That’s a great point that always jumps at me when reading especially philosophy of science. I see lots of empirical claims, never tested, accepted as is. What an incredibly vast domain full of research questions.
-
-
That being said, they (the methods, the reviewing paradigms) are all truly "the way we do science". And the lines are getting even more blurred vis-a-vis by above dissociation since RRR and pre-reg generally affect both publication methods and research methods.
-
*by = my Also just wanna say, great conversation, you all!

-
Right back at you! You always provide a different perspective and make me think

-
:) Find it both interesting - and useful - to separate these aspects of "doing science" out like that,
@o_guest - thanks for that! > -
These days I do no research - rather I'm working with the researchers, funders, admin, finance, etc., so what I see (and think of) when it comes to "how science is done" is about the scientists, how they interact with each other and other stakeholders, the politics involved etc
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.