↓ Skip to main content

Reichenbach on causality in 1923: Scientific inference, coordination, and confirmation

Overview of attention for article published in Studies in History & Philosophy of Science Part A, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
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
Reichenbach on causality in 1923: Scientific inference, coordination, and confirmation
Published in
Studies in History & Philosophy of Science Part A, July 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.05.004
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In The Theory of Relativity and A Priori Knowledge (1920b), Reichenbach developed an original account of cognition as coordination of formal structures to empirical ones. One of the most salient features of this account is that it is explicitly not a top-down type of coordination, and in fact it is crucially "directed" by the empirical side. Reichenbach called this feature "the mutuality of coordination" but, in that work, did not elaborate sufficiently on how this is supposed to work. In a paper that he wrote less than two years afterwards (but that he published only in 1932), "The Principle of Causality and the Possibility of its Empirical Confirmation" (1923/1932), he described what seems to be a model for this idea, now within an analysis of causality that results in an account of scientific inference. Recent reassessments of his early proposal do not seem to capture the extent of Reichenbach's original worries. The present paper analyses Reichenbach's early account and suggests a new way to look at his early work. According to it, we perform measurements, individuate parameters, collect and analyse data, by using a "constructive" approach, such as the one with which we formulate and test hypotheses, which paradigmatically requires some simplicity assumptions. Reichenbach's attempt to account for all these aspects in 1923 was obviously limited and naive in many ways, but it shows that, in his view, there were multiple ways in which the idea of "constitution" is embodied in scientific practice.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 21%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 6 43%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Philosophy 2 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 14%
Arts and Humanities 1 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Psychology 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 5 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 July 2015.
All research outputs
#31,186,061
of 34,363,559 outputs
Outputs from Studies in History & Philosophy of Science Part A
#884
of 963 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#265,621
of 302,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Studies in History & Philosophy of Science Part A
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,363,559 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 963 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 302,454 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.