You must have of history, philosophy, maybe sociology of science. What about psychology of science? Are the inner factors of scientists not an important area to study? I disagree and propose an agenda for psychology of science here: rdcu.be/dtSWj@natureportfolio.bsky.social

In case you're interested, this book talks about how psychology originally came about from a need to understand science and the scientific mind. Here's my thread to give an idea. bsky.app/profile/deve...

BDdevezer.bsky.socialAug 11, 2023 10:14pm

I'll make a 🧵 of my notes on this book here. To get us started: "There's no such thing as the scientific method, and there never was. And yet, 'the scientific method' is alive and well. […] Why? Because 'the scientific method' is a myth—and myths are powerful things." 🧪#metasci #philsci #STS

Balazs, do you have a non-paywalled version of this? Or, if need be, you can email me — patrick.forscher@busara.global

We had this during a @volkswagenstiftung.bsky.social symposium. Prof. Dr. Klaus Lieb (Mainz) analyzed the science system during the pandemic against the background of concepts about resilience.

A group of colleagues and I have recently developed a qualitative analysis of systemic factors influencing the behavior of scientists (with an emphasis on ethical vs. self-serving behavior, the field of psychology, and the German academic system). Feedback is very welcome. osf.io/preprints/ps...

I’d be curious to know what psychologists have to say about the acquisition of tacit knowledge in science.

if you wish to be involved in building this new discipline join the initiative here: docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1F...

This looks awesome and much needed