Against Popperized epidemiology
Jacobsen, M. (Institute of Occupational Medicine, Roxburgh Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9SU, Scotland). Against Popperized Epidemiology. International Journal of Epidemiology, 1976, 5: 9–11.
The recommendation that Popper‘s philosophy of science should be adopted by epidemiologists is disputed. Reference is made to other authors who have shown that the most constructive elements in Popper’s ideas have been advocated by earlier philosophers and have been used in epidemiology without abandoning inductive reasoning. It is argued that Popper‘s denigration of inductive methods is particularly harmful to epidemiology. Inductive reasoning and statistical inference play a key role in the science; it is suggested that unfamiliarity with these ideas contributes to widespread misunderstanding of the function of epidemiology. Attention is drawn to a common fallacy involving correlations between three random variables. The prevalence of the fallacy may be related to confusion between deductive and inductive logic.
Publication Number: P/068
First Author: Jacobsen M
Publisher: Oxford University Press,Oxford University, Oxford,Oxford
Download PublicationCOPYRIGHT ISSUES
Anyone wishing to make any commercial use of the downloadable articles on this page should contact the publishers of the journals. Please see the copyright notices on the journals' home pages:
- Annals of Occupational Hygiene
- Occupational and Environmental Medicine
- American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology
- QJM: An International Journal of Medicine
- Occupational Medicine
Permissions requests for Oxford Journals Online should be made to: [email protected]
Permissions requests for Occupational Health Review articles should be made to the editor at [email protected]