Abstract
Based on the accusations that some important ergonomics theories are not falsifiable, the present article reflects on the issue in a different way than has been previously presented by ergonomics researchers. This discussion highlights the importance of auxiliary assumptions in deriving testable predictions and emphasises the complications that result from understanding falsification. These arguments are made more concrete by considering them in the context of an important ergonomics theory that has been the target of falsification-related accusations – Multiple Resource Theory. Finally, the implications of this specific discussion for larger philosophical issues relevant to the falsification of ergonomics theories are explicated.