Current attempts at methodological reform in sciences come in response to an overall lack of rigor in methodological and scientific practices in experimental sciences. However, most methodological reform attempts suffer from similar mistakes and over-generalizations to the ones they aim to address. We argue that this can be attributed in part to lack of formalism and first principles. Considering the costs of allowing false claims to become canonized, we argue for formal statistical rigor and scientific nuance in methodological reform. To attain this rigor and nuance, we propose a five-step formal approach for solving methodological problems. To illustrate the use and benefits of such formalism, we present a formal statistical analysis of three popular claims in the metascientific literature: (a) that reproducibility is the cornerstone of science; (b) that data must not be used twice in any analysis; and (c) that exploratory projects imply poor statistical practice. We show how our formal approach can inform and shape debates about such methodological claims.

中文翻译：

---

科学改革中形式方法论的案例

当前在科学方法改革中的尝试是对实验科学方法和科学实践总体上缺乏严格性的回应。但是，大多数方法改革尝试都遭受着与要解决的类似的错误和普遍化。我们认为，这可以部分归因于缺乏形式主义和第一原则。考虑到允许虚假声明得到规范的代价，我们主张在方法改革中采取正式的统计严格性和科学差异。为了达到这种严谨和细微差别，我们提出了解决方法问题的五步正式方法。为了说明这种形式主义的使用和益处，我们对超科学文献中的三种流行主张进行了正式的统计分析：（a）可再现性是科学的基石；（b）数据在任何分析中均不得使用两次；（c）探索性项目暗示了不良的统计实践。我们将展示我们的正式方法如何为此类方法论主张提供信息并形成辩论。