Lakatosian Research Programme Research Articles

Bayesian belief protection: A study of belief in conspiracy theories

ABSTRACT Several philosophers and psychologists have characterized belief in conspiracy theories as a product of irrational reasoning. Proponents of conspiracy theories apparently resist revising their beliefs given disconfirming evidence and tend to believe in more than one conspiracy, even when the relevant beliefs are mutually inconsistent. In this paper, we bring leading views on conspiracy theoretic beliefs closer together by exploring their rationality under a probabilistic framework. We question the claim that the irrationality of conspiracy theoretic beliefs stems from an inadequate response to disconfirming evidence and internal incoherence. Drawing analogies to Lakatosian research programs, we argue that maintaining a core conspiracy belief can be Bayes-rational when it is embedded in a network of auxiliary beliefs, which can be revised to protect the more central belief from disconfirmation. We propose that the (ir)rationality associated with conspiracy belief lies not in a flawed updating method, but in their failure to converge toward well-confirmed, stable belief networks in the long run. This approach not only reconciles previously disjointed views, but also points toward more specific hypotheses explaining why some agents may be prone to adopting beliefs in conspiracy theories.

Bayesian belief protection: A study of belief in conspiracy theories

ABSTRACT Several philosophers and psychologists have characterized belief in conspiracy theories as a product of irrational reasoning. Proponents of conspiracy theories apparently resist revising their beliefs given disconfirming evidence and tend to believe in more than one conspiracy, even when the relevant beliefs are mutually inconsistent. In this paper, we bring leading views on conspiracy theoretic beliefs closer together by exploring their rationality under a probabilistic framework. We question the claim that the irrationality of conspiracy theoretic beliefs stems from an inadequate response to disconfirming evidence and internal incoherence. Drawing analogies to Lakatosian research programs, we argue that maintaining a core conspiracy belief can be Bayes-rational when it is embedded in a network of auxiliary beliefs, which can be revised to protect the more central belief from disconfirmation. We propose that the irrationality associated with conspiracy belief lies not in a flawed updating method, but in a failure to converge toward well-confirmed, stable belief networks in the long run. This approach not only reconciles previously disjointed views, but also points toward more specific descriptions of why agents may be prone to adopting beliefs in conspiracy theories.

Theories of Independent Intelligences as a Lakatosian Research Program

Theories of different and independent types of intelligence constitute a Lakatosian research program, as they all claim that human intelligence has a multidimensional structure, consisting of independent cognitive abilities, and that human intelligence is not characterized by any general ability that is of greater practical importance, or that has greater predictive validity, than other, more specialized cognitive abilities. This paper argues that the independent intelligences research program is degenerating, since it has not led to novel, empirically corroborated predictions. However, despite its flaws, the program provides an illustrative example of some of the philosophical problems that inhere in Lakatos’s so-called “methodology”. Indeed, Lakatos’s conceptions of the negative heuristic, the positive heuristic, and the relationship between scientific appraisal and advice are all vulnerable to objections. The upshot is that theories of independent intelligences indeed teach us more about philosophy of science than about the nature of human intelligence.

SCIENCE AND RELIGION: MOVING BEYOND THE CREDIBILITY STRATEGY

AbstractReeves condemns the recruitment of scientific methods by representative theologians to lend credibility to their theological claims. His treatment of Nancey Murphy's use of Lakatosian research programme methodology is focused on here, and his proposal that science and religion scholars might act as “historians of the present” to advance the field is explored. The “credibility strategy” is set in historical context with an exploration of some of the science and religion field's original commitments and goals, particularly in terms of the emphasis on rationalism and corresponding neglect of the imagination, and the value of more creative input in promoting better dialogue between science and religion is highlighted.

The Aims and Structures of Ecological Research Programs

Neutral Theory is controversial in ecology. Ecologists and philosophers have diagnosed the source of the controversy as: its false assumption that individuals in different species within the same trophic level are ecologically equivalent, its conflict with Competition Theory and the adaptation of species, its role as a null hypothesis, and as a Lakatosian research programme. In this paper, I show why we should instead understand the conflict at the level of research programs which involve more than theory. The Neutralist and Competitionist research programs borrow and construct theories, models, and experiments for various aims and given their home ecological systems. I present a holistic and pragmatic view of the controversy that foregrounds the interrelation between many kinds of practices and decisions in ecological research.

