Cited by 318Logic and Philosophy of SciencePhilosophy of Biology and Scientific ExplanationAcademic integrity and plagiarism

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes

LAKATOS, IMRE·2014·Philosophy, Science, and History

Abstract

Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes - 1

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4324/9780203802458-7

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 313

Metadata

Authors
LAKATOS, I.
Corresponding author
LAKATOS, IMRE
Venue
Philosophy, Science, and History
Publisher
Routledge
Published
2014-06-27
Pages
89-94
OpenAlex
W4236797681
Cited by
318
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 11
FWCI
155.03
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Routledge eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Logic and Philosophy of Science
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation
  • Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
Keywords
falsification, scientific research programs, methodology of science, Karl Popper, philosophy of science, research programs

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