Psychologists tend to go in for changes to methods and statistics. But we argue these crises point to deeper epistemological issues that need to be addressed for the discipline to progress.

There's a great paper on exactly this by Simon Fokt, which is part of what prompted me to think about making the change philpapers.org/rec/FOKCI

Eventually, we can start thinking about the shape of the category and potential sub-categories, to recognise the diversity of work in this area.

If your work is on or related to feminist philosophy of science, don't forget to add the category when you upload to PhilPapers.

I don't think it's being recorded, unfortunately. But eventually I'll write up a paper about it :)

Thanks to @philsci.bsky.social for supporting online conferencing and its sustainability and accessibility benefits.

Instead of thinking about motivation, I'll look at things like epistemic agency, aesthetics, values, individualism, meritocracy and injustices.
tl;dr Gamification can be great, but we should be careful about what are set up as values and what expectations people get about their agency