Abstract
This chapter discusses the achievements and potential of broad and narrow approaches to experimental philosophy of science with a specific focus on scientific explanation. Proponents of the broad approach attempt to enrich the philosophical investigation of science with an array of empirical findings about human cognition. Most philosophers of science claim, however, that such findings hold little relevance to their own inquiries. The newer, narrow approach to experimental philosophy of science utilizes tools from social psychology and bibliometrics to directly study scientists and their written output. Among its findings is that the above claims for the autonomy of philosophy of science (i. e., from cognitive science) rest on judgments that are unjustifiably out of step with those of practicing scientists. A thoroughly interdisciplinary investigation of the nature and value of science may thus be warranted after all. Possible future contributions from this type of research are discussed in closing.
