Opendata, web and dolomites

Objectivity SIGNED

Making Scientific Inferences More Objective

Total Cost €

0

EC-Contrib. €

0

Partnership

0

Views

0

 Objectivity project word cloud

Explore the words cloud of the Objectivity project. It provides you a very rough idea of what is the project "Objectivity" about.

causal    unbiased    answering    benefits    trustworthy    outright    standard    foundational    inference    ground    impartiality    interests    pluralism    think    precisely    subjective    disciplines    scope    grounds    move    interpretation    techniques    nature    develops    theoretical    forms    calibrate    science    normative    descriptive    image    society    sine    people    view    public    practitioners    label    trust    medicine    consist    clinical    marks    manifold    hypothesis    reconciled    clever    qua    choices    limits    universities    ameliorating    convergence    psychology    combination    accounts    shown    break    objectivity    inferences    philosophy    biased    scientific    ways    conversely    notion    empirical    epistemic    philosophical    sometimes    plays    undermines    trials    reasoning    insights    give    foremost    opinion    methodological    salient    definition    instance    picture    conflicts    explanatory    nearly    misleading    first    questions   

Project "Objectivity" data sheet

The following table provides information about the project.

Coordinator
UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI TORINO 

Organization address
address: VIA GIUSEPPE VERDI 8
city: TORINO
postcode: 10124
website: www.unito.it

contact info
title: n.a.
name: n.a.
surname: n.a.
function: n.a.
email: n.a.
telephone: n.a.
fax: n.a.

 Coordinator Country Italy [IT]
 Project website https://msio.wordpress.com/
 Total cost 1˙487˙928 €
 EC max contribution 1˙487˙928 € (100%)
 Programme 1. H2020-EU.1.1. (EXCELLENT SCIENCE - European Research Council (ERC))
 Code Call ERC-2014-STG
 Funding Scheme ERC-STG
 Starting year 2015
 Duration (year-month-day) from 2015-09-01   to  2020-08-31

 Partnership

Take a look of project's partnership.

# participants  country  role  EC contrib. [€] 
1    UNIVERSITA DEGLI STUDI DI TORINO IT (TORINO) coordinator 846˙995.00
2    STICHTING KATHOLIEKE UNIVERSITEIT BRABANT NL (TILBURG) participant 640˙932.00

Map

 Project objective

'What makes scientific inferences trustworthy? Why do we think that scientific knowledge is more than the subjective opinion of clever people at universities? When answering these questions, the notion of objectivity plays a crucial role: the label 'objective' (1) marks an inference as unbiased and trustworthy and (2) grounds the authority of science in society. Conversely, any challenge to this image of objectivity undermines public trust in science. Sometimes these challenges consist in outright conflicts of interests, but sometimes, they are of a foundational epistemic nature. For instance, standard inference techniques in medicine and psychology have been shown to give a biased and misleading picture of reality.

My project addresses precisely those epistemic challenges and develops ways of making scientific inferences more objective. Our key move is to go beyond the traditional definition of objectivity as a 'view from nowhere' and to calibrate the most recent philosophical accounts of objectivity (e.g., convergence of different inference methods) with the practice of scientific inference. The combination of normative and descriptive analysis is likely to break new ground in philosophy of science and beyond. In particular, we demonstrate how two salient features of scientific practice––methodological pluralism and subjective choices in inference––can be reconciled with the aim of objective knowledge.

The benefits of the proposed research are manifold. First and foremost, it will greatly enhance our understanding of the scope and limits of scientific objectivity. Second, it will improve standard forms of scientific inference, such as hypothesis testing and causal and explanatory reasoning. This will be highly useful for scientific practitioners from nearly all empirical disciplines. Third, we will apply our theoretical insights to ameliorating the design and interpretation of clinical trials, where objectivity and impartiality are sine qua non requirements.'

