Hacker News

zeleza said 3 months ago:

Cool work! If you're allowing more biological cognitive neuroscience, I'd also consider adding: -engram studies on memory, probably starting with the Liu et al 2012 paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11028 -Famous cases studies of Phineas Gage and HM for PFC and hippocampal importance, respectively

dr_dshiv said 3 months ago:

I love it! Sadly, misses connection between cognitive science and design (and Don Norman).

I'd also really like to see Lillian Gilbreth on here as a forerunner. She had a massive impact, had the first industrial psychology PhD, would be viewed now as cognitive science of human-technical systems. Yes, and also for more female representation.

gbr4 said 3 months ago:

Great work! Tracing the history of this beautiful subject does much to help bring it to the awareness of the layperson or non-expert creating more legitimacy in it as a subject to the public. Cognitive science is a science!

la_barba said 3 months ago:

The lack of legitimacy is not an imagined made-up fear of lay non-expert people. It has been in the news that over half of psych papers are not reproducible. Maybe thats why people have a hard time accepting related fields as science. Sure, its always better to counter flawed science with better science. But if half of your accepted papers are not reproducible then it does cast a doubt on whether its a science to begin with.

AnnaLeptikon said 3 months ago:

Thank you!!!

There just was a publication in "nature human behavior" about "what happened to cognitive science?". Recommend the read and joining the conversation.

turingbook said 3 months ago:

One of the authors posted the PDF on GitHub: https://github.com/rdgao/WH2CogSci/blob/master/nunezetal_fin...

justsomeguy3591 said 3 months ago:

As someone with a lack of a formal cognitive science background which (I think) would've forced me to read through and trace a lot of this from the beginning - I've often times wondered "where" a certain paper, set of experiments, or even an entire understanding/perspective fits into the broader picture. Especially given how many of these developments seem to invalidate or shift previous theories and experiments. This is immensely helpful in that regard!

sewercake said 3 months ago:

Looks cool, but I can't seem to find anything referencing 'embodied cognition'. I'm not expert, but that still seems to be a ripe area of research.

AnnaLeptikon said 3 months ago:

There is one circle about Embodied Mind and the "4E Paradigm" contains this approach as well.

ranie93 said 3 months ago:

What does the y-axis represent? For example, why does Behaviorism seem to have a bulge around the 1930s?

AnnaLeptikon said 3 months ago:

Very roughly the space of ideas. For the paradigms it is meant for when they were trending.

"Moving from left to right, the map is read in a roughly historical fashion, but not literally, as we are compressing a n-dimensional intellectual space into a two dimensional map grid."

ranie93 said 3 months ago:

Thanks! Maybe an area chart could show their relative popularities over time (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_chart)

I look forward to your future developments, this is really cool. I think some interactions with the diagram would be neat, for example clicking a bubble taking you to the corresponding Wikipedia article

nbeleski said 3 months ago:

This is lovely, thank you for your work. I will be forwarding this to a number of colleagues.

seonsakke said 3 months ago:

Great start! I hope this is developed further. The issue always remains, what to include and what to leave out.

AnnaLeptikon said 3 months ago:

Yes, as with every model. Thanks for the acknowledgement!

bra-ket said 3 months ago:

related: list of cognitive architectures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_architecture

aldoushuxley001 said 3 months ago:

That's actually a very impressive attempt! Solid work!

AnnaLeptikon said 3 months ago:

Thank you so much!

baking said 3 months ago:

It's George H. W. Bush, the father.