"Tribalism is awesome! All disciplines other than mine are stupid!" I don't think that's what you mean, but that's what you sound like to me here.
-
-
I am very super trans- and inter-disciplinary which is what I think causes a lot of confusion with other people in the "same" field. I don't even know where I or my current lab fits into psychology because of how many varied topics we all work on.
-
I feel uncomfortable being labelled a neuro-person or even a psych person because of how much the "centroid" of these areas is devoid of what I do. I have a preprint that is basically computational politics, another that uses deep nets for modeling categorisation...
-
Modelers are like this. We are not in a "single field". The reason I said what's "wrong with what we have" is because we have a tonne of great stuff — don't forget that the roots of a lot of modern ML are in psych — and I see no engagement with it or the wider modeling community.
-
The reason I say no real engagement is because it's false to claim we don't already do exactly what is being proposed as a novel thing. We — modellers in cog, neuro, psych — influence and are influenced by other fields constantly.
-
Agreed. Perhaps these quarrels and misinterpretations would lessen if we would realise that psychology as a field is very varied, uses different methods and has different purposes, that one specific area cannot represent and less so set the canons for all others.
-
We certainly would gain by reading more about what others are doing or have already done and stop reinventing the wheel. This doesn’t not only apply to different areas. In this context, theory and modelling is are keystone.
-
TBF many modellers also reinvent the wheel. So this advice is a universal maxim.

-
Precisely!
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.