The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A tradition of natural kinds
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Koslicki, K. (2008) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199539895.001.0001 · Cited by 379
Historical Kinds and the “Special Sciences”
Millikan, R. G. (1999) · Philosophical Studies · doi:10.1023/a:1004532016219 · Cited by 297
The vegetative state and the science of consciousness
Shea, N., & Bayne, T. (2010) · The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1093/bjps/axp046 · Cited by 143
Trade-offs in model-building: A more target-oriented approach
Matthewson, J. (2011) · Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A · doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2010.11.040 · Cited by 46
Why P rather than Q? The curiosities of fact and foil
Barnes, E. (1994) · Philosophical Studies · doi:10.1007/bf00989743 · Cited by 33
Metadata
- Authors
- Hacking, I.
- Venue
- Philosophical Studies
- Published
- 1991-02
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 109-126
- ISSN
- 0031-8116 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-0883
- OpenAlex
- W1975827486
- Cited by
- 376
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A tradition of natural kinds. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/bf00385836
- The paper
- Hacking, I. (1991). A tradition of natural kinds. Philosophical Studies. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00385836
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
