Sven Ulpts
(Aarhus University)
Sheena F. Bartscherer
(Robert K. Merton Center for Science Studies)
Chairs:
Sven Ulpts
(Aarhus University)
Sheena F. Bartscherer
(Robert K. Merton Center for Science Studies)
Discussants:
Mark Rubin
(Durham University)
Lisa Malich
(University of Luebeck)
Carlos Santana
(University of Pennsylvania)
Lai Ma
(University College Dublin)
Thomas Hostler
(Manchester Metropolitan University)
Format:
Pre-conference virtual symposium
Critical Metascience: Does Metascience Need to Change?.
Virtual Symposium VS06 at conference Metascience 2025.
Despite broad uptake, metascience and the Open Science reform movement have garnered ample criticism. Such criticism is also known as critical metascience. We will reflect on central critiques by bringing together key voices from a variety of disciplines, asking what needs to change, how and why?
Description
Over the years metascience and associated Open Science reforms have garnered extensive criticism. Moderated by Sven Ulpts (psychology/science studies) and Sheena Bartscherer (social sciences/science studies), in this pre-conference event we would like to provide an open forum for these critical metascience voices by hosting key representatives:
Mark Rubin (psychology) will introduce the area of critical metascience and its importance, while Carlos Santana (philosophy of science) will talk about the perils of designing Open Science infrastructures for machine availability and highlight how that can trade off with human epistemic needs. Lisa Malich (history of science/ psychology) will talk about the dangers of Metascience's tendencies to homogenize research, while Lai Ma (information science) will question the assumptions of knowledge as public good and openness as equitable. Thomas Hostler (psychology) will talk about potential alignments of open research reforms with academic capitalism and how this can lead to the exploitation of academic labour.
To keep the session dynamic, the audience is invited to give feedback after each talk. Following the talks we'll transition into an open roundtable discussion, to reflect on the kinds of reactions and feedback our panellists have received during the event, but also in the past from the wider metascience community. We will close the event by asking whether these fundamental critiques have had an impact on the culture surrounding metascience, especially concerning reflexivity and how the community engages with criticism. We intend to foster an inclusive discourse culture and to provide an intellectual playground for critical and thought-provoking exchange.
Sheena F. Bartscherer (Robert K. Merton Center for Science Studies)
Sheena F. Bartscherer (Robert K. Merton Center for Science Studies)
Lisa Malich (University of Luebeck)
Carlos Santana (University of Pennsylvania)
Lai Ma (University College Dublin)
Thomas Hostler (Manchester Metropolitan University)
Short Abstract
Despite broad uptake, metascience and the Open Science reform movement have garnered ample criticism. Such criticism is also known as critical metascience. We will reflect on central critiques by bringing together key voices from a variety of disciplines, asking what needs to change, how and why?
Description
Over the years metascience and associated Open Science reforms have garnered extensive criticism. Moderated by Sven Ulpts (psychology/science studies) and Sheena Bartscherer (social sciences/science studies), in this pre-conference event we would like to provide an open forum for these critical metascience voices by hosting key representatives:
Mark Rubin (psychology) will introduce the area of critical metascience and its importance, while Carlos Santana (philosophy of science) will talk about the perils of designing Open Science infrastructures for machine availability and highlight how that can trade off with human epistemic needs. Lisa Malich (history of science/ psychology) will talk about the dangers of Metascience's tendencies to homogenize research, while Lai Ma (information science) will question the assumptions of knowledge as public good and openness as equitable. Thomas Hostler (psychology) will talk about potential alignments of open research reforms with academic capitalism and how this can lead to the exploitation of academic labour.
To keep the session dynamic, the audience is invited to give feedback after each talk. Following the talks we'll transition into an open roundtable discussion, to reflect on the kinds of reactions and feedback our panellists have received during the event, but also in the past from the wider metascience community. We will close the event by asking whether these fundamental critiques have had an impact on the culture surrounding metascience, especially concerning reflexivity and how the community engages with criticism. We intend to foster an inclusive discourse culture and to provide an intellectual playground for critical and thought-provoking exchange.