Abstract

This paper explores the calibration of laboratory models in population genetics as an experimental strategy for justifying experimental results and claims based upon them following Franklin (1986, 1990) and Rudge (1996, 1998). The analysis provided undermines Coyne et al.'s (1997) critique of Wade and Goodnight's (1991) experimental study of Wright's (1931, 1932) Shifting Balance Theory. The essay concludes by further demonstrating how this analysis bears on Diamond's (1986) claims regarding the weakness of laboratory experiments as evidence, and further how the calibration strategy fits within Lloyd's (1987, 1988) account of the confirmation of ecological and evolutionary models.

pdf

Additional Information

ISSN
1530-9274
Print ISSN
1063-6145
Pages
pp. 369-393
Launched on MUSE
2005-01-11
Open Access
No
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.