Critical thinking
Article: Dienes (2008)
Degrees of falsifiability

Falsifiability

A potential falsifier of a theory: any potential observation that would contradict the theory.
One theory is more falsifiable than another if the class of potential falsifiers is larger.

Scientists prefer simple theories.
Simple theories are better testable.

A theory can gain in falsifiability not only by being precise, but also be being broad in range of situations to which the theory applies.
The greater the universality of a theory, the more falsifiable it is. Even if the predictions are not very precise.

Revisions to a theory may make it more falsifiable by specifying fine-grained causal mechanisms.
As long as the steps in a proposed causal pathway are testable, specifying the pathway gives you more falsifiers.

Psychologists sometimes theorize and make predictions by constructing computational models.
A computational model is a computer simulation of a subject, where the model is exposed to the same stimuli subjects receive and gives actual trial-by-trial responses.

A theory that allows everything explains nothing.
The more a theory forbids, the more it says about the world. The empirical content of a theory increases with its degree of falsifiability.

The more falsifiable a theory is, the more open it is to criticism.
So the more falsifiable our theories are, the faster we can make progress, given progress comes from criticism.

Science aims at the maximum falsifiability it can achieve: successive theories should be successively more falsifiable. Either in terms of universality or precision.

Make sure that any revision or amendment to theory can be falsified. That way theory development is guaranteed to keep its empirical character.

Observations

Observations are always ‘theory impregnated’.
Falsification is not so simple as pitting theory against observation.
Theories determine what an observation is.