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: (i) that reproducibility is the cornerstone of science; (ii) that data must not be used twice in any analysis; and (iii) that exploratory projects imply poor statistical practice. We show how our formal approach can inform and shape debates about such methodological claims.

当前科学方法论改革的尝试是为了应对实验科学中方法论和科学实践总体上缺乏严谨性的情况。然而，大多数方法论改革尝试都犯了类似的错误，并且对其所要解决的问题过度概括。我们认为，这可以部分归因于缺乏形式主义和首要原则。考虑到允许虚假主张被奉为经典的成本，我们主张方法论改革中的正式统计严谨性和科学细微差别。为了实现这种严格性和细微差别，我们提出了解决方法论问题的五步正式方法。为了说明这种形式主义的用途和好处，我们对元科学文献中三个流行的主张进行了正式的统计分析：（i）可重复性是科学的基石；(ii) 数据不得在任何分析中重复使用；(iii) 探索性项目意味着不良的统计实践。我们展示了我们的正式方法如何为有关此类方法论主张的辩论提供信息和影响。