Misleading Evidence

14 Pages Posted: 6 Jul 2014

See all articles by Don Fallis

Don Fallis

Northeastern University

Peter Lewis

University of Miami - Department of Philosophy

Date Written: February 25, 2014

Abstract

Evidence is sometimes misleading; it can mislead researchers who use it to update their beliefs, even if they do so in an epistemically responsible way. But what exactly does it take for evidence to be misleading, and what is it for a researcher to be misled? We investigate three approaches to this question - based on significance tests, based on likelihood ratios, and based on credence shifts - and argue in favor of the latter approach. In particular, we argue that a function of credences known as the spherical rule provides the best criterion for deciding whether evidence is misleading.

Keywords: Misleading Evidence, Likelihood Ratios, Significance Tests, Credences, Epistemic Utility, Proper Scoring Rules, Brier Score

Suggested Citation

Fallis, Don and Lewis, Peter, Misleading Evidence (February 25, 2014). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2462771 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2462771

Don Fallis (Contact Author)

Northeastern University ( email )

360 Huntington Ave,
Boston, MA 02115
United States

HOME PAGE: http://philpeople.org/profiles/don-fallis

Peter Lewis

University of Miami - Department of Philosophy ( email )

P.O. Box 248054
Coral Gables, FL 33124-4670
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
75
rank
306,192
Abstract Views
573
PlumX Metrics