I struggle to think of a statistical "method" that has been more damaging to psychology (and related disciplines) than mediation analysis based on observational data. IMHO all such manuscripts should be desk rejected.

First rule of psychology nomenclature is to only use naming established by Freud. This is where psychometrics fail us.

All researchers also needs to take full responsibility for their research methods. Not understanding something and just citing an authority figure isn’t good enough. If you don’t have the competence to apply methods, either learn, get people on your team who do, or switch methods.

Agreed. All fields need to take full responsibility for their research methods. Full stop. Likely, most research methods cannot be fully vetted without cross-disciplinary collaborations, but sitting around waiting for discipline x to solve our problems is not an option!

I think good description and indexing is important on its own. I don’t mind a database of bad theories as long as it’s transparent that it’s just a collection without any claims of validity.

It’s important that the database is correct and exhaustive though!

Or submit it as a registered report format systematic review!

I tend to ignore meta-analyses that aren’t systematic reviews as they tend to be haphazard collections of studies at best. If it claims to be a systematic review you should correct and/or submit a registered report with proper searches etc.

I think it’s deliberately not supported.

That’s a description of how things have been. The idea of FMS as an emerging scientific field will definitely require a more formal approach. I can agree on you on that.

If so, then metascience is not science either. I think we have to separate application of a scientific discipline with the discipline itself.

I will therefore not complain if someone tries to introduce more structure. And so here you go: a decent attempt at methods building from @jamesheathers.bsky.social :
jamesheathers.curve.space

(Could I have a PDF though? ) 2/

Only way to get people to download metadata!

I am sorry that you fail to see the benefit of this paper or this type of work, Brett. Read it first, perhaps.