Sentence examples for foresight validation from inspiring English sources

This paper introduces exemplarily social epistemology as an underpinning theory for foresight validation by quality criteria.

One of the main challenges in foresight validation is the creation of quality criteria that meet the requirements of the different scientific disciplines involved in foresight processes.

But how can we evaluate whether these criteria are scientifically valid themselves and whether they correspond to a form of scientific criticism that is appropriate for foresight validation?

Thus, the two main issues of foresight validation as formulated by Kuusi, Cuhls and Steinmüller (see 2.1) are refocused: "Does the 'whole picture' meet scientific criteria?

But how can we evaluate whether these criteria are scientifically valid themselves and whether they correspond to a form of scientific criticism that is appropriate to foresight validation?

For the sake of clarity in foresight validation the distinction between two forms of criteria makes sense: The internal criteria focus on processes and the external validity criteria test if results are supported by "weak signals, etc. and well-established theories" [12].

What will validation validate?

The results will be discussed in regard to their significance for possible theory building and validation in foresight in "Discussing relations: quality criteria, objectivity and relevance" section.

This pair of criteria indicates that the intersubjective and value-laden character of outcomes in foresight should actively be addressed in its validation.

This means that even if there were standardized quality criteria for validation, the interdisciplinary character of foresight evokes a vicious circle.

These internal criteria for validation refer mainly to the scientific method applied in a foresight project.