It is admittedly unfair to do the pshawing without having read the paper but the original tweet sounded a bit patronizing to me. I understand it wasn't offered with that intent, but this is why interdisciplinary work is difficult.
-
-
Replying to @bradpwyble @psmaldino and
That is 100% you Brad. The paper is about modeling the publication process using signalling theory. You are all going off on a tweet not remotely relevant to what you are complaining about. Now please stop adding me to replies, thanks.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @lakens @psmaldino and
I'd be happy to modify the publication process and I look forward to reading a paper that makes such a proposal. The original tweet didn't really put it that way though (i.e. talked about building on theories rather than methods of dissemination)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bradpwyble @psmaldino and
To answer Paul's question: "Are you really so hostile to learning how frameworks and models from other fields can help psychological/cognitive research?" It's basically my job to do exactly that.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @bradpwyble and
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @o_guest @bradpwyble and
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...
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @bradpwyble and
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.
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @bradpwyble and
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @bradpwyble and
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.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
TBF many modellers also reinvent the wheel. So this advice is a universal maxim. 
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.