The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes
Abstract
Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes - 1
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“a theory that is never at risk of being wrong ultimately forfeits its status as a scientifically informative framework (Lakatos 2014).”
From The myth of the Bayesian brain (2025) · cites this paper as Lakatos 2014
In the citing paper
“A framework that can explain everything, after all, explains nothing in particular (Lakatos 2014; Popper 2002).”
From The myth of the Bayesian brain (2025) · cites this paper as Lakatos 2014
In the citing paper
“As the philosopher of science Lakatos (2014) argued, research programs that continually accommodate counterevidence by adjusting auxiliary assumptions may become degenerative rather than progressive.”
From The myth of the Bayesian brain (2025) · cites this paper as Lakatos 2014
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–313 of 313
Depicting Falsifiability in Algebraic Modelling
Schlather, A., & Schlather, M. (2025) · J — Multidisciplinary Scientific Journal · doi:10.3390/j8030023
Efecto de musicoterapia en signos vitales en pacientes pediátricos durante la exodoncia
López-Yee, L., Quiroz, J. C. H., Serafín, P. E. N., & García, G. P. (2025) · LATAM Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades · doi:10.56712/latam.v6i4.4349
Su-Keene, E., Coker, J., & Bogotch, I. E. (2025) · Springer international handbooks of education · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-56275-4_184-1
Vélez-Cruz, N., & Laubichler, M. D. (2026) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.251872
Who Do We Write for? Strategies for Network Formation of a Research Program
Cunha, M. P. E., & Clegg, S. R. (2026) · Journal of Leadership Studies · doi:10.1002/jls.70024
Mangalam, M., & Stergiou, N. (2026) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/s00221-026-07275-0
Theorizing omnivorousness: the cultural reproduction thesis and elite consumption of lowbrow culture
Соколов, М. М. (2026) · Theory and Society · doi:10.1007/s11186-026-09731-w
AI-driven Acceleration and the Evaluation Bottleneck in Science: A Conceptual FrameworkPreprint
Rana, P., Varshney, L. R., & Varshney, K. R. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.7318643
Inferential accountability and theory corroboration: rethinking empirical claims
Rashid, A., & Rasheed, R. (2026) · Management Research Review · doi:10.1108/mrr-01-2026-0052
Falsification and experimental psychology: examples from face perception
Rakover, S. S. (2026) · Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science · doi:10.1007/s12124-026-10024-1
Su-Keene, E., Coker, J., & Bogotch, I. (2026) · Springer international handbooks of education · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-21359-4_184
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
