Systematicity, knowledge, and bias. How systematicity made clinical medicine a science
In: Synthese: an international journal for epistemology, methodology and philosophy of science, Band 196, Heft 3, S. 863-879
ISSN: 1573-0964
12 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Synthese: an international journal for epistemology, methodology and philosophy of science, Band 196, Heft 3, S. 863-879
ISSN: 1573-0964
In: Synthese: an international journal for epistemology, methodology and philosophy of science, Band 195, Heft 4, S. 1397-1426
ISSN: 1573-0964
In: Synthese: an international journal for epistemology, methodology and philosophy of science, Band 175, Heft S1, S. 5-16
ISSN: 1573-0964
In: Synthese: an international journal for epistemology, methodology and philosophy of science, Band 149, Heft 3, S. 491-508
ISSN: 1573-0964
In: Synthese: an international journal for epistemology, methodology and philosophy of science, Band 143, Heft 1-2, S. 89-107
ISSN: 1573-0964
In: Metascience: an international review journal for the history, philosophy and social studies of science, Band 13, Heft 1, S. 106-108
ISSN: 1467-9981
In: Social epistemology: a journal of knowledge, culture and policy, Band 17, Heft 2-3, S. 127-133
ISSN: 1464-5297
In: Synthese: an international journal for epistemology, methodology and philosophy of science, Band 149, Heft 3, S. 445-450
ISSN: 1573-0964
In: Routledge studies in metaphysics 5
The 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF2014) was conducted to assess the quality of research carried out at higher education institutions in the UK over a 6 year period. However, the process was criticized for being expensive and bureaucratic, and it was argued that similar information could be obtained more simply from various existing metrics. We were interested in whether a prediction market on the outcome of REF2014 for 33 chemistry departments in the UK would provide information similar to that obtained during the REF2014 process. Prediction markets have become increasingly popular as a means of capturing what is colloquially known as the 'wisdom of crowds', and enable individuals to trade 'bets' on whether a specific outcome will occur or not. These have been shown to be successful at predicting various outcomes in a number of domains (e.g. sport, entertainment and politics), but have rarely been tested against outcomes based on expert judgements such as those that formed the basis of REF2014.
BASE
In: Munafò , M R , Pfeiffer , T , Altmejd , A , Heikensten , E , Almenberg , J , Bird , A , Chen , Y , Wilson , B , Johannesson , M & Dreber , A 2015 , ' Using Prediction Markets to Forecast Research Evaluations ' Royal Society open science . DOI:10.1098/rsos.150287
The 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF2014) was conducted to assess the quality of research carried out at higher education institutions in the UK over a 6 year period. However, the process was criticized for being expensive and bureaucratic, and it was argued that similar information could be obtained more simply from various existing metrics. We were interested in whether a prediction market on the outcome of REF2014 for 33 chemistry departments in the UK would provide information similar to that obtained during the REF2014 process. Prediction markets have become increasingly popular as a means of capturing what is colloquially known as the 'wisdom of crowds', and enable individuals to trade 'bets' on whether a specific outcome will occur or not. These have been shown to be successful at predicting various outcomes in a number of domains (e.g. sport, entertainment and politics), but have rarely been tested against outcomes based on expert judgements such as those that formed the basis of REF2014.
BASE
In: Munafo , M R , Pfeiffer , T , Altmejd , A , Heikensten , E , Almenberg , J , Bird , A , Chen , Y , Wilson , B , Johannesson , M & Dreber , A 2015 , ' Using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations ' , Royal Society Open Science , vol. 2 , no. 10 , 150287 . https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150287
The 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF2014) was conducted to assess the quality of research carried out at higher education institutions in the UK over a 6 year period. However, the process was criticized for being expensive and bureaucratic, and it was argued that similar information could be obtained more simply from various existing metrics. We were interested in whether a prediction market on the outcome of REF2014 for 33 chemistry departments in the UK would provide information similar to that obtained during the REF2014 process. Prediction markets have become increasingly popular as a means of capturing what is colloquially known as the 'wisdom of crowds', and enable individuals to trade 'bets' on whether a specific outcome will occur or not. These have been shown to be successful at predicting various outcomes in a number of domains (e.g. sport, entertainment and politics), but have rarely been tested against outcomes based on expert judgements such as those that formed the basis of REF2014.
BASE