Against naïve induction from experimental data

David Kellen; Gregory E. Cox; Chris Donkin; John C. Dunn; Richard M. Shiffrin

doi:10.1017/S0140525X2300211X

Against naïve induction from experimental data

David Kellen, Gregory E. Cox, Chris Donkin, John C. Dunn, Richard M. Shiffrin

School of Psychological Science

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

This commentary argues against the indictment of current experimental practices such as piecemeal testing, and the proposed integrated experiment design (IED) approach, which we see as yet another attempt at automating scientific thinking. We identify a number of undesirable features of IED that lead us to believe that its broad application will hinder scientific progress.

Original language	English
Article number	e33
Journal	Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Volume	47
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X2300211X
Publication status	Published - 5 Feb 2024

Access to Document

10.1017/S0140525X2300211X

Cite this

@article{3a16471dc0ec43fab23711932961240e,

title = "Against na{\"i}ve induction from experimental data",

abstract = "This commentary argues against the indictment of current experimental practices such as piecemeal testing, and the proposed integrated experiment design (IED) approach, which we see as yet another attempt at automating scientific thinking. We identify a number of undesirable features of IED that lead us to believe that its broad application will hinder scientific progress.",

author = "David Kellen and Cox, {Gregory E.} and Chris Donkin and Dunn, {John C.} and Shiffrin, {Richard M.}",

year = "2024",

month = feb,

day = "5",

doi = "10.1017/S0140525X2300211X",

language = "English",

volume = "47",

journal = "Behavioral and Brain Sciences",

issn = "0140-525X",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Against naïve induction from experimental data

AU - Kellen, David

AU - Cox, Gregory E.

AU - Donkin, Chris

AU - Dunn, John C.

AU - Shiffrin, Richard M.

PY - 2024/2/5

Y1 - 2024/2/5

N2 - This commentary argues against the indictment of current experimental practices such as piecemeal testing, and the proposed integrated experiment design (IED) approach, which we see as yet another attempt at automating scientific thinking. We identify a number of undesirable features of IED that lead us to believe that its broad application will hinder scientific progress.

AB - This commentary argues against the indictment of current experimental practices such as piecemeal testing, and the proposed integrated experiment design (IED) approach, which we see as yet another attempt at automating scientific thinking. We identify a number of undesirable features of IED that lead us to believe that its broad application will hinder scientific progress.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85185525650&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S0140525X2300211X

DO - 10.1017/S0140525X2300211X

M3 - Review article

C2 - 38311445

AN - SCOPUS:85185525650

SN - 0140-525X

VL - 47

JO - Behavioral and Brain Sciences

JF - Behavioral and Brain Sciences

M1 - e33

ER -

Against naïve induction from experimental data

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this