Choosing expert statistical advice: practical costs and epistemic justification

We discuss the role of practical costs in the epistemic justification of a novice choosing expert advice, taking as a case study the choice of an expert statistician by a lay politician. First, we refine Goldman’s criteria for the assessment of this choice, showing how the costs of not being imparti...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: González de Prado Salas, Javier, Teira Serrano, David
Formato: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2024
País:España
Recursos:Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
Repositorio:e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNED
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:e-spacio.uned.es:20.500.14468/19408
Acesso em linha:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/19408
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:experts, epistemic justification, practical costs
id ES_69ef5746c7dbb0fd78d33d1f14435e07
oai_identifier_str oai:e-spacio.uned.es:20.500.14468/19408
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Choosing expert statistical advice: practical costs and epistemic justificationGonzález de Prado Salas, JavierTeira Serrano, Davidexperts, epistemic justification, practical costsWe discuss the role of practical costs in the epistemic justification of a novice choosing expert advice, taking as a case study the choice of an expert statistician by a lay politician. First, we refine Goldman’s criteria for the assessment of this choice, showing how the costs of not being impartial impinge on the epistemic justification of the different actors involved in the choice. Then, drawing on two case studies, we discuss in which institutional setting the costs of partiality can play an epistemic role. This way we intend to show how the sociological explanation of the choice of experts can incorporate its epistemic justification.We discuss the role of practical costs in the epistemic justification of a novice choosing expert advice, taking as a case study the choice of an expert statistician by a lay politician. First, we refine Goldman’s criteria for the assessment of this choice, showing how the costs of not being impartial impinge on the epistemic justification of the different actors involved in the choice. Then, drawing on two case studies, we discuss in which institutional setting the costs of partiality can play an epistemic role. This way we intend to show how the sociological explanation of the choice of experts can incorporate its epistemic justification.e-Spacio UNED20242024-05-21journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/19408reponame:e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNEDinstname:Universidad Nacional de Educación a DistanciaInglésengopen accesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:e-spacio.uned.es:20.500.14468/194082026-06-06T12:38:31Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Choosing expert statistical advice: practical costs and epistemic justification
title Choosing expert statistical advice: practical costs and epistemic justification
spellingShingle Choosing expert statistical advice: practical costs and epistemic justification
González de Prado Salas, Javier
experts, epistemic justification, practical costs
title_short Choosing expert statistical advice: practical costs and epistemic justification
title_full Choosing expert statistical advice: practical costs and epistemic justification
title_fullStr Choosing expert statistical advice: practical costs and epistemic justification
title_full_unstemmed Choosing expert statistical advice: practical costs and epistemic justification
title_sort Choosing expert statistical advice: practical costs and epistemic justification
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv González de Prado Salas, Javier
Teira Serrano, David
author González de Prado Salas, Javier
author_facet González de Prado Salas, Javier
Teira Serrano, David
author_role author
author2 Teira Serrano, David
author2_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv e-Spacio UNED
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv experts, epistemic justification, practical costs
topic experts, epistemic justification, practical costs
description We discuss the role of practical costs in the epistemic justification of a novice choosing expert advice, taking as a case study the choice of an expert statistician by a lay politician. First, we refine Goldman’s criteria for the assessment of this choice, showing how the costs of not being impartial impinge on the epistemic justification of the different actors involved in the choice. Then, drawing on two case studies, we discuss in which institutional setting the costs of partiality can play an epistemic role. This way we intend to show how the sociological explanation of the choice of experts can incorporate its epistemic justification.
publishDate 2024
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2024
2024-05-21
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv journal article
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
dc.type.openaire.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/19408
url https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/19408
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
eng
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
language eng
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv open access
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rights.openaire.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv open access
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNED
instname:Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
instname_str Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
reponame_str e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNED
collection e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNED
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869410065318936576
score 15,812455

Registos relacionados