What experiment did we just do? Counterfactual error statistics and uncertainties about the reference class

Philosophy of Science 69 (2):279-299 (2002)

Kent Staley
Saint Louis University
Experimenters sometimes insist that it is unwise to examine data before determining how to analyze them, as it creates the potential for biased results. I explore the rationale behind this methodological guideline from the standpoint of an error statistical theory of evidence, and I discuss a method of evaluating evidence in some contexts when this predesignation rule has been violated. I illustrate the problem of potential bias, and the method by which it may be addressed, with an example from the search for the top quark. A point in favor of the error statistical theory is its ability, demonstrated here, to explicate such methodological problems and suggest solutions, within the framework of an objective theory of evidence.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/341054
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 41,507
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Robust Evidence and Secure Evidence Claims.Kent W. Staley - 2004 - Philosophy of Science 71 (4):467-488.
A Contractarian Solution to the Experimenter’s Regress.David Teira - 2013 - Philosophy of Science 80 (5):709-720.

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
843 ( #3,068 of 2,248,581 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #1,031,479 of 2,248,581 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes

Sign in to use this feature