Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-14T13:28:24.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Herbert Simon’s Computational Models of Scientific Discovery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2023

Stephen Downes
Stephen Downes*
Affiliation:
University of Cincinnati
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Herbert Simon’s work on scientific discovery deserves serious attention by philosophers of science for several reasons. First, Simon was an early advocate of rational scientific discovery, contra Popper and logical empiricist philosophers of science (Simon 1966). This proposal spurred on investigation of scientific discovery in philosophy of science, as philosophers used and developed Simon’s notions of “problem solving” and “heuristics” in attempts to provide rational accounts of scientific discovery (See Nickles 1980a, Wimsatt 1980). Second, Simon promoted and developed many of the crucial techniques and methods used in cognitive science. One is the use of computers to model internal psychological processes, a technique central to his account of scientific discovery. Another is protocol analysis, the use of the verbal reports of experimental subjects in psychology to construct accounts of their psychological processes. Protocol analysis is given a detailed formulation by Simon (Simon and Ericsson 1984), and is modified for use in the study of scientific cognition in the paper on Krebs (Kulkarni and Simon 1988).

Type
Part II. Discovery and Change
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1990 , Issue 1: Volume One: Contributed Papers 1990 , 1990 , pp. 97 - 108
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baars, B.J. (1986), The Cognitive Revolution in Psychology.: New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
Brannigan, A. (1981), The Social Basis of Scientific Discoveries. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Buchanan, B.G. and Mitchell, T.M. (1978), “Model Directed Learning of Production Rules,” in Waterman and Hayes-Roth (eds.) (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherniak, C. (1986), Minimal Rationality. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Colodny, R.G., (ed.) (1966), Mind and Cosmos. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburg Press.Google Scholar
Cummins, R.C. (1983), “SOFT,” in The Proceedings of the Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Oakland University.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K.A. and Oliver, W.L. (1988), “Methodology for Laboratory Research on Thinking: Task Selection, Collection of Observations, and Data Analysis,” in Sternberg and Smith (eds.), pp. 392–428.Google Scholar
Faust, D. (1984), The Limits of Scientific Reasoning. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Fetzer, J.H. (ed.) (1988), Aspects of Artificial Intelligence. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galison, P. (1987), How Experiments End. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gholson, B., Shadish, W.R., Neimeyer, R.A., and Houts, A.C. (eds.) (1989), Psychology of Science: Contributions to Metascience. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, U.K.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glymour, C. (1988), “Philosophy is Artificial Intelligence,” in Fetzer (ed.), pp. 195–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glymour, C. (1987), “Android Epistemology and the Frame Problem,” in Pylyshyn (ed.) (1987), pp. 65–75.Google Scholar
Glymour, C. (1981), Theory and Evidence. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Glymour, C. and Kelly, K. (1989), “Convergence to the Truth and Nothing but the Truth,” in Philosophy of Science 56.Google Scholar
Glymour, C, Kelly, K. and Spirtes, P. (1988), “Philosophy of Science and the Logic of Discovery,” unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Gooding, D. and James, F.A. (eds.) (1985), Faraday Reconsidered. New York: Stockton Press.Google Scholar
Hanson, N.R. (1958), Patterns of Discovery. Cambridge Cambridge, U.K: University Press.Google Scholar
Holton, G. (1978), The Scientific Imagination. Cambridge, U.K: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kulkarni, D. and Simon, H.A. (1988), “The Process of Scientific Discovery: The Strategy of Experimentation,” Cognitive Science 12: 139–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langley, P., Bradshaw, G.L, Simon, H.A. and Zytgow, J.M. (1987), Scientific Discovery. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1979), Laboratory Life. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Laudan, L. (1977), Progress and its Problems. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Nersessian, N. (ed.) (1987), The Process of Science. Dordrecht: Nihjoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickles, T. (1987), “Twixt Method and Madness,” in Nersessian (ed.) 1987.Google Scholar
Nickles, T. (1980), “Scientific Discovery and the Future of Philosophy of Science,” in Nickles (ed.), pp. 1–63.Google Scholar
Nickles, T. (ed.) (1980), Scientific Discovery. 2 Volumes, Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisbett, R. and Wilson, T.D. (1977) “Telling More than we can Know: Verbal Reports on Mental Processes,” Psychological Review 84: 231–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, A. (1984), Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z.W. (ed.) (1987), The Robot’s Dilemma. Ablex: New Jersey.Google Scholar
Simon, H.A. and Ericsson, A. (1984) Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Simon, H.A. and Ericsson, A. (1977), Models of Discovery. Reidel: Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H.A. and Newell, A. (1972) Human Problem Solving. Prentice-Hall: New Jersey.Google Scholar
Simon, H.A. and Newell, A. (1969), The Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Simon, H.A. and Newell, A. (1966), “The Psychology of Scientific Problem Solving,” in, R.G.Colodny, (ed.) 1966.Google Scholar
Simon, H.A. and Newell, A. (1957), Models of Man. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.: New York.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R.J. and Smith, E.E. Eds. (1988), The Psychology of Human Thought. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, U.K.Google Scholar
Tweney, R.D. (1989), “A Framework for the Cognitive Psychology of Science,” in Gholson et al. (eds.), pp. 342–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterman, D.A. and Hayes-Roth, F. (eds) (1978), Pattern Directed Inference Systems. Academic Press: New York.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1980), “Reductionist Research Strategies and their Biases in the Units of Selection Controversy,” in Nickles (ed.), 231-259.Google Scholar
Woolgar, S. (1988), Science: The Very Idea. Tavistock: London.Google Scholar
Zytgow, J.M. and Simon, H.A. (1988), “Normative Systems of Discovery and Logic of Search,” Synthese 74: 65–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar