Constantin Späth

Exactly, we need meta-scientists who not only operate on an abstract level, but who are also involved in specific areas of research!

Exactly, we need meta-scientists who not only operate on an abstract level, but who are also involved in specific areas of research!

James is a real role model. Doing just about the best empirical work in his field, and writing the best papers on his view on how to do good science. Even more impressive, he is no doing it outside of academia. I wish more metascientists would not just talk the talk, but walk the walk!

Introducing a new “Preliminary Report” submission category for small-sample intervention studies: viewpoints from external experts Published in Science and Medicine in Football (Ahead of Print, 2026)

I was invited along with a selection of other experts to review the new format and afterwards to provide any additional commentary.

These have now been collected and published here: www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

2/3

On the reliability and reproducibility of qualitative research With my collaborators, I am increasingly performing qualitative research. I find qualitative research projects a useful way to improve my un...

New blog post, inspired by the excellent recent qualitative paper by Makel and colleagues: On the reliability and reproducibility of qualitative research.

I reflect on how I will incorporate realist ontologies in my own qualitative research.

daniellakens.blogspot.com/2026/02/on-r...

PhD Candidate on The Future of Mixed Methods Research /Junior Lecturer in Methodology and Statistics Tilburg University | Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences is looking for a PhD Candidate on The Future of Mixed Methods Research /Junior Lecturer in Methodology and Statistics, for the Dep...

Are you open science-minded, technically savvy, and interested in mixed methods? Come build the future of mixed methods with Tamarinde Haven and @mariestadel.bsky.social. Our campus is green, our colleagues supportive, and our research excellent!
www.academictransfer.com/en/jobs/3583...

Thanks! I hadn't thought of that (it's been a while since I wrote the article and adapted the chart for it) - in the original, there were no CIs & they used the publication year.

I think using the start year makes more sense as you've said, since the requirement was to register prospectively /1

I always find this image a bit misleading because it focus on the year studies are *published*, not when they are *started*.

Here is another version of that figure using the start year of study rather than publication year. Sample sizes in the early 1990s were larger than previous years.

I will leave you with 1 more blog on how incentives drive ignorance, not heuristics. daniellakens.blogspot.com/2016/09/why-... I did not learn about power because it was convenient not to. There was no motivation. Now I am a world leading expert. It is just incentives, not cognitive.

I've wondered about this in my area... I don't suspect as much pub bias as p-hacking. We've generated non-adjusted meta-analytic estimates and dose-response models from large datasets, then tested predictions in highly powered pre-reg studies with estimates almost bang on the mark.

A hypothesis developed based on the data is often more likely to be true, than if you had not used the data.

The problem is not whether the hypothesis is true.

The problem is the hypothesis was not severely tested. You can't *claim* it is true until you test it on new data.

Often a single Registered Report is more informative than a meta-analysis. The meta-analysis will show a non-zero estimate and we will not know if it is due to bias. Heterogeneity is huge, so the main recommendation of a meta-analysis is that future research is needed anyway.

screenshot of my post

Big new blogpost!

My guide to data visualization, which includes a very long table of contents, tons of charts, and more.

--> Why data visualization matters and how to make charts more effective, clear, transparent, and sometimes, beautiful.
www.scientificdiscovery.dev/p/salonis-gu...

If you have added some new slides/information and record yourself again for practice, it would be really great if you could share this practice session again for those who can't attend!

The image shows the abstract for my talk "The value of strong theory in intervention research: an example from the field of exercise science" at the upcoming 8th Perspectives on Scientific Error Workshop - you can find it in the program here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rt9ToVs1EkEuTbWod4st2b6StUQr5IhyTP1jhGskr4E/edit?usp=sharing

As if I haven't banged on about enough by now... looking forward to continuing to talk about how developing and trying to test strong theories is a pretty damned useful way of going about doing science.

Here's my abstract for the 8th Perspectives on Scientific Error Workshop in Leiden, NL.

#PSE8

New on the Archive:

Uygun Tunc, Duygu and Tunc, Mehmet Necip (2025) Inductive Risks and Evidential Thresholds: A Reliabilist Case for Value-Freedom in Science. [Preprint]

https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/27848/

You can sign up until January 23 for the free Paul Meehl Graduate School workshop on Scientific Criticism and Peer review taught by René Bekkers. It promises to be an extremely interesting day, so do join us in Eindhoven on January 30th! paulmeehlschool.github.io/workshops/cr...

Writing about technical topics in an accessible manner A wise man – I’m quite sure it was Brian Wansink – once pointed out that it is impossible to both read and write a lot. So, maybe reading a post about how to write just steals time from the more urgen...

Accessibility is *absolutely* key but also hard because of the curse of knowledge. I've written down some writing advice here: www.the100.ci/2024/12/01/w.... If you're more of a technical person, consider teaming up with a substantive researcher for instant audience access.>

Explainers & tutorials are a great way to criticize current practices with a positive twist. Tailoring them to a specific substantive (!) subfield can greatly increase uptake. Forget about novelty; if some statistican said sth in the 70s but no one was around to hear it, say it again.>

Individual and collective epistemic virtue in science - Synthese Synthese - We investigate the explanatory role of epistemic virtue in accounting for the success of science as a social institution that is characterized by predominantly epistemic ends. We explore...

After 3 years, this paper is finally out OA! We engage with the idea (that many entertain, if not endorse) that science can progress (or be fixed) thanks to its incentive structures alone - no explanatory role left to truth-seeking, curiosity, or scientific integrity. doi.org/10.1007/s112...

"The replication crisis in Psychology has undermined both intra-scientific and public trust. This review shows–using Wilholt's notion of epistemic trust–that replicability is fundamental for epistemic reliability" #metascience

www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

At the end, the research is still done by humans.

but rather as a form of nitpicking aimed at discrediting the researcher personally. So while I fully appreciate the goal of improving research practices, I think @narrprof.bsky.social is right that the framing plays a crucial role in determining whether these negative reactions arise. ->

Based on past conversations, I think that researchers who were not among the main drivers of the open science movement — and those who were not academically socialized within it — often worry (and perhaps have experienced) that such critiques are not meant as constructive, substantive feedback, ->

Comparing positive rates in traditional articles and registered reports within sport and exercise science: A stage 2 registered report This Stage 2 registered report analyzed the rates at which hypotheses were supported in registered reports versus traditional publications within spor…

Surprised to see this in PSE:
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

We had a very interesting visit and talk from Anna-Marie Ortloff at the lab yesterday, talking about how researchers in HCI and at CHI interpret effect sizes. Long story short: A lot of room - and need - for improvement. You can find her papers on this at: scholar.google.com/citations?us...

Job opportunity — Junior Professorship in Psychological Metascience @zpid.bsky.social leibniz-psychology.onlyfy.jobs/job/10kku5n7 h/t @bethclarke.bsky.social

Test severity may at once improve the ability of a replication study to reduce uncertainty, but it can also leave less uncertainty to be reduced to begin with.

Thank you for the quick response, that helped for sure, but I will also dive into the PhD thesis discussion!

You can see I have not thought this through completely, but I would be very interested in your opinions.

@isager.bsky.social @lakens.bsky.social