The article addresses the question of how should scientific peers revise their beliefs (if at all) upon recognized disagreement. After presenting basics peer disagreement in sections 1 and 2, we focus, section 3, on a concrete case disagreement, to wit, dispute over evidential status randomized control trials medical practice. examination this motivates idea that some disagreements permit stead...

Can someone who suspends judgement about a certain proposition be in relational state of disagreement with believes as well disbelieves ? This paper argues for an affirmative answer. It develops account the notions suspended and that explains how why suspender is both believer disbeliever very same . More specifically, first provides characterisation normative profile associated terms set commi...

This paper examines the use of survey-based measures in volatility forecasting. We argue that an aggregate forecast built up from individual forecasts should be sum expected volatilities and dispersion mean return forecasts. data coming a repeated survey to capture expectations returns investors, produce Our are consistent quantitatively similar with based on GARCH implied models. result is rob...