Paradigm Found? Immanent Critique to Tackle Interdisciplinarity and Normativity in Science for Sustainable Development

The ambition of this two-part article is to argue for immanent critique as a research strategy in sustainability studies. We do this by picking up and developing two central, cross-cutting themes in sustainability research, namely interdisciplinarity and normativity. It is widely suggested that the problem-driven and solution-focused orientation in sustainability studies necessitates interdisciplinarity and an engagement with questions of normativity, each creating problems regarding how science is conducted. For interdisciplinarity, questions remain regarding by what scientific procedure rational (i.e., non-arbitrary) interdisciplinarity can be accomplished. For normativity, it is unclear whether normativity can be addressed scientifically, or only politically; in other words, can normativity be objectively incorporated in sustainability research, and if so, how? Ultimately, the paper asks and answers the following questions: when should a researcher move from one discipline to another in sustainability research and, how do we judge the validity of the normative values that are deemed necessary for sustainability? In Part I, we show the silences, gaps, vagueness and inadequacies of how these themes are currently addressed in sustainability science literature, and from this move to propose immanent critique as a potential strategy for dealing with them in a scientific manner. In Part II, we exemplify our strategy by applying it to re-construct the debate over sustainable development, by far the most prominent topical focus in sustainability science research, producing a novel systematized typology of sustainable development approaches in the process. We conclude with reflections on how this paper amounts to an initial contribution to the construction of a Lakatosian research programme in sustainability studies.

Are Scientific Research Programmes Applicable to Theology? On Philip Hefner’s Use of Lakatos

ABSTRACTThis paper focuses on the work of Philip Hefner, who employs Lakatosian scientific research programme methodology in order to develop and articulate certain theological concepts. Lakatos’ methodology has been criticised on several counts, including its dependence on reconstructed history and the risk of prematurely abandoning a scientific theory. Hefner does not address these critiques directly, nor does he modify his own methodology sufficiently to avoid valid criticism. Finally, this paper explores the implications of applying a Lakatosian methodology to theology for the way in which we understand truth in relation to the methodology’s criterion of fruitfulness.

Practice-based learning in construction projects: a literature review

Construction project managers often face problems when trying to change work practices. Management research addresses these problems by offering stylized and abstract models; unfortunately, they may say little about the actual work practices that managers want to change. Practice theory offers an alternative way to address practice-related managerial problems, arguing that learning is a central enabler of performing practices. While some early research on practice-based learning in construction management exists, an understanding of how this theory has been applied is lacking. To address this limitation, a systematic literature review of 15 published construction management articles was conducted, the articles being divided into five practice-related analytical categories: participation, context, meaning production, power and becoming a practitioner to identify the areas of theory discussed. Participation and context were discussed more in the published articles than meaning production, power and becoming a practitioner, which might suggest that the latter categories offer more possibilities for future research. Further, the articles were analysed through a Lakatosian research programme lens, showing that a progressive research programme exists in practice-based studies in construction management. These findings provide avenues for future construction management studies seeking to apply practice-based learning theory to understand learning in construction projects better.

UM ENSAIO SOBRE OS PROGRAMAS DE PESQUISA LAKATOSIANOS E A METODOLOGIA DA ECONOMIA NEOCLÁSSICA: CONTRIBUIÇÕES E CRÍTICAS

A obra de Imre Lakatos procurou proporcionar um refinamento à abordagem falsificacionista popperiana, que o inspirou, mediante a incorporação de conceitos desenvolvidos por Thomas Kuhn, mas sem negar algumas das hipóteses clássicas do falsificacionismo, como os critérios demarcacionistas e a ênfase na investigação e nos testes empíricos. As principais ideias do autor consistem na noção de programa de pesquisa como uma estrutura dotada de um núcleo irredutível de hipóteses básicas das teorias levantadas, protegido por um cinturão protetor de hipóteses auxiliares e por heurísticas positivas e negativas que guiam o processo de investigação científica. O pensamento de Lakatos foi discutido na metodologia da economia por parecer defender boa parte do trabalho teórico e empírico dessa profissão. Contudo, apesar de um entusiasmo inicial, a aplicação dos programas de pesquisa lakatosianos na ciência econômica passaram a ser criticados pela bibliografia em geral a partir dos anos 1980. Parte dessas críticas dirigiu-se diretamente a Lakatos; outra se dirigiu ao pensamento falsificacionista; e outras atacaram os próprios critérios demarcacionistas da metodologia científica. O presente estudo busca realizar uma revisão bibliográfica sobre os principais pontos destacados nesse debate.

