Note to users. If you're seeing this message, it means that your browser cannot find this page's style/presentation instructions -- or possibly that you are using a browser that does not support current Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing, and what you can do to make your experience of our site the best it can be.

Site Tools

  • AAAS
  • Subscribe
  • Feedback

Site Search

Search Advanced

Science 1 December 1989:
Vol. 246. no. 4934, pp. 1124 - 1129
DOI: 10.1126/science.246.4934.1124
Prev | Table of Contents | Next

Articles

Prediction and Theory Evaluation: The Case of Light Bending

STEPHEN G. BRUSH 1

1 Professor in the Department of History and in the Institute for Physical Science and Technology at the University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742.

Is a theory that makes successful predictions of new facts better than one that does not? Does a fact provide better evidence for a theory if it was not known before being deduced from the theory? These questions can be answered by analyzing historical cases. Einstein's successful prediction of gravitational light bending from his general theory of relativity has been presented as an important example of how "real" science works (in contrast to alleged pseudosciences like psychoanalysis). But, while this success gained favorable publicity for the theory, most scientists did not give it any more weight than the deduction of the advance of Mercury's perihelion (a phenomenon known for several decades). The fact that scientists often use the word "prediction" to describe the deduction of such previously known facts suggests that novelty may be of little importance in evaluating theories. It may even detract from the evidential value of a fact, until it is clear that competing theories cannot account for the new fact.


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES:
Testing Hypotheses: Prediction and Prejudice.
P. Lipton (2005)
Science 307, 219-221
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
Dynamics of Theory Change in the Social Sciences: Relative Deprivation and Collective Violence.
S. G. Brush (1996)
Journal of Conflict Resolution 40, 523-545
   Abstract »
Weak Models, Nil Hypotheses, And Decorative Statistics: Is There Really No Hope?.
B. O'Neill (1995)
Journal of Conflict Resolution 39, 731-748
   Abstract »
On the Threats That Do Not Face Educational Research.
R. Amundson, R. C. Serlin, R. Lehrer, and professor (1992)
Educational Researcher 21, 19-24
   Abstract »    PDF »
Knowledge or Certainty? A Reply to Cziko.
R. Lehrer, R. C. Serlin, and R. Amundson (1990)
Educational Researcher 19, 16-19
   Abstract »    PDF »


To Advertise     Find Products

Science. ISSN 0036-8075 (print), 1095-9203 (online)