Abstract：
In this essay, I argue that the combination of research synthesis and philosophical methods can fill an important methodological gap in neuroscience. While experimental research and formal modelling have seen their methods progressively increase in rigour and sophistication over the years, the task of analysing and synthesizing the vast literature reporting new results and models has lagged behind. The problem is aggravated because neuroscience has grown and expanded into a vast mosaic of related but partially independent subfields, each with their own literatures. This fragmentation not only makes it difficult to see the full picture emerging from neuroscience research but also limits progress in individual subfields. The current neuroscience literature has the perfect conditions to create what the information scientist Don Swanson called \"undiscovered public knowledge\"-knowledge that exists in the mutual implications of different published pieces of information but that is nonetheless undiscovered because those pieces have not been explicitly connected. Current methods for rigorous research synthesis, such as systematic reviews and meta-analyses, mostly focus on combining similar studies and are not suited for exploring undiscovered public knowledge. To that aim, they need to be adapted and supplemented. I argue that successful exploration of the hidden implications in the neuroscience literature will require the combination of these adapted research synthesis methods with philosophical methods for rigorous (and creative) analysis and synthesis.
摘要：
在这篇文章中，我认为，研究综合与哲学方法的结合可以填补神经科学中重要的方法论空白。虽然多年来实验研究和正式建模已经看到他们的方法在严谨性和复杂性方面逐渐增加，分析和综合报告新结果和模型的大量文献的任务已经落后。这个问题变得更加严重，因为神经科学已经发展并扩展到一个由相关但部分独立的子领域组成的巨大马赛克，每个人都有自己的文献。这种碎片化不仅使得很难看到神经科学研究的全貌，而且限制了各个子领域的进展。当前的神经科学文献具有创造信息科学家唐·斯旺森所说的“未被发现的公共知识”的完美条件-存在于不同已发布信息的相互含义中的知识，但仍然未被发现，因为这些信息没有明确地联系在一起。目前严格的研究综合方法，如系统评价和荟萃分析，大多侧重于结合类似的研究，不适合探索未被发现的公共知识。为了这个目标,它们需要适应和补充。我认为，成功探索神经科学文献中的隐藏含义将需要将这些适应的研究综合方法与哲学方法相结合，以进行严格（和创造性）的分析和综合。
