Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (23)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by JACOBSEN, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by JACOBSEN, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1976 Oxford University Press

research-article

Against Popperized Epidemiology

M. JACOBSEN1

1Institute of Occupational Medicine, Roxburgh Place, Edinburgh EH8 9SU, Scotland.

Jacobsen, M. (Institute of Occupational Medicine, Roxburgh Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9SU, Scotland). Against Popperized Epidemiology. International Journal of Epidemiology, 1976, 5: 9–11.

The recommendation that Popper‘s philosophy of science should be adopted by epidemiologists is disputed. Reference is made to other authors who have shown that the most constructive elements in Popper’s ideas have been advocated by earlier philosophers and have been used in epidemiology without abandoning inductive reasoning. It is argued that Popper‘s denigration of inductive methods is particularly harmful to epidemiology. Inductive reasoning and statistical inference play a key role in the science; it is suggested that unfamiliarity with these ideas contributes to widespread misunderstanding of the function of epidemiology. Attention is drawn to a common fallacy involving correlations between three random variables. The prevalence of the fallacy may be related to confusion between deductive and inductive logic.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Epidemiol. Community HealthHome page
E. Koch, A. Otarola, and A. Kirschbaum
A landmark for popperian epidemiology: refutation of the randomised Aldactone evaluation study
J. Epidemiol. Community Health, November 1, 2005; 59(11): 1000 - 1006.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
R. M. SZABO
Current Concepts Review - Principles of Epidemiology for the Orthopaedic Surgeon
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., January 1, 1998; 80(1): 111 - 20.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.