Strong inference

<h2 id="the-single-hypothesis-problem">The single hypothesis problem</h2>
The problem with single hypotheses, <a href="/facts/Confirmation_bias/o5rHY4lP">confirmation bias</a>, was aptly described by <a href="/facts/Thomas_Chrowder_Chamberlin/mhh8CHcl">Thomas Chrowder Chamberlin</a> in 1897:

<blockquote>The moment one has offered an original explanation for a phenomenon which seems satisfactory, that moment affection for [one’s] intellectual child springs into existence, and as the explanation grows into a definite theory [one’s] parental affections cluster about [the] offspring and it grows more and more dear .... There springs up also unwittingly a pressing of the theory to make it fit the facts and a pressing of the facts to make them fit the theory...
The temptation to misinterpret results that contradict the desired hypothesis is probably irresistible.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:2" href="#fn:2">2</a></blockquote>
Despite the admonitions of Platt, reviewers of grant-applications often require "A Hypothesis" as part of the proposal (note the singular). Peer-review of research can help avoid the mistakes of single-hypotheses, but only so long as the reviewers are not in the thrall of the same hypothesis. If there is a shared enthrallment among the reviewers in a commonly believed hypothesis, then innovation becomes difficult because alternative hypotheses are not seriously considered, and sometimes not even permitted.

<h2 id="strong-inference">Strong Inference</h2>
The method, very similar to the <a href="/facts/Scientific_method/182j8RWE">scientific method</a>, is described as:

<ol><li>Devising alternative <a href="/facts/Hypotheses/gMABEJul">hypotheses</a>;</li>
<li>Devising a <a href="/facts/Experimentum_crucis/u7KGTbLH">crucial experiment</a> (or several of them), with alternative possible outcomes, each of which will, as nearly as possible, exclude one or more of the hypotheses;</li>
<li>Carrying out the experiment(s) so as to get a clean result;</li>
<li>Recycling the procedure, making subhypotheses or sequential hypotheses to refine the possibilities that remain, and so on.</li></ol>
The methods of <a href="/facts/Grey_system_theory/RItWn3Dc">Grey system theory</a> effectively entertain strong inference.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:3" href="#fn:3">3</a><a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:4" href="#fn:4">4</a> In such methods, the first step is the nullification of the single hypothesis by assuming that the true information of the system under study is only partially known.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:5" href="#fn:5">5</a>

<h2 id="criticisms">Criticisms</h2>
The original paper outlining strong inference has been criticized, particularly for overstating the degree that certain fields used this method.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:6" href="#fn:6">6</a><a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:7" href="#fn:7">7</a>

<h2 id="strong-inference-plus">Strong inference plus</h2>
The limitations of Strong-Inference can be corrected by having two preceding phases:<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:8" href="#fn:8">8</a>

<ol><li>An exploratory phase: at this point information is inadequate so observations are chosen randomly or intuitively or based on <a href="/facts/List_of_scientific_method_topics/4ztf01tj">scientific creativity</a>.</li>
<li>A pilot phase: in this phase <a href="/facts/Statistical_power/5KU54nW1">statistical power</a> is determined by replicating experiments under identical experimental conditions.</li></ol>
These phases create the critical seed observation (s) upon which one can base alternative hypotheses.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:9" href="#fn:9">9</a>

<h2 id="references">References</h2>

<ol>
<li id="fn:1">John R. Platt (1964). "Strong inference". Science. 146 (3642): 347–53. Bibcode:1964Sci...146..347P. doi:10.1126/science.146.3642.347. PMID 17739513. <a href="http://256.com/gray/docs/strong_inference.html" target="_blank">http://256.com/gray/docs/strong_inference.html</a> <a href="#fnref:1" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></li>
<li id="fn:2">Don L. Jewett (1 January 2005). "What's wrong with single hypotheses? Why it is time for Strong-Inference-PLUS". Scientist (Philadelphia, Pa.). 19 (21): 10. PMC 2048741. PMID 17975652. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2048741" target="_blank">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2048741</a> <a href="#fnref:2" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></li>
<li id="fn:3">Haken, Hermann (28 January 2011). "Grey Information: Theory and Practical Applications". Grey Systems: Theory and Application. 1 (1): 105–106. doi:10.1108/gs.2011.1.1.105.1. ISSN 2043-9377. <a href="/wiki/Hermann_Haken" target="_blank">/wiki/Hermann_Haken</a> <a href="#fnref:3" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></li>
<li id="fn:4">Ju-Long, Deng (March 1982). "Control problems of grey systems". Systems & Control Letters. 1 (5): 288–294. doi:10.1016/S0167-6911(82)80025-X. <a href="/wiki/Deng_Julong" target="_blank">/wiki/Deng_Julong</a> <a href="#fnref:4" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></li>
<li id="fn:5">Javed, Saad Ahmed; Mahmoudi, Amin; Liu, Sifeng (June 2020). "Grey Absolute Decision Analysis (GADA) Method for Multiple Criteria Group Decision-Making Under Uncertainty". International Journal of Fuzzy Systems. 22 (4): 1073–1090. doi:10.1007/s40815-020-00827-8. ISSN 1562-2479. S2CID 256426658. <a href="/wiki/Liu_Sifeng" target="_blank">/wiki/Liu_Sifeng</a> <a href="#fnref:5" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></li>
<li id="fn:6">O'Donohue, William; Buchanan, Jeffrey A. (2001). "The weaknesses of strong inference". Behavior and Philosophy. 29. Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies: 1–20. <a href="/wiki/William_O%27Donohue" target="_blank">/wiki/William_O%27Donohue</a> <a href="#fnref:6" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></li>
<li id="fn:7">Rowland H. Davis (2006). "Strong Inference: rationale or inspiration?". Perspectives in Biology and Medicine. 49 (2): 238–250. doi:10.1353/pbm.2006.0022. PMID 16702707. S2CID 42507520. <a href="http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/perspectives_in_biology_and_medicine/v049/49.2davis01.html" target="_blank">http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/perspectives_in_biology_and_medicine/v049/49.2davis01.html</a> <a href="#fnref:7" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></li>
<li id="fn:8">Don L. Jewett (1 January 2005). "What's wrong with single hypotheses? Why it is time for Strong-Inference-PLUS". Scientist (Philadelphia, Pa.). 19 (21): 10. PMC 2048741. PMID 17975652. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2048741" target="_blank">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2048741</a> <a href="#fnref:8" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></li>
<li id="fn:9">Don L. Jewett (1 January 2005). "What's wrong with single hypotheses? Why it is time for Strong-Inference-PLUS". Scientist (Philadelphia, Pa.). 19 (21): 10. PMC 2048741. PMID 17975652. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2048741" target="_blank">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2048741</a> <a href="#fnref:9" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></li>
</ol>

Strong inference open-in-new

Strong inference