Past research

My PhD was dedicated to a cognitive approach to theorising. I have developed a view whereby the very format of representations used in forming, developing, testing, and presenting scientific hypotheses matters to their very content. This study was based on two in-depth case studies, one on the formulations of Classical Mechanics, and the other on Classical Genetics maps and diagrams. This work was awarded several prices, and has given rise to an important number of talks and papers, as well as a book in French (see Publications and Talks lists). My dissertation (in French) is available here.

It is in this work that my interest in agents' cognition and perspective, which drives all the subsequent research I have been carrying out, originates.

Since the completion of my PhD, my work has developed along three main lines of research (which are interrelated). See Publications and Talks lists for detail and preprint.

• Social epistemology: I have given several talks and written papers on the epistemology of computer simulations, on testimony, and on trust. (See Publications and Talks lists).

• Since 2015, I have been developing a project on the notion of reasonable doubt, that lies at the intersection of epistemology, psychology of reasoning, and law. From 2015 to 2018, I was a Marie Curie fellow at Birkbeck College (ReaDoubt MSCA project), London (with a maternity and parental break in between). This enabled me to publish papers on reasonable doubt, conspiracy theories, cognitive biases, and trust,  as well as experimental studies on credulity and belief formation. I also organised the international conference 'From reasonable doubt to undue sketicism' in London in May 2017 and co-edited a topical collection of Synthese.

• Since 2019, I have been developing a project on evidential reasoning in law, science, and everyday-life. Thanks to my Institut universitaire de France fellowship, I could complete a master 2 in law, and carry out an in-depth inquiry into scientific expertise and the role of scientific information in a public health trial.  Both projects will give rise to a book. More generally, I have also given a series of talks about the role and status of scientific expertise in informing decisions, and the importance of their relevance. Lastly, my interest in expertise in public health has recently been growing, and could feed from my being a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of the French public health agency (Santé publique France).