The Strong Researcher Hypothesis
macroscience.org · 865 words · saved by 1 readers
There’s a tension between two basic metascientific instincts.
There’s a tension between two basic metascientific instincts. On the one hand, metascience promises that, although scientific and technological progress is wild, powerful, and mysterious, it can be understood deeply enough that we can craft interventions to effectively influence it. Through reforms to scientific publication, changes to granting, and other procedural tweaks, we may be able to accelerate and shape progress. These reforms are built on the idea that by shaping the incentives of researchers, we can shift their decision making calculus in ways that will produce faster progress.…
related reading
- A Vision of Metasciencescienceplusplus.org
- A Vision of Metasciencescienceplusplus.org
- No, it’s not The Incentives—it’s you – [citation needed]talyarkoni.org
- Metascience Working Group - Using science to improve sciencemetasciencepolicy.org
- The Six Camps of Metasciencemacroscience.org
- Bottling Lightningparpa.substack.com
- We Need a New Science of Progress - The Atlantictheatlantic.com
- How Life Sciences Actually Work: Findings of a Year-Long Investigation - Alexey Guzeyguzey.com
- You and Your Researchcs.virginia.edu
- Principles of Effective Research – Michael Nielsenmichaelnielsen.org
- Nintil - Limits and Possibilities of Metasciencenintil.com
- Home | Levers for Progressleversforprogress.com