Abstract
The paper analyzes the notion of exploration that can be found in the distinction between exploratory and confirmatory research, which is sometimes appealed to in the metascience literature. We argue that this notion (a) differs in important respects from previous works in exploratory data analysis and (b) contains some counterintuitive assumptions about the nature of exploration. Engaging with works in the history and philosophy of experimentation and modeling, we develop and defend a more comprehensive and accurate notion of exploration and argue that it is better suited for a normative analysis of exploratory research.