Supply chain management as Lakatosian research program

Purpose – There is an ongoing and controversial debate about the current state of maturity of supply chain management (SCM) as research discipline and its future development. Openness to theory of other fields is on the one hand welcome and on the other hand denounced as arbitrariness hampering the progression of SCM. This paper aims to contribute to this debate outlining one promising framework that structures the field and provides guidance for its evolution. Design/methodology/approach – This paper conceives SCM as a Lakatosian research program from a philosophy of knowledge perspective that allows for continuously developing the knowledge base of SCM. After outlining the peculiarities of knowledge development according to Lakatos, the hard core of the program is delimitated from its protective belt by means of various analytical criteria referring to the meta, discipline, and practice level. The distinction framework is illustratively applied to four SCM research articles. Findings – Developing SCM as a Lakatosian research program entails two main challenges: consensus regarding the irrefutable hard core and theoretic and methodological openness regarding its protective belt. Research limitations/implications – Meeting these challenges requires distinguishing between hard core and protective belt. Thus, the Lakatosian viewpoint facilitates both the integration of knowledge from a diversified range of research designs into the body of SCM knowledge and safeguards its stability and its identity as research program. Originality/value – This paper is a rare attempt of grounding SCM in a coherent conceptualization of scientific knowledge development.

Finding Practical Knowledge in Entrepreneurship

Research in the pre–paradigmatic, applied scientific field of entrepreneurship is characterized mainly as exploratory. This article advocates for a considerable shift toward a more effective applied research agenda. An applied research program is proposed based on modifications to a Lakatosian research program. The agenda extends beyond typical calls for more replication work to include a focus on practical outcomes, practical significance, and surprising findings among other things. The intent is to produce substantially more practical knowledge—knowledge that is useful to entrepreneurs, policy makers, educators, and scholars.

Mark Blaug on the Historiography of Economics

This paper discusses how Mark Blaug reversed his thinking about the historiography of economics, abandoning rational reconstructions for historical ones, by using an economics of scientific knowledge argument against Paul Samuelson and others that rational reconstructions of past ideas and theories in the 'marketplace of ideas' were Pareto inefficient. Blaug’s positive argument for historical reconstructions was built on the concept of 'lost content' and his rejection of the end-state view of competition in favor of a process conception. He used these ideas to emphasize path dependency in the development of economic thinking, thereby advancing an evolutionary view of economics that has connections to his Lakatosian research programs understanding of economic methodology. The paper argues that Blaug was essentially successful in criticizing the standard view of the history of economic thought in economics, and that this is borne out by the nature of the change in recent economics.

A Modern Epistemological Reading of Agent Orientation

This article presents a modern epistemological validation of the process of agent oriented software development. Agent orientation has been widely presented in recent years as a novel modeling, design and programming paradigm for building systems using features such as openness, dynamics, sociality and intentionality. These will be put into perspective through a Lakatosian epistemological approach. The contribution of this article is to get researchers acquainted with the epistemological basis of the agent research domain and the context of the emergence of object and agent-orientation. This article advocates the use of the Lakatosian research programme concept as an epistemological basis for object and agent orientation. This is done on the basis of how these frameworks operationalize relevant theoretical concepts of the Kuhnian and Lakatosian theories.

Supply chain management: a structured literature review and implications for future research

PurposeThe field of supply chain management (SCM) has historically been informed by knowledge from narrow functional areas. While some effort towards producing a broader organizational perspective has been made, nonetheless, SCM continues to be largely eclectic with little consensus on its conceptualization and research methodological bases. This paper seeks to clarify aspects of this emerging perspective.Design/methodology/approachA total of 100 randomly selected refereed journal articles were systematically analyzed.FindingsA number of key findings emerged: the field is a relatively “new” one; several disciplines claim ownership of the field; consensus is lacking on the definition of the term; contextual focus is mostly on the manufacturing industry; predominantly “process” conceptual framing prevails; research methods employed are mostly analytical conceptual, empirical surveys or case studies; the positivist research paradigmatic stance is prevalent; and theories related to transaction cost economics and competitive advantage dominate.Originality/valueThis review identifies various conceptual and research methodological characteristics of SCM. From a philosophy of knowledge perspective, it is suggested that SCM be framed as a Lakatosian Research Program, for this has the best potential to assist in the development of SCM body of knowledge in a sustainable way into the future.

Constructivism’s New Clothes: The Trivial, the Contingent, and a Progressive Research Programme into the Learning of Science

Constructivism has been a key referent for research into the learning of science for several decades. There is little doubt that the research into learners’ ideas in science stimulated by the constructivist movement has been voluminous, and a great deal is now known about the way various science topics may commonly be understood by learners of various ages. Despite this significant research effort, there have been serious criticisms of this area of work: in terms of its philosophical underpinning, the validity of its most popular constructs, the limited scope of its focus, and its practical value to science teaching. This paper frames this area of work as a Lakatosian Research Programme (RP), and explores the major criticisms of constructivism from that perspective. It is argued that much of the criticism may be considered as part of the legitimate academic debate expected within any active RP, i.e. arguments about the auxiliary theory making up the ‘protective belt’ of the programme. It is suggested that a shifting focus from constructivism to ‘contingency in learning’ will allow the RP to draw upon a more diverse range of perspectives, each consistent with the existing hard core of the programme, which will provide potentially fruitful directions for future work and ensure the continuity of a progressive RP into learning science.

