David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 147 (1):59 - 70 (2010)
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are widely taken as the gold standard for establishing causal conclusions. Ideally conducted they ensure that the treatment ‘causes’ the outcome—in the experiment. But where else? This is the venerable question of external validity. I point out that the question comes in two importantly different forms: Is the specific causal conclusion warranted by the experiment true in a target situation? What will be the result of implementing the treatment there? This paper explains how the probabilistic theory of causality implies that RCTs can establish causal conclusions and thereby provides an account of what exactly that causal conclusion is. Clarifying the exact form of the conclusion shows just what is necessary for it to hold in a new setting and also how much more is needed to see what the actual outcome would be there were the treatment implemented.
|Keywords||Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) External validity Probabilistic theory of causality Causal inference Capacities Contributions|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Nancy Cartwright (2007). Hunting Causes and Using Them: Approaches in Philosophy and Economics. Cambridge University Press.
Nancy Cartwright (1983). How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford University Press.
Nancy Cartwright (1989). Nature's Capacities and Their Measurement. Oxford University Press.
Nancy Cartwright (1999). The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science. Cambridge University Press.
John Dupré (1984). Probabilistic Causality Emancipated. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 9 (1):169-175.
Citations of this work BETA
Brendan Clarke, Donald Gillies, Phyllis Illari, Federica Russo & Jon Williamson (2014). Mechanisms and the Evidence Hierarchy. Topoi 33 (2):339-360.
Michael Baumgartner & Isabelle Drouet (2013). Identifying Intervention Variables. European Journal for Philosophy of Science 3 (2):183-205.
Stefan Dragulinescu (2012). On Anti Humeanism and Medical Singular Causation. Acta Analytica 27 (3):265-292.
Jacob Stegenga (2014). Down with the Hierarchies. Topoi 33 (2):313-322.
Mary Jean Walker & Wendy Rogers (2014). What Can Feminist Epistemology Do for Surgery? Hypatia 29 (2):404-421.
Similar books and articles
P. Allmark (2001). Is It in a Neonate's Best Interest to Enter a Randomised Controlled Trial? Journal of Medical Ethics 27 (2):110-113.
Lisa R. Stines & Norah C. Feeny (2008). Unique Ethical Concerns in Clinical Trials Comparing Psychosocial and Psychopharmalogical Interventions. Ethics and Behavior 18 (2 & 3):234 – 246.
Sherrilyn Roush (2009). Randomized Controlled Trials and the Flow of Information: Comment on Cartwright. Philosophical Studies 143 (1):137--145.
Franklin G. Miller & Howard Brody (2002). What Makes Placebo-Controlled Trials Unethical? American Journal of Bioethics 2 (2):3 – 9.
P. Allmark (2006). Should Desperate Volunteers Be Included in Randomised Controlled Trials? Journal of Medical Ethics 32 (9):548-553.
Carole J. Torgerson & David J. Torgerson (2001). The Need for Randomised Controlled Trials in Educational Research. British Journal of Educational Studies 49 (3):316 - 328.
Gordon C. S. Smith & Jill P. Pell (2003). Parachute Use to Prevent Death and Major Trauma Related to Gravitational Challenge: Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials. Bmj 327 (7429):1459--61.
David J. Torgerson & Carole J. Torgerson (2003). Avoiding Bias in Randomised Controlled Trials in Educational Research. British Journal of Educational Studies 51 (1):36 - 45.
Added to index2009-10-03
Total downloads125 ( #9,659 of 1,410,535 )
Recent downloads (6 months)9 ( #25,434 of 1,410,535 )
How can I increase my downloads?