Many of us have been commenting on this (@IrisVanRooij, @djnavarro, @o_guest, myself, and others) but typically receive backlash. Now that an insider to psych OS movement is making the same point, maybe it’ll be received with more appreciation. Here’s to hoping
https://twitter.com/PsyBrief/status/1102890288467623936 …
-
-
I know we work in the same departments, I know we essentially (appear to) study the same stuff, but the methods, ideas, ways, cultural touchstones, are just disjoint. Are we really the same discipline when we don't actually have a common language?
-
I view our discipline as defined by subject matter, the key phenomena & systems we wish to understand. In that sense psych is my home discipline. I‘m pushed out when ppl go ‘you do formal modeling (not experiments), that’s not psychology’. That can’t be right, for the discipline.
-
Certainly not my argument. I do view them pushing you out as their own cultural issue though which of course you do not share with them.
-
Oh, but then perhaps I misread you. I thought you suggested that modeling vs methods was a discipline split-line, or did I misunderstand? Perhaps you meant, some subdomains of psych have more modelers and other subdomains less so?
-
If I had to pick one it's the second, essentially.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
