%0 Book Section
%A Tramacere, Antonella
%+ Linguistic and Cultural Evolution, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Max Planck Society
%T Triangulating tools in the messiness of cognitive neuroscience : 
%G eng
%U https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0009-8FEF-A
%D 2021
%8 31.12.2021
%* Review method: peer-reviewed
%X When findings are discordant, using many independent tools to inquire into a phenomenon (a practice called triangulation) is valuable. Or is it not?<br>Neuroscientific tools often provide partial, inconsistent, and divergent findings about the role of brain processes and mechanisms in cognition. Consequently, it is unclear whether triangulation is of any value in cognitive neuroscience.<br>I consider a messy case, where different neuroscientific tools have provided discordant evidence, and compare this case with a successful case of triangulation from epidemiology. I discuss the epistemic rationale of a relatively novel practice in neuroscience, namely triangulation of tools within the same experimental setting. I conclude by arguing that triangulation is valuable also when evidence is discordant. Using multiple independent tools to<br>inquire into a specific phenomenon is helpful with minimization of errors and with integration of data and findings, contributing to the understanding of how the mind works.
%K triangulation, robustness, discordance, errors, tools, integration, causal inferences.
%B The tools of Neuroscience Experiment: philosophical and scientific perspectives
%E Bickle, John; Craver, Carl F.; Barwich, Ann Sophie
%P 1 - 16
%& II.8
%I Routledge
%@ 9781003251392 9781032127996
%S Routledge Studies in the Philosophy of Science