  Philosophers interested in characterizing correct patterns of inductive reasoning and in providing "rational reconstructions" of scientific methodology have tended to focus on incremental evidence as crucial to their enterprise.  When scientists (or ordinary folk) say that E supports or confirms H what they generally mean is that learning of E's truth will increase the total amount of evidence for H's truth.  Since subjectivists characterize total evidence in terms of subjective probabilities or odds, they analyze incremental evidence in terms of changes in these quantities.  On such views, the simplest way to characterize the strength of incremental evidence is by making ordinal comparisons of conditional and unconditional probabilities or odds.