Increasingly curious as to why the tools-for-thought folk talk a lot about note-taking tool features and plugins and not at all about the cognitive science of better externalised thinking.
29
27
221
Conversation
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Many factors in play, but I think two major disconnects play a role:
1) A disconnect between research and practice. With notable exceptions, e.g. , not that many people seem genuinely committed to bridging this gap >
1
9
2) On the side of research, a disconnect btw technical sciences + computer science that primarily focus on tools, and cog sci + psychology-oriented research, which tends to focus on mental processes but largely ignore the role of tools. Bridge-building definitely required here.
1
1
10
+1 for this. It's like educators understanding education and HCI understanding computer systems but they don't really attend each others' conferences and the lack of awesome EduTech prevails.
1
7
That being said it is very difficult to keep up with newest research in HCI as well as cognitive science, and as much as I would love to understand cog sci better, my brain seems to only have that much room...
2
8
Yes, even keeping up with one field is hard. But I'd argue that in many cases a lot could be gained by getting acquainted with canonical texts in these other disciplines would go a long way.
1
5
If only fields (and reviewers!) then agreed on which were canonical texts 😂
2
5
Peter, if you're willing, I'd be curious to hear what you consider to be, say, 3 "canonical" HCI texts published post-2000?