Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T04:37:37.583Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental Localism and External Validity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Francesco Guala
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experimental “localism” stresses the importance of context-specific knowledge, and the limitations of universal theories in science. I illustrate Latour's radical approach to localism and show that it has some unpalatable consequences, in particular the suggestion that problems of external validity (or how to generalize experimental results to nonlaboratory circumstances) cannot be solved. In the last part of the paper I try to sketch a solution to the problem of external validity by extending Mayo's error-probabilistic approach.

Type
Science and Social Context
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 70 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2002 Biennial Meeting of The Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers , December 2003 , pp. 1195 - 1205
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

Financial and logistic support from the Cognitive Science Laboratory of the University of Trento, where this paper was written, is gratefully acknowledged. Matteo Motterlini provided useful comments on an earlier version—of course all the remaining mistakes are mine.

References

Ankeny, Rachel (2001), “Model Organisms as Models: Understanding the ‘Lingua Franca’ of the Human Genome Project”, Model Organisms as Models: Understanding the ‘Lingua Franca’ of the Human Genome Project 68 (Proceedings): S251–S261.Google Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy (1999), The Dappled World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chu, Y. P., and Chu, R. L. (1990), “The Subsidence of Preference Reversals in Simplified and Marketlike Experimental Settings: A Note”, The Subsidence of Preference Reversals in Simplified and Marketlike Experimental Settings: A Note 80:902–911.Google Scholar
Cook, Thomas, and Campbell, Donald (1979), Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Gooding, David (1990), Experiment and the Making of Meaning. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guala, Francesco (2000), “Artefacts in Experimental Economics: Preference Reversals and the Becker-DeGroot-Marschak Mechanism”, Artefacts in Experimental Economics: Preference Reversals and the Becker-DeGroot-Marschak Mechanism 16:47–75.Google Scholar
Guala, Francesco (2001), “Building Economic Machines: the FCC Auctions”, Building Economic Machines: the FCC Auctions 32:453–477.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian (1983), Representing and Intervening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacking, Ian (1992), “The Self-Vindication of the Laboratory Sciences”, in Pickering, A. (ed.), Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hausman, Daniel (1992), The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, Daniel (1998), Causal Asymmetries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kagel, John, and Levin, Daniel (1986), “The Winner's Curse Phenomenon and Public Information in Common Value Auctions”, The Winner's Curse Phenomenon and Public Information in Common Value Auctions 76:894–920.Google Scholar
LaFollette, Hugh, and Shanks, Niall (1995), “Two Models of Models in Biomedical Research”, Two Models of Models in Biomedical Research 45:141–160.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno (1987), Science in Action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno (1988), The Pasteurisation of France. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Frankfort-Nachmias, Chava, and Nachmias, David (1996), Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Mayo, Deborah (1996), Error and the Growth of Experimental Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, Andrew (1995), The Mangle of Practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, Paul (1999), How Scientists Explain Disease. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thaler, Richard, and Tversky, Amos (1990), “Preference Reversals”, Preference Reversals 4:201–211.Google Scholar