How can research findings be made more durable over time?

A Nature analysis highlights key strategies to improve reproducibility, replicability, and robustness across the social and behavioural sciences.

🔗 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-00965-3

#OpenScience #Reproducibility #Replication #ResearchIntegrity #metascience

#metascience What if we could study all grant applications—not just the funded ones—without compromising privacy?

Introducing MIGA: a minimal standard for open funding data https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/9hguf_v1

Helen Pearson: Beyond Belief

In this Plutopia podcast episode, journalist and author Helen Pearson discusses her book Beyond Belief, which traces the rise of evidence-based decision-making in medicine, government, education, conservation, and other fields, arguing that evidence-based practice is both more recent and more fragile than many people realize. Pearson explains how pioneers of evidence-based medicine challenged “eminence-based” authority and helped build systems like randomized trials and systematic reviews, while also emphasizing that evidence is only one part of good decision-making alongside human values, experience, and compassion. The conversation explores how misinformation, influencers, political polarization, and poor communication of scientific uncertainty have eroded trust, especially in the U.S. — but Pearson remains cautiously optimistic, stressing the need to help people ask better questions, synthesize bodies of evidence rather than rely on anecdotes or single studies, and communicate science through engaging stories in the media channels where people actually get information.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Helen Pearson:

We have to understand where people are getting their information from. If science is failing, then it’s because other channels are providing better entertainment and — maybe we touched on this earlier — the idea that scientists need to be where people are. I teach a class in science communication and journalism, and I ask them where they’re getting information from. This is sort of top-level undergraduate students or MSc students. And when I last polled the class, it was an interesting mix actually. They were saying from academic papers and YouTube. Academic papers, I think the scientists have got covered, but YouTube — that’s where that’s where they need to be.

Related: Michael Marshall on Compassionate Skepticism

YouTube Video

Thanks to the fantastic PreLights team @co_biologists and @JontyTownson for a great conversation about our recent preprints describing how to support and predict scientific breakthroughs, and what that means for how we distribute science funding.

Give it a listen! https://youtu.be/u-X3dYl7dHQ

#metascience

#statstab #526 A Meta-Analysis of the Impact and Heterogeneity of Explicit Demand Characteristics

Thoughts: The impact of the design on conclusions is under-appreciated

#demandcharacteristics #design #methodology #error #bias
#metascience #metaanalysis

https://online.ucpress.edu/collabra/article/11/1/143005/212614/A-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Impact-and-Heterogeneity-of

This week I'm taking a break from #MetaScience / #OpenScience and getting back into #SCIENCE!

I'm at the Rank Symposium on "21st Century Colour Vision" 👁️🧠🌈🤓

Got Colour Vision questions? AMA!
(If I don't know the answer I'll have lots of people to pass the question on to...)

#Rank #RankSymposium #ColourVision #ColorVision #OpenResearch

Is a 55% replication rate too low, too high, or just right? Some thoughts on Tyner et al.’s (2026) recent study.

#Metascience

https://markrubin.substack.com/p/is-a-55-replication-rate-too-low

New work and events...

🔸 Workshop on the politics and finances of open science reform

🔸 Symposium: “Who critiques the critique? Toward a reflexive metascience”

🔸 Preprint encourages establishing phenomena before testing theories

🔸 Systematic review of questionable research practices

https://markrubin.substack.com/p/critical-metascience-roundup-b87

#Metascience