 Publications

year authors and title journal last update
List of publications.
2017 Jan Sprenger, Jacob Stegenga
Three Arguments for Absolute Outcome Measures
published pages: 840-852, ISSN: 0031-8248, DOI: 10.1086/693930?af=R
Philosophy of Science 84/5 2019-05-29
2016 Jan Sprenger
The probabilistic no miracles argument
published pages: 173-189, ISSN: 1879-4912, DOI: 10.1007/s13194-015-0122-0
European Journal for Philosophy of Science 6/2 2019-05-29
2016 Matteo Colombo Marie Postma-Nilsenova Jan Sprenger
Explanatory Value, Probability and Abductive Inference
published pages: 432-437, ISSN: , DOI:
Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society 2019-05-29
2017 Matteo Colombo, Leandra Bucher, Jan Sprenger
Determinants of Judgments of Explanatory Power: Credibility, Generality, and Statistical Relevance
published pages: , ISSN: 1664-1078, DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01430
Frontiers in Psychology 8 2019-05-29
2018 Matteo Colombo, Georgi Duev, Michèle B. Nuijten, Jan Sprenger
Statistical reporting inconsistencies in experimental philosophy
published pages: e0194360, ISSN: 1932-6203, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194360
PLOS ONE 13/4 2019-05-29
2016 Jan Sprenger
Bayésianisme versus fréquentisme en inférence statistique
published pages: , ISSN: , DOI:
Le Bayésanisme aujourd\'hui 2019-05-29
2017 Martini, Carlo; Sprenger, Jan
Opinion Aggregation and Individual Expertise
published pages: 180--201, ISSN: , DOI:
Scientific Collaboration and Collective Knowledge 2019-05-29
2017 Felipe Romero
Novelty versus Replicability: Virtues and Vices in the Reward System of Science
published pages: 1031-1043, ISSN: 0031-8248, DOI: 10.1086/694005
Philosophy of Science 84/5 2019-05-29
2018 Jan Sprenger
Foundations of a Probabilistic Theory of Causal Strength
published pages: 371-398, ISSN: 0031-8108, DOI: 10.1215/00318108-6718797
The Philosophical Review 127/3 2019-04-18
2017 Colombo, Matteo; Gervais, Raoul; Sprenger, Jan
Introduction: objectivity in science
published pages: , ISSN: 0039-7857, DOI:
Synthese 194 2019-04-18
2018 Florian Cova, Brent Strickland, Angela Abatista, Aurélien Allard, James Andow, Mario Attie, James Beebe, Renatas Berniūnas, Jordane Boudesseul, Matteo Colombo, Fiery Cushman, Rodrigo Diaz, Noah N’Djaye Nikolai van Dongen, Vilius Dranseika, Brian D. Earp, Antonio Gaitán Torres, Ivar Hannikainen, José V. Hernández-Conde, Wenjia Hu, François Jaquet, Kareem Khalifa, Hanna Kim, Markus Kneer, Joshua Knobe, Miklos Kurthy, Anthony Lantian, Shen-yi Liao, Edouard Machery, Tania Moerenhout, Christian Mott, Mark Phelan, Jonathan Phillips, Navin Rambharose, Kevin Reuter, Felipe Romero, Paulo Sousa, Jan Sprenger, Emile Thalabard, Kevin Tobia, Hugo Viciana, Daniel Wilkenfeld, Xiang Zhou
Estimating the Reproducibility of Experimental Philosophy
published pages: , ISSN: 1878-5158, DOI: 10.1007/s13164-018-0400-9
Review of Philosophy and Psychology 2019-04-18
2018 Jan Sprenger
The objectivity of Subjective Bayesianism
published pages: 539-558, ISSN: 1879-4912, DOI: 10.1007/s13194-018-0200-1
European Journal for Philosophy of Science 8/3 2019-04-18
2018 Felipe Romero
Who Should Do Replication Labor?
published pages: 516-537, ISSN: 2515-2459, DOI: 10.1177/2515245918803619
Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science 1/4 2019-04-18
2017 Andrew Gelman, Christian Hennig
Beyond subjective and objective in statistics
published pages: 967-1033, ISSN: 0964-1998, DOI: 10.1111/rssa.12276
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 180/4 2019-04-18
2016 Felipe Romero
Can the behavioral sciences self-correct? A social epistemic study
published pages: 55-69, ISSN: 0039-3681, DOI:
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 60 2019-04-18
2019 Mattia Andreoletti, Maria Rescigno
Microbiota-gut-brain research: a plea for an interdisciplinary approach and standardization, (accepted for publication in) Behavioral and Brain Sciences
published pages: , ISSN: 0140-525X, DOI:
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2019-04-18
2016 Jan Sprenger
Two Impossibility Results for Measures of Corroboration
published pages: axw016, ISSN: 0007-0882, DOI: 10.1093/bjps/axw016
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 2019-04-18

Are you the coordinator (or a participant) of this project? Plaese send me more information about the "OBJECTIVITY" project.

For instance: the website url (it has not provided by EU-opendata yet), the logo, a more detailed description of the project (in plain text as a rtf file or a word file), some pictures (as picture files, not embedded into any word file), twitter account, linkedin page, etc.

Send me an  email (fabio@fabiodisconzi.com) and I put them in your project's page as son as possible.

Thanks. And then put a link of this page into your project's website.

The information about "OBJECTIVITY" are provided by the European Opendata Portal: CORDIS opendata.

More projects from the same programme (H2020-EU.1.1.)

MuFLOART (2018)

Microbiological fluorescence observatory for antibiotic resistance tracking

Read More  

LapIt (2019)

Making AML treatment a clinical reality: A novel anti-IL7 receptor antibody to deliver Lap to 5LO positive cells

Read More  

TroyCAN (2020)

Redefining the esophageal stem cell niche – towards targeting of squamous cell carcinoma

Read More