If social sci is ultimately about prediction and modification of behavior (from level of atoms to groups), not joint-carving (which is for the philosophers), then it seems inevitable that ML will soon supersede top-down psych theorizing in this game.https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-40952-5 …
-
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
Joint-carving (i.e., explicitly representing our model of the world) is only useful insofar as we need to grok these models. But for many use cases, this isn’t necessary. A black box gets the job done.
Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Evidently "neobehaviorist" doesn't mean what I thought it does. Perhaps better language is a "blackbox approach" or "Skinnerian approach"
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
to clarify, I agree that ML probably won't have much of an impact on ontologies in psychology. what I'm saying is that, to everyone other than the people engaged in such work, the perceived utility of psychological models is likely to diminish over time.
-
I am more and more thinking that the exact details of these ontologies are overvalued. The right model is probably not that of well-separated constructs, but of a continuum, a set of latent spaces.
- Još 10 drugih odgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.