稳健性分析确认:贝叶斯论述。

IF 4.9 3区 医学 Q1 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Innovation in Aging Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-05-11 DOI:10.1007/s10670-022-00537-7
Lorenzo Casini, Jürgen Landes
{"title":"稳健性分析确认:贝叶斯论述。","authors":"Lorenzo Casini, Jürgen Landes","doi":"10.1007/s10670-022-00537-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Some authors claim that minimal models have limited epistemic value (Fumagalli, 2016; Grüne-Yanoff, 2009a). Others defend the epistemic benefits of modelling by invoking the role of robustness analysis for hypothesis confirmation (see, e.g., Levins, 1966; Kuorikoski et al., 2010) but such arguments find much resistance (see, e.g., Odenbaugh & Alexandrova, 2011). In this paper, we offer a Bayesian rationalization and defence of the view that robustness analysis can play a confirmatory role, and thereby shed light on the potential of minimal models for hypothesis confirmation. We illustrate our argument by reference to a case study from macroeconomics. At the same time, we also show that there are cases in which robustness analysis is detrimental to confirmation. We characterize these cases and link them to recent investigations on evidential variety (Landes, 2020b, 2021; Osimani and Landes, forthcoming). We conclude that robustness analysis over minimal models <i>can</i> confirm, but its confirmatory value depends on concrete circumstances.</p>","PeriodicalId":13596,"journal":{"name":"Innovation in Aging","volume":"6 1","pages":"367-409"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10827917/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Confirmation by Robustness Analysis: A Bayesian Account.\",\"authors\":\"Lorenzo Casini, Jürgen Landes\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10670-022-00537-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Some authors claim that minimal models have limited epistemic value (Fumagalli, 2016; Grüne-Yanoff, 2009a). Others defend the epistemic benefits of modelling by invoking the role of robustness analysis for hypothesis confirmation (see, e.g., Levins, 1966; Kuorikoski et al., 2010) but such arguments find much resistance (see, e.g., Odenbaugh & Alexandrova, 2011). In this paper, we offer a Bayesian rationalization and defence of the view that robustness analysis can play a confirmatory role, and thereby shed light on the potential of minimal models for hypothesis confirmation. We illustrate our argument by reference to a case study from macroeconomics. At the same time, we also show that there are cases in which robustness analysis is detrimental to confirmation. We characterize these cases and link them to recent investigations on evidential variety (Landes, 2020b, 2021; Osimani and Landes, forthcoming). We conclude that robustness analysis over minimal models <i>can</i> confirm, but its confirmatory value depends on concrete circumstances.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13596,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Innovation in Aging\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"367-409\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10827917/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Innovation in Aging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-022-00537-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/5/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovation in Aging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-022-00537-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/5/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

一些学者认为,最小模型的认识价值有限(Fumagalli, 2016; Grüne-Yanoff, 2009a)。另一些学者则援引稳健性分析对假设确认的作用,为建模的认识论益处辩护(见 Levins, 1966; Kuorikoski et al.在本文中,我们对稳健性分析可以起到确认作用的观点进行了贝叶斯合理化解释和辩护,从而阐明了最小模型在假设确认方面的潜力。我们引用宏观经济学中的一个案例来说明我们的论点。同时,我们也表明,在有些情况下,稳健性分析不利于确认。我们描述了这些情况,并将它们与最近关于证据多样性的研究联系起来(Landes,2020b,2021;Osimani 和 Landes,即将出版)。我们的结论是,对最小模型的稳健性分析可以证实,但其证实价值取决于具体情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Confirmation by Robustness Analysis: A Bayesian Account.

Some authors claim that minimal models have limited epistemic value (Fumagalli, 2016; Grüne-Yanoff, 2009a). Others defend the epistemic benefits of modelling by invoking the role of robustness analysis for hypothesis confirmation (see, e.g., Levins, 1966; Kuorikoski et al., 2010) but such arguments find much resistance (see, e.g., Odenbaugh & Alexandrova, 2011). In this paper, we offer a Bayesian rationalization and defence of the view that robustness analysis can play a confirmatory role, and thereby shed light on the potential of minimal models for hypothesis confirmation. We illustrate our argument by reference to a case study from macroeconomics. At the same time, we also show that there are cases in which robustness analysis is detrimental to confirmation. We characterize these cases and link them to recent investigations on evidential variety (Landes, 2020b, 2021; Osimani and Landes, forthcoming). We conclude that robustness analysis over minimal models can confirm, but its confirmatory value depends on concrete circumstances.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Innovation in Aging
Innovation in Aging GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
72
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Innovation in Aging, an interdisciplinary Open Access journal of the Gerontological Society of America (GSA), is dedicated to publishing innovative, conceptually robust, and methodologically rigorous research focused on aging and the life course. The journal aims to present studies with the potential to significantly enhance the health, functionality, and overall well-being of older adults by translating scientific insights into practical applications. Research published in the journal spans a variety of settings, including community, clinical, and laboratory contexts, with a clear emphasis on issues that are directly pertinent to aging and the dynamics of life over time. The content of the journal mirrors the diverse research interests of GSA members and encompasses a range of study types. These include the validation of new conceptual or theoretical models, assessments of factors impacting the health and well-being of older adults, evaluations of interventions and policies, the implementation of groundbreaking research methodologies, interdisciplinary research that adapts concepts and methods from other fields to aging studies, and the use of modeling and simulations to understand factors and processes influencing aging outcomes. The journal welcomes contributions from scholars across various disciplines, such as technology, engineering, architecture, economics, business, law, political science, public policy, education, public health, social and psychological sciences, biomedical and health sciences, and the humanities and arts, reflecting a holistic approach to advancing knowledge in gerontology.
期刊最新文献
Life-Course Multidisciplinary Psychosocial Predictors of Dementia Among Older Adults: Results From the Health and Retirement Study. What Characteristics Modify the Relation of Neighborhood Walkability and Walking Behavior in Older Adults? Gender Selectively Mediates the Association Between Sex and Memory in Cognitively Normal Older Adults. The Effects of Social Interaction Intervention on Cognitive Functions Among Older Adults Without Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Association Between Social Isolation and Incident Dementia Among Older Adults: Evidence From National Health and Aging Trend Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1