Cited by 4,649Philosophy, Science, and HistoryPhilosophy and History of ScienceAcademic integrity and plagiarism

Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes

Lakatos, I.·1970·Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/cbo9781139171434.009

Cites

143 of 143 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Lakatos distinguished between hard core propositions and protective belt propositions within a theory; hard core propositions cannot be altered without scrapping the entire theory, but protective belt propositions can be altered while preserving the key, central hypotheses.

    “Lakatos (1970) has distinguished between two types of propositions within a theory: hard core propositions and protective belt propositions.Hard core propositions cannot be altered without scrapping the entire theory, but protective belt propositions can be altered while preserving the key, central hypotheses.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

10 of the 153 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lakatos, I.
Venue
Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge
Published
1970-09-02
Pages
91-196
OpenAlex
W256019955
Cited by
4,649
References
153
Citations by year
2026: 106 · 2025: 134 · 2024: 148 · 2023: 112 · 2022: 125 · 2021: 116 · 2020: 155 · 2019: 152 · 2018: 116 · 2017: 195 · 2016: 119 · 2015: 108 · 2014: 114 · 2013: 131 · 2012: 129
FWCI
84.37
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy, Science, and History
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
Keywords
falsification, scientific research programs, methodology of science, Karl Popper, philosophy of science

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