Post
An interesting conceptualization of the metascience space, not at all how I have organized it in my head.
Inspired (partly) by @jontreadway.bsky.social 's tweet thread, I have come up with a highly subjective and tentative map of different strands in metascience.
It is intended as a starter to begin talking about what people (want to) include in metascience.
#metascience2025
I have tended to focus on the things that I perceive as being a particular emphasis in metascience growing from several other related areas of study.
I gave a talk about it at the 2021 AIMOS conference that even just 4 years later probably needs an update: www.youtube.com/watch?v=xueB...
Brian Nosek
@briannosek.bsky.social
One instinct that I keep is a hope that metascience does not become a discipline of its own.
Disciplines get too monocultural and self-referential. The most exciting part of metascience is that it feels a bit disorienting because of the diversity in discipline, sectors, assumptions coming together.
July 4, 2025 at 9:27 PM
4 reposts
2 quotes
16 likes
This produces a couple of success indicators for the Metascience conference.
Turf-defending: It is natural to feel mild irritation that other people are studying something without being informed by the years of scholarship in one's field.
This is always occurring. No one knows everything.
People enter similar scholarly questions from different pathways. That's good.
Diversity in what literature and assumptions people are informed by is good too. Metascience cross-pollinates just a bit by soliciting sharing of one's turf w/others.
Another unusual success indicator for the conference is a general unease that there was some of my stuff, but lots of others stuff.
There is so much in metascience, across many sectors, that everyone may feel that unease. And, we hope people make more new and distant connections than expected.