Bodong Chen

Crisscross Landscapes

Notes: How scientists really reason

0001-01-01


References

Citekey: @dunbar1995

Dunbar, K. N. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.), The Nature of Insight (pp. 365–395). MIT Press.

Notes

http://cognet.mit.edu/library/books/mitpress/0262691876/cache/chpt11.pdf

Two approaches: in vitro and in vivo.

This chapter focuses on in vivo study.

Mechanisms underlying conceptual change: 1. (how scientists treat) inconsistent results 2. analogy, esp. local and reginal analogies 3.fruitful analogies call for different sources of knowledge of lab members 4. more expertise –> more analogies 5. social interactions that promote conceptual change (need to check coding scheme they use) 6. (no) serendity 7. risk–may connect with promisingness. (need to check how scientists rate risk levels)