There is a good summary on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lzwle9gjC2E
also this can take several definitions! depends on how you want to define the measure or maybe the research itself is finding that meter stick itself
A better question would be, in this context, why research 'controversial' topics? If it's in hopes of persuading people to your point of view it seems like it'll be a futile effort.
Consciousness and everything related to it. Lucid dreams, the effect that different drugs have on consciousness, ranging from coffee to hallucinogenics, the space of human qualia.
Would it possible to add a new dimension to our conscious experience, for example, our best model of human color space is CIELAB, it has three dimensions, L, meaning lightness, A, where negative values indicate green while positive values indicate magenta and B, where negative values indicate blue and positive values indicate yellow, what if we could add another dimension to our color-space?
What would it take to measure qualia/conscious experiences, or, are they really "private" as Daniel Dennet claims?[1]. What would it mean for a human if we could "engineer" their consciousness.
What is the role of consciousness within the human brain?
Are non-humans conscious? Or, does consciousness exist outside of humans? Are dogs conscious? What about worms? Ants? Bacteria? Viruses? What about the USA? (https://www.physicalism.com/)
How can you objectively determine that "something" is conscious?
Was consciousness "recruited" by evolution? Just like how electricity was "recruited" by evolution, meaning it was naturally occurring before, but manifests itself in a far more complex way, being one part of a gigantically complex biological machine?
Is it possible to "share" or "conjoin" multiple consciousnesses? What are the ethical implications of something like this? Should judges be allowed to go "inside the heads" of victims, the defendant and witnesses?
I could go on for a while. I think the implications of finding answers to some of these questions would be unimaginable. I don't think any of this is feasible within the coming few hundred years, but perhaps we'll make some progress.
[1] private; that is, all interpersonal comparisons of qualia are systematically impossible.
i think there are several topics out there than can be tackled with data. we're just too lazy (or the data is extremely hard to find)
also, could always use all of the meter sticks and see if there is a trend there. the more the meter sticks the better