The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Best Explanation: Criteria for Theory Choice
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
Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learning
Gilpin, L. H., Bau, D., Yuan, B. Z., Bajwa, A., Specter, M., & Kagal, L. (2018) · 2018 IEEE 5th International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA) · doi:10.1109/dsaa.2018.00018 · Cited by 2,507
Thagard, P. (1989) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00057046 · Cited by 1,043
Self-citationUnderstanding, Explanation, and Scientific Knowledge
Khalifa, K. (2017) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108164276 · Cited by 331
Woodward, J. (1989) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/bf00869282 · Cited by 253
Why Astrology is a Pseudoscience
Thagard, P. R. (1978) · PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association · doi:10.1086/psaprocbienmeetp.1978.1.192639 · Cited by 165
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Thagard, P. R.
- Venue
- The Journal of Philosophy
- Publisher
- Philosophy Documentation Center
- Published
- 1978-02
- Volume
- 75
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 76
- ISSN
- 0022-362X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W133115189
- Cited by
- 606
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.76
- 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: The Best Explanation: Criteria for Theory Choice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2025686
- The paper
- Thagard, P. R. (1978). The Best Explanation: Criteria for Theory Choice. The Journal of Philosophy. https://doi.org/10.2307/2025686
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.
