When “Replicability” is More than Just “Reliability”: The Hubble Constant Controversy


We argue that the epistemic functions of replication in science are best understood by their role in assessing kinds of experimental error. Direct replications serve to assess the reliability of an experiment through its precision: the presence and degree of random error. Conceptual replications serve to assess the validity of an experiment through its accuracy: the presence and degree of systematic errors. To illustrate the aptness of this view, we examine the Hubble constant controversy in astronomy, showing how astronomers have responded to the concordances and discordances in their results by carrying out the different kinds of replication that we identify, with the aim of establishing a precise, accurate value for the Hubble constant. We contrast our view with Machery’s “re-sampling” account of replicability, which maintains that replications only assess reliability.



External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

The epistemic consequences of pragmatic value-laden scientific inference.Adam P. Kubiak & Paweł Kawalec - 2021 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 11 (2):1-26.
Trouble with Hubble: Status of the Big Bang Models.Chris Smeenk - 2022 - Philosophy of Science 89 (5):1265-1274.
Is forensic science in crisis?Michał Sikorski - 2022 - Synthese 200 (3):1-34.
Replication, uncertainty and progress in comparative cognition.Alexandria Boyle - 2021 - Animal Behaviour and Cognition 8 (2):296-304.
Replicability of Experiment.John D. Norton - 2015 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 30 (2):229.
Replication Is for Meta-Analysis.Samuel C. Fletcher - 2022 - Philosophy of Science 89 (5):960-969.


Added to PP

312 (#67,275)

6 months
78 (#64,999)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Vera Matarese
Perugia University
C. D. McCoy
Yonsei University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Error and the growth of experimental knowledge.Deborah Mayo - 1996 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 15 (1):455-459.
What Is a Replication?Edouard Machery - 2020 - Philosophy of Science 87 (4):545-567.
Philosophy of science and the replicability crisis.Felipe Romero - 2019 - Philosophy Compass 14 (11):e12633.
Understanding the replication crisis as a base rate fallacy.Alexander Bird - 2018 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:000-000.

View all 9 references / Add more references