Reputation
7,278
Next tag badge:
105/100 score
10/20 answers
Badges
3 42 121
Newest
 Booster
Impact
~65k people reached

May
30
comment What article reported variability in supporting hypotheses across disciplines?
why not just edit the figure into @Xurtio's answer?
May
29
awarded  Necromancer
May
28
revised Can learning styles be changed?
added a free pdf link
May
28
revised Is it possible to quantify cognitive bias?
added 103 characters in body
May
28
answered Is it possible to quantify cognitive bias?
May
28
revised Can learning styles be changed?
retagged and formatted
May
27
revised What type of behaviour is showing, but withholding, a reward?
edited tags
May
25
comment Does the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis apply to artificial (specifically programming) languages?
@ChuckSherrington if this was a question about programming languages wouldn't that relate to io-psych? Since organizations would be interested in optimizing what tools they give their programmers? We can discuss this in detail in chat. As is, I think the question is fine with the linguistics and maybe language tag. Here are 1, 2, 3 related questions; we could steal some tags from them. I recommend philosophy-of-mind.
May
25
comment Does the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis apply to artificial (specifically programming) languages?
NLP as in Natural Language Processing is also not an appropriate tag for this question. If by 'artificial languages' the OP means 'programming languages' and how they effect how we design/implement/reason-about algorithms, then he should write programming languages, and the io-psych tag would be relevant. But usually 'artificial languages' means languages that are created artificially for normal conversation (say Klingon, or Esperanto). Which do you mean @Roly?
May
25
revised What is the term for judging based on a simulation of the same parameters on oneself
edited tags and format
May
24
comment Visual search: complexity of positive vs negative search tasks
@H.Muster not-X is almost always a more difficult task than X.
May
24
comment How does a researcher typically go about conducting a survey-based psychological experiment?
I also moved the motivation after the question, since you suggested that you want general info, not high-heels specific. If you feel this is inappropriate, you can always roll-back my edits.
May
24
revised How does a researcher typically go about conducting a survey-based psychological experiment?
moved the motivation after the question, edited links, and shortened the text slightly.
May
24
comment How does a researcher typically go about conducting a survey-based psychological experiment?
I think the securing funding part is a completely separate question. I don't see what would be special about a survey-type experiment in terms of securing funding (except that you need much less funding). The appropriate-design of the experiment cannot be answered without knowing which experiment you want to conduct and what you expect to measure.
May
24
comment Visual search: complexity of positive vs negative search tasks
@H.Muster I am not saying she explained it in terms of task difficulties, I am suggesting that her work makes my assumption "a reasonable one". In that there are two types of processing observed: highly parallel pre-attentive and serial post-attentive. I think my answer is structured pretty poorly right now, and I will try to restructure by moving the Treisman answer to the top and my conjecturing and analogies below.
May
24
answered Visual search: complexity of positive vs negative search tasks
May
24
comment Visual search: complexity of positive vs negative search tasks
this is not a fair comparison between human and computer. You are allowing a human to do parallel processing in the first case by saying "thus can be seen immediately" while you force the computer to do only sequential processing. This would be a poor model.
May
24
comment Do only humans spend a lot of time daydreaming (or having “stimulus-independent thoughts”)?
can you give a quick summary of what the Suddendorf & Corballis group typically conclude?
May
24
comment Is it possible to distinguish recall and calculation?
@fgregg sometimes the types/frequency of mistakes can be used to understand how individuals represent/process information (apart from timing data). The most famous example of this is the study of how beginner versus expert chess players memorize and recall chess positions. On real-game boards: beginners make simple swap mistakes and experts make formation mistakes --- suggesting that experts chunk and memorize on the level of formation, while beginners do so on the level of individual pieces. Note that when a random non-real-game position is given, both experts and beginners do equally poorly.
May
24
revised Visual search: complexity of positive vs negative search tasks
tagges and typo