Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 4, 2026
12:12
Irrelevant Stimuli and Action Control: Analyzing the Influence of Ignored Stimuli via the Distractor-Response Binding Paradigm
Published on: May 14, 2014
Rebuttal to Douglas and Elliott.
1Department of Philosophy, University of Saskatchewan, 9 Campus Drive, S7N 5A5 Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Canada.
Journal for General Philosophy of Science = Zeitschrift Fur Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie
|July 5, 2022
Summary
This paper argues that incorporating non-epistemic values into scientific evidence assessment, as suggested by Douglas and Elliott, exacerbates bias and the reproducibility crisis. The rebuttal reaffirms that their approach can lead science astray from truth.
Area of Science:
- Philosophy of Science
- Scientific Methodology
- Ethics in Science
Background:
- The reproducibility crisis is a significant challenge in contemporary science.
- Bias in scientific research is identified as a key contributing factor to this crisis.
- Existing literature debates the role of non-epistemic values in scientific reasoning.
Purpose of the Study:
- To critically assess the impact of introducing non-epistemic values into evidential assessment of scientific hypotheses.
- To respond to criticisms by Douglas and Elliott regarding the interpretation of their work.
- To argue that the proposed integration of non-epistemic values exacerbates scientific bias.
Main Methods:
- Philosophical analysis of scientific bias and the reproducibility crisis.
- Examination of published views by Douglas and Elliott on non-epistemic values in science.
- Rebuttal of counterarguments concerning the misrepresentation of their philosophical positions.
Main Results:
- The author maintains that the initial interpretation of Douglas and Elliott's work is accurate.
- Introducing non-epistemic values into evidential assessment can worsen scientific bias.
- Science, when guided by the criticized approach, is prone to deviations from objective truth.
Conclusions:
- Striving for a completely bias-free science is complex.
- The integration of non-epistemic values, as advocated by some, may inadvertently undermine scientific objectivity.
- Further philosophical examination is needed to navigate the role of values in scientific inquiry.
More Related Videos
06:42Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses
Published on: September 28, 2018
05:48The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
Published on: June 12, 2020
Related Concept Videos
02:05Self-Presentation: Self-Monitoring and Self-Handicapping
People can go to great lengths to protect their self-image and present themselves in ways that they want others to see them. Sociologist Erving Goffman presented the idea that a person is like an actor on a stage. Calling his theory dramaturgy, Goffman believed that we use “impression management” to present ourselves to others as we hope to be perceived. Each situation is a new scene, and individuals perform different roles depending on who is present (Goffman, 1959). Think about the way you...
01:37Reason and Intuition
The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the brain can only use...
01:38Cognitive Dissonance
Social psychologists have documented that feeling good about ourselves and maintaining positive self-esteem is a powerful motivator of human behavior (Tavris & Aronson, 2008). In the United States, members of the predominant culture typically think very highly of themselves and view themselves as good people who are above average on many desirable traits (Ehrlinger, Gilovich, & Ross, 2005). Often, our behavior, attitudes, and beliefs are affected when we experience a threat to our...
01:23Criticisms of the Evolutionary Perspective
In a study where individuals posing as strangers offered compliments and proposed casual sex to students, the responses differed significantly based on gender. Not a single woman accepted the proposal, while 70% of the men agreed. This outcome provides a useful scenario to explore through the lens of evolutionary psychology and social learning theory, highlighting the diverse perspectives on human sexual behaviors.
Evolutionary psychology provides one explanation for these findings, suggesting...
Evolutionary psychology provides one explanation for these findings, suggesting...
01:24Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy
Cognitive-behavioral therapies (CBTs) are grounded in the belief that our thoughts profoundly influence our emotions and actions. Advocates of CBT emphasize three core assumptions: first, that cognitions are identifiable and measurable; second, that they are central to psychological functioning; and third, that irrational or maladaptive beliefs can be replaced with rational and adaptive ones. This transformative approach to therapy has paved the way for specific models such as Albert Ellis's...
01:26Equity Theory
Equity theory explains how our sense of fairness influences the dynamics of close relationships. Rooted in social psychology, the theory posits that individuals evaluate fairness by comparing the ratio of their contributions to the rewards they receive. Relationship satisfaction is highest when these ratios are perceived as balanced between partners, promoting mutual reciprocity and a sense of justice.Equity vs. Equality in RelationshipsEquity is distinct from equality. Fairness does not...