Abstract
The limitations of the hypothetico‐deductive (H‐D) method of inductive confirmation are described, and an alternate method, the hypothetico‐analog (H‐A) method is described in detail. The H‐A method can be characterized as a modified and supplemented form of the simple H‐D method, and is proposed as being more appropriate for archaeological inference. Aspects of the H‐A method that are given particular attention include the establishment of boundary conditions for reference classes, plausibility considerations, multiple working hypotheses, bridging arguments, and criteria for selecting alternative hypotheses. [scientific method, archaeological inference, hypothetico‐analog method, inductive confirmation]
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
