↓ Skip to main content

Progress and Rationality in Science

Overview of attention for book
Progress and Rationality in Science
Springer Netherlands

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 Objective Criteria of Scientific Progress? Inductivism, Falsificationism, and Relativism
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 The Popperian Approach to Scientific Knowledge
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 The Ways in which the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes Improves on Popper’s Methodology
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 ‘Crucial’ Experiments: A Case Study
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 The Objective Promise of a Research Programme
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 Popper vs Inductivism
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 In Defence of Aristotle: Comments on the Condition of Content Increase
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 Evidential Support, Falsification, Heuristics, and Anarchism
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 Science and the Search for Truth
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 Philosophy of Science and Its Rational Reconstructions
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 Towards a New Theory of Scientific Inquiry
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 Some Critical Comments on Current Popperianism on the Basis of a Theory of System Sets
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 The Problem of Verisimilitude
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 Objectivism vs Sociologism
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 15 Research Programmes, Empirical Support, and the Duhem Problem: Replies to Criticism
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 16 Corroboration and the Problem of Content-Comparison
  18. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 17 The Gong Show — Popperian Style
  19. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 18 Reply to Watkins’: Hübner on Falsification, “Grue” and Truth’
Overall attention for this book and its chapters
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#39 of 125)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Progress and Rationality in Science
Published by
Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, January 1978
DOI 10.1007/978-94-009-9866-7
ISBNs
978-9-02-770922-6, 978-9-40-099866-7
Authors

Gerard Radnitzky, Gunnar Andersson

Editors

Gerard Radnitzky, Gunnar Andersson

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 August 2015.
All research outputs
#7,688,404
of 28,833,811 outputs
Outputs from Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science
#39
of 125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,100
of 27,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,833,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 125 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 27,850 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them