Abstract
Based on the accusations that some important ergonomics theories are not falsifiable, the present article reflects on the issue in a different way than has been previously presented by ergonomics researchers. This discussion highlights the importance of auxiliary assumptions in deriving testable predictions and emphasises the complications that result from understanding falsification. These arguments are made more concrete by considering them in the context of an important ergonomics theory that has been the target of falsification-related accusations – Multiple Resource Theory. Finally, the implications of this specific discussion for larger philosophical issues relevant to the falsification of ergonomics theories are explicated.
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.
