medicine·2026
Same author

DPP4 inhibition affects metabolism and inflammation associated pathways in hiPSC-derived steatotic HLCs.

Frontiers in cell and developmental biology·2026
Same author

A single-cell transcriptional reference for the functional and developmental diversity of neonatal innate lymphoid cells.

Cell reports·2026
Same author

FOXN1 immunodeficiency detected by TREC-based newborn screening - A challenge of management?

Immunology letters·2026
Same author

A human NK cell progenitor that originates in the thymus and generates KIR<sup>+</sup>NKG2A<sup>-</sup> NK cells.

Science advances·2025
Same author

Prognostic Role of mRNA-Expression of Aquaporins (AQP) 3, 4, 7 and 9 in Stage pT1 Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer.

Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)·2024
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 19, 2026

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason&#180;s Selection Task
06:08

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task

Published on: July 22, 2025

Causation in the sciences: an inferentialist account.

Julian Reiss1

  • 1Erasmus University, PO Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands. reiss@fwb.eur.nl

Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences
|August 14, 2012
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study proposes a new way to understand causation in science, defining causal claims by how they connect to evidence, explanation, prediction, intervention, and responsibility. This inferential account impacts our understanding of causation

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 19, 2026

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason&#180;s Selection Task
06:08

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task

Published on: July 22, 2025

Area of Science:

  • Philosophy of Science
  • Biomedical Sciences
  • Social Sciences

Background:

  • Causation is central to scientific understanding and practice.
  • Existing accounts of causation face challenges in diverse scientific fields.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To present an alternative inferential account of causation.
  • To redefine the meaning of causal claims based on their inferential relationships.

Main Methods:

  • Conceptual analysis of causal claims.
  • Examination of inferential relations to evidential, explanatory, predictive, interventional, and responsibility claims.

Main Results:

  • Causal claims derive meaning from their inferential connections to other types of claims.
  • The proposed account offers a unified framework for understanding causation across disciplines.

Conclusions:

  • The inferential account provides novel insights into the epistemology, semantics, and metaphysics of causation.
  • This framework enhances the understanding of causal reasoning in biomedical and social sciences.