Cognitive Architectures as Lakatosian Research Programs: Two Case Studies

Cognitive architectures—task-general theories of the structure and function of the complete cognitive system—are sometimes argued to be more akin to frameworks or belief systems than scientific theories. The argument stems from the apparent non-falsifiability of existing cognitive architectures. Newell was aware of this criticism and argued that architectures should be viewed not as theories subject to Popperian falsification, but rather as Lakatosian research programs based on cumulative growth. Newell's argument is undermined because he failed to demonstrate that the development of Soar, his own candidate architecture, adhered to Lakatosian principles. This paper presents detailed case studies of the development of two cognitive architectures, Soar and ACT-R, from a Lakatosian perspective. It is demonstrated that both are broadly Lakatosian, but that in both cases there have been theoretical progressions that, according to Lakatosian criteria, are pseudo-scientific. Thus, Newell's defense of Soar as a scientific rather than pseudo-scientific theory is not supported in practice. The ACT series of architectures has fewer pseudo-scientific progressions than Soar, but it too is vulnerable to accusations of pseudo-science. From this analysis, it is argued that successive versions of theories of the human cognitive architecture must explicitly address five questions to maintain scientific credibility.

Democratic Peace Research: Whence and Whither?

The democratic peace has become a topic about which every IR scholar must hold an opinion. Empirical and theoretical scepticism about the peace endures, but the consensus seems to be that it is real and only needs explaining. Predictably, rationalists and constructivists, broadly defined, differ on what causes the peace: rationalists now emphasize how democracies reveal more information; constructivists, how they adhere to distinctive norms. Although strictly speaking, the democratic peace does not constitute a Lakatosian research programme, a ‘democratic distinctiveness’ programme has emerged, whose core includes the proposition that relations among democracies are qualitatively different from those among non-democracies or between democracies and non-democracies. Future research should focus on the conditions under which the international system selects for democracy; the links between democratic peace and international power, especially US hegemony; and what democratic peace and European integration can tell us about one another.

News Framing as a Multiparadigmatic Research Program: a Response to Entman

A large and growing body of mass media research centers on the concept of “framing.” This article responds to Entman's (1993) call for the establishment of a paradigm of news framing research, drawing on work in the sociology of knowledge to argue that news framing research operates according to principles of a Lakatosian research program (Lakatos, 1974) in which researchers employ and refine specific theories to generate findings in particular studies about a common core of irrefutable conjectures. In the metatheory developed here, the research program is inclusive of 3 paradigmatic outlooks, called cognitive, constructionist, and critical, that provide researchers with specific images with which to examine the interaction of media frames and individual- or social-level reality. Thus, contra Entman (1993), I argue that there is not, nor should there be, a single “mended” paradigm of framing research. The research program has benefited the communication discipline by encouraging researchers to use specific theories to progressively explicate a complex process.

News Framing as a Multiparadigmatic Research Program: A Response to Entman

A large and growing body of mass media research centers on the concept of “framing.” This article responds to Entman's (1993) call for the establishment of a paradigm of news framing research, drawing on work in the sociology of knowledge to argue that news framing research operates according to principles of a Lakatosian research program (Lakatos, 1974) in which researchers employ and refine specific theories to generate findings in particular studies about a common core of irrefutable conjectures. In the metatheory developed here, the research program is inclusive of 3 paradigmatic outlooks, called cognitive, constructionist, and critical, that provide researchers with specific images with which to examine the interaction of media frames and individual- or social-level reality. Thus, contra Entman (1993), I argue that there is not, nor should there be, a single “mended” paradigm of framing research. The research program has benefited the communication discipline by encouraging researchers to use specific theories to progressively explicate a complex process.

Is folk psychology a Lakatosian research program?

It has often been argued, by philosophers and more recently by developmental psychologists, that our common-sense conception of the mind should be regarded as a scientific theory. However, those who advance this view rarely say much about what they take a scientific theory to be. In this paper, I look at one specific proposal as to how we should interpret the theory view of folk psychology--namely, by seeing it as having a structure analogous to that of a Lakatosian research program. I argue that although the Lakatosian model may seem promising--particularly to those who are interested in studying the development of children's understanding of the mind--the analogy between Lakatosian research programs and folk psychology cannot be made good because folk psychology does not possess anything analogous to the positive heuristic of a Lakatosian research program. I also argue that Lakatos' account of theories may not be the best one for developmental psychologists to adopt because of the emphasis which Lakatos places on the social embeddedness of scientific theorising.