Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 20, 2026

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
Published on: September 19, 2012
Inductive Risk, Science, and Values: A Reply to MacGillivray
Daniel J Hicks1, P D Magnus2, Jessey Wright3
1University of California, Merced, Merced, CA, USA.
Abstract:
The argument from inductive risk (AIR) is perhaps the most common argument against the value-free ideal of science. Brian MacGillivray rejects the AIR (at least as it would apply to risk assessment) and embraces the value-free ideal. We clarify the issues at stake and argue that MacGillivray's criticisms, although effective against some formulations of the AIR, fail to overcome the essential concerns that motivate the AIR. There are inevitable trade-offs in scientific enquiry that cannot be resolved with any formal methods or general rules. Choices must be made, and values will be involved. It is best to recognize this explicitly. Even so, there is more work to be done developing methods and institutional support for these choices.
Related Concept Videos
Inductive Reasoning
Ethics in Research
Social Traps
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Relative Risk
Causality in Epidemiology

