-
-
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @lakens
As this is relevant imo for the inclusivity & diversity discussion, cc-ing
@o_guest@dingding_peng@mcxfrank@patrickshafto on this.2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @lakens and
Do you mean the general discussion or some spec one that occured at
#SIPS2017? Just asking cos I keep getting tagged in the latter and there3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Was just curious if society saw theoretical/comp tools as falling under 'umbrella' of 'improving psych science'. Wasn't at
#SIPS2017 myself.3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @o_guest and
Again, this 200 different people, getting together, doing stuff. There is no 'society that sees'. If you want this, come, and do it.
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @lakens @IrisVanRooij and
That said,, many emphasized importance of theory, measurement, tools, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @dstephenlindsay @lakens and
What about cognitive computational modelling?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Not that I heard. Interesting to think about transparency in the context of computational modeling...Certainly there were modelers present.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @dstephenlindsay @o_guest and
Many of us were interested in improving theory, modeling, inference, etc., but some areas of psych were underrepresented at
#sips2017.1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes
Which ones do you think? Modellers being present is a good sign...
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.