Validating Animal Models
Abstract
In this paper, I respond to the challenge raised against contemporary experimental neurobiology according to which the field is in a state of crisis because of the multiple experimental protocols employed in different laboratories and strengthening their reliability that presumably preclude the validity of neurobiological knowledge. I provide an alternative account of experimentation in neurobiology which makes sense of its experimental practices. I argue that maintaining a multiplicity of experimental protocols and strengthening their reliability are well justified and they foster rather than preclude the validity of neurobiological knowledge. Thus, their presence indicates thriving rather than crisis of experimental neurobiology.
Read the paper
Related studies
- The Matrisome: In Silico Definition and In Vivo Characterization by Proteomics of Normal and Tumor Extracellular Matrices
- The Escherichia coli MG1655 in silico metabolic genotype: Its definition, characteristics, and capabilities
- In silico pharmacology for drug discovery: methods for virtual ligand screening and profiling
- In silico prediction of splice-altering single nucleotide variants in the human genome
- In silico clinical trials: how computer simulation will transform the biomedical industry
- In silico optimization of a guava antimicrobial peptide enables combinatorial exploration for peptide design
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.