Abstract
The overarching objective of the original article was to apply a well-defined set of measures in a systematic and objective way to evaluate the extent of scientific progress within a given research program. The measures chosen were identified and defined by major philosophers of science. These measures were then applied to the empirical studies on the diffusion of war. Starr and Siverson claim to find problems in my analysis that undermined the conclusions I reach. This reply argues that each of their claims is unfounded. Moreover, they fail to refute the conclusion that the marginal progressiveness of their program is a significant reason for reduced interest in this topic.
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.
