Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message

Login Alert

Cancel
Log in
×
×
Register
Log In
(0) Cart
Logo for Cambridge Core from Cambridge University Press. Click to return to homepage.
Logo for Cambridge Core from Cambridge University Press. Click to return to homepage.
Cited by
  • Crossref logo 29
  • Google Scholar logo
Crossref Citations
Crossref logo
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
Mayo, Deborah G. 1997. Error Statistics and Learning From Error: Making a Virtue of Necessity. Philosophy of Science, Vol. 64, Issue. S4, p. S195.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Wheeler, Gregory R. 2000. Error Statistics and Duhem's Problem. Philosophy of Science, Vol. 67, Issue. 3, p. 410.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
2001. Critical Notice. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 15, Issue. 1, p. 93.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Rakover, Sam S. 2003. Experimental Psychology and Duhem's Problem. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, Vol. 33, Issue. 1, p. 45.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Shrader-Frechette, Kristin 2004. Comparativist Rationality and. Topoi, Vol. 23, Issue. 2, p. 153.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Bandyopadhyay, Prasanta S. and Brittan, Gordon G. 2006. Acceptibility, Evidence, and Severity. Synthese, Vol. 148, Issue. 2, p. 259.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Miller, S. I. and Gatta, J. L. 2006. The Use of Mixed Methods Models and Designs in the Human Sciences: Problems and Prospects. Quality & Quantity, Vol. 40, Issue. 4, p. 595.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Achinstein, Peter and Mayo, Deborah G. 2009. Error and Inference. p. 170.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Mayo, Deborah G. 2009. Error and Inference. p. 28.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Glymour, Clark Mayo, Deborah G. and Spanos, Aris 2009. Error and Inference. p. 331.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Spanos, Aris 2010. Statistical adequacy and the trustworthiness of empirical evidence: Statistical vs. substantive information. Economic Modelling, Vol. 27, Issue. 6, p. 1436.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Staley, Kent W. 2010. Evidence and Justification in Groups with Conflicting Background Beliefs. Episteme, Vol. 7, Issue. 3, p. 232.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Staley, Kent and Cobb, Aaron 2011. Internalist and externalist aspects of justification in scientific inquiry. Synthese, Vol. 182, Issue. 3, p. 475.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Spanos, Aris 2012. Philosophy of Economics. p. 329.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Spanos, Aris 2013. A frequentist interpretation of probability for model-based inductive inference. Synthese, Vol. 190, Issue. 9, p. 1555.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Sánchez-Algarra, Pedro and Anguera, M. Teresa 2013. Qualitative/quantitative integration in the inductive observational study of interactive behaviour: impact of recording and coding among predominating perspectives. Quality & Quantity, Vol. 47, Issue. 2, p. 1237.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Aktunç, M. Emrah 2014. Tackling Duhemian Problems: An Alternative to Skepticism of Neuroimaging in Philosophy of Cognitive Science. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, Vol. 5, Issue. 4, p. 449.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Spanos, Aris and Mayo, Deborah G. 2015. Error statistical modeling and inference: Where methodology meets ontology. Synthese, Vol. 192, Issue. 11, p. 3533.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Bandyopadhyay, Prasanta S. Brittan, Gordon and Taper, Mark L. 2016. Belief, Evidence, and Uncertainty. p. 73.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Morrison, Joe 2017. Evidential holism. Philosophy Compass, Vol. 12, Issue. 6,
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Download full list
Google Scholar Citations

View all Google Scholar citations for this article.

×
Cambridge University Press

Our Site

  • Accessibility
  • Contact & Help
  • Legal Notices

Quick Links

  • Cambridge Core
  • Cambridge Open Engage
  • Cambridge Aspire

Our Products

  • Journals
  • Books
  • Elements
  • Textbooks
  • Courseware

Join us online

Please choose a valid location.

  • Rights & Permissions
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Notice
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies Policy
Cambridge University Press 2025

Cancel
Confirm
×

Save article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Duhem's Problem, the Bayesian Way, and Error Statistics, or “What's Belief Got to Do with It?”
  • Volume 64, Issue 2
  • Deborah G. Mayo (a1)
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/392549
Please provide your Kindle email.
Available formats Please select a format to save.
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Duhem's Problem, the Bayesian Way, and Error Statistics, or “What's Belief Got to Do with It?”
  • Volume 64, Issue 2
  • Deborah G. Mayo (a1)
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/392549
Available formats Please select a format to save.
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Duhem's Problem, the Bayesian Way, and Error Statistics, or “What's Belief Got to Do with It?”
  • Volume 64, Issue 2
  • Deborah G. Mayo (a1)
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/392549
Available formats Please select a format to save.
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Contents help
Close Contents help

- No HTML tags allowed
- Web page URLs will display as text only
- Lines and paragraphs break automatically
- Attachments, images or tables are not permitted

Please enter your response.

Your details

Email help
Close Email help

Your email address will be used in order to notify you when your comment has been reviewed by the moderator and in case the author(s) of the article or the moderator need to contact you directly.

Please enter a valid email address.
You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? * Conflicting interests help

Close Conflicting interests help

Please list any fees and grants from, employment by, consultancy for, shared ownership in or any close relationship with, at any time over the preceding 36 months, any organisation whose interests may be affected by the publication of the response. Please also list any non-financial associations or interests (personal, professional, political, institutional, religious or other) that a reasonable reader would want to know about in relation to the submitted work. This pertains to all the authors of the piece, their spouses or partners.