The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Methodological and Epistemic Differences between Historical Science and Experimental Science
Abstract
Experimental research is commonly held up as the paradigm of “good” science. Although experiment plays many roles in science, its classical role is testing hypotheses in controlled laboratory settings. Historical science (which includes work in geology, biology, and astronomy, as well as paleontology and archaeology) is sometimes held to be inferior on the grounds that its hypothesis cannot be tested by controlled laboratory experiments. Using contemporary examples from diverse scientific disciplines, this paper explores differences in practice between historical and experimental research vis-à-vis the testing of hypotheses. It rejects the claim that historical research is epistemically inferior. For as I argue, scientists engage in two very different patterns of evidential reasoning and, although there is overlap, one pattern predominates in historical research and the other pattern predominates in classical experimental research. I show that these different patterns of reasoning are grounded in an objective and remarkably pervasive time asymmetry of nature.
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
Cites
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Kuhn, T. S., & Schlegel, R. (1963) · Physics Today · doi:10.1063/1.3050879 · Cited by 35,538
Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science
Hacking, I. (1983) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511814563 · Cited by 4,814
Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes
Lakatos, I. (1970) · Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139171434.009 · Cited by 4,649
Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes
Lakatos, I. (1976) · Can Theories be Refuted? · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1863-0_14 · Cited by 3,915
A Production of Amino Acids Under Possible Primitive Earth Conditions
Miller, S. L. (1953) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.117.3046.528 · Cited by 3,522
Extraterrestrial Cause for the Cretaceous-Tertiary Extinction
Alvarez, L. W., Alvarez, W., Asaro, F., & Michel, H. V. (1980) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.208.4448.1095 · Cited by 3,198
Lehman, H. (1972) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1086/288419 · Cited by 2,998
Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World
Salmon, W. C. (1985) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9780691221489 · Cited by 2,459
Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World
Salmon, W. C. (2020) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctv173f2gh · Cited by 2,007
Search for Past Life on Mars: Possible Relic Biogenic Activity in Martian Meteorite ALH84001
McKay, D. S., Gibson, E. K., Thomas-Keprta, K. L., Vali, H., Romanek, C. S., Clemett, S. J., Chillier, X. D. F., Maechling, C. R., & Zare, R. N. (1996) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.273.5277.924 · Cited by 1,883 · cited 1×
“Using electron microscopy and energy dispersive spectroscopy (McKay et al. 1996, 926), McKay and his team discovered tiny (20–100 nm) crystals of magnetite in the carbonate globules.”
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- Popper, 1963, Philosophy of Science, 3
- Gee, 2000, In Search of Deep Time
- 10.1063/1.3037671 · doi:10.1063/1.3037671
- Kerr, 2001, Are Martian ‘Pearl Chains’ Signs of Life, Are Martian ‘Pearl Chains’ Signs of Life, 291, 1875
- 10.1038/177538a0 · doi:10.1038/177538a0
- 10.1177/004839317700700403 · doi:10.1177/004839317700700403
- Klein, 1992, Mars, 1221
- Price, 1996, Time’s Arrow and Archimedies’ Point
- 10.1007/978-94-011-5334-8 · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-5334-8
- Kitcher, 1993, The Advancement of Science
- Ward, 1990, Global Catastrophes in Earth History, 425
Cited by
The logical structure of the world
Maddy, P. (2007) · Second Philosophy · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199273669.003.0018 · Cited by 665
The Logic of Process Tracing Tests in the Social Sciences
Mahoney, J. (2012) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124112437709 · Cited by 577
A theoretical framework for narrative explanation in science
Norris, S. P., Guilbert, S. M., Smith, M. L., Hakimelahi, S., & Phillips, L. M. (2005) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20063 · Cited by 324
Losos, J. B. (2011) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/660020 · Cited by 284
Roux, C., Bucht, R., Crispino, F., De Forest, P., Lennard, C., Margot, P., Miranda, M. D., NicDaeid, N., Ribaux, O., Ross, A., et al. (2022) · Forensic Science International · doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2022.111182 · Cited by 195
Metadata
- Authors
- Cleland, C. E.
- Venue
- Philosophy of Science
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2002-09
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 474-496
- ISSN
- 0031-8248 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-767X
- OpenAlex
- W1977803477
- Cited by
- 457
- References
- 34
- FWCI
- 33.13
- 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: Methodological and Epistemic Differences between Historical Science and Experimental Science. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/342455
- The paper
- Cleland, C. E. (2002). Methodological and Epistemic Differences between Historical Science and Experimental Science. Philosophy of Science. https://doi.org/10.1086/342455
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.
