Author:
Heesen Remco,Rubin Hannah,Schneider Mike D.,Woolaston Katie,Bortolus Alejandro,Chukwu Emelda E.,Kaufer Ricardo,Mitova Veli,Schwenkenbecher Anne,Schwindt Evangelina,Slanickova Helena,Sogbanmu Temitope O.,Hewitt Chad L.
Funder
Zentrum für interdisziplinäre Forschung, Universität Bielefeld
Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences
Volkswagen Foundation
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference53 articles.
1. de Cruz, H. & de Smedt, J. The value of epistemic disagreement in scientific practice. The case of Homo floresiensis. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. Part A 44, 169–177 (2013).
2. Borge, B. & Guercio, N. L. Learning from Scientific Disagreement-Aprendiendo del desacuerdo científico. Theor. Int. J. Theory Hist. Found. Sci. 36, 375–398 (2021).
3. Norberg, J., Blenckner, T., Cornell, S. E., Petchey, O. L. & Hillebrand, H. Failures to disagree are essential for environmental science to effectively influence policy development. Ecol. Lett. 25, 1075–1093 (2022).
4. McConnell, A. Policy success, policy failure and grey areas in-between. J. Public Policy 30, 345–362 (2010).
5. Weiss, C. H. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Adm. Rev. 39, 426–431 (1979).