Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2018-19/Truth in Subconscious Racism

DISCUSSION COPIED FROM BELLE'S SANDBOX:

{ Hi guys! Just starting our discussion page. Since we met up on Friday and came up with a rough plan for our page and split up the page into parts, we can all post our research we've been doing over the weekend on here. Thanks everyone for adding stuff to the user page over the weekend! Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 21:53, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

so after going through the structural approach to our chapter, we have finalized the plan and gone through each others ideas from research. As we have now split up the individual work we are going to do, we can start writing our chapter. We have created a google drive in order to share what we have written with each other so we can correct and possibly modify each others work. 144.82.8.76 (discuss) 13:59, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi guys, just made our page 'Absolute Truth in Subconscious Racism' and copied in the stub that we started writing together earlier. Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 17:41, 27 November 2018 (UTC) Also the link is https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Issues_in_Interdisciplinarity_2018-19/Absolute_Truth_in_Subconscious_Racism for easy access! Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 17:43, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Just added a definition of truth and specifically why it is an issue in interdisciplinarity / how it links to our study of race and racial bias. I'm a bit worried its too long but I thought maybe it would help to ground us and make sure everything we write is linked to truth / interdisciplinarity? If we run out of words we can always cut it for more important stuff. Please edit it if you think im rambling / wording things awkwardly! Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 21:12, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

}

Hey guys I have just added a little section covering what the test is and the grounding of our argument. However this may overlap with Emily's introduction slightly so feel free to edit and crop certain areas you think may be worth leaving out! Phoebe C-S (discuss • contribs) 09:18, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi everyone just adding in my section now - Im not too sure im referencing right so I'll just do it how I am currently and then when we next meet up we can sort out referencing to make sure we all use the exact same, correct style :) Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 16:28, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

just spent a long time trying to shorten my section but as you can see its still way too long - ive identified a few big chunks i can get rid of though to get it to the world limit so when we met up and all read eachothers you guys can help me decide which bits are necessary / repetitions of other sections. :) Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 22:22, 2 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Sounds good, so then we can make sure each of our main paragraphs are around 250-275 words to still allow space for our intro and conclusion. Bellebramer (discuss • contribs) 23:25, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Hey, I just added what I wrote for the counter-counter-argument on social psychology. I added some things to it that aren't in the version on GoogleDocs, but then I cut some things as well to try to get the word count down. Let me know if I've cut too much and parts of it is no longer clear. Also haven't completed the references yet, will add those later. (Smogensen (discuss • contribs) 12:25, 3 December 2018 (UTC))
 * I think its really really clear Sofie and really keeps the focus on truth - great!! And well done keeping in the word limit ;) Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 17:35, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Also I realise everyones sections will probably be discussing 'subconscious' and the subconscious mind while mine (neuroscience) looked at unconscious because 'subconscious' is more a psychology idea - I'll make sure to add a sentence clarifying that the neuroscience 'unconscious' is the same as the psychology 'subconscious' in the research described :) thought this was an interesting interdisciplinary language 'conflict' haha .. Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 17:40, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah that's good! I'm pretty sure they would mean the same thing too, but just for clarity definitely a good idea Bellebramer (discuss • contribs) 23:15, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Hey guys -- so I just added my sociology section in the counter argument part after getting it to the word limit we set. Let me know what you think! Just added references as websites for now so still need to correctly format those. Bellebramer (discuss • contribs) 23:23, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Just added an overall introduction for the chapter above the truth and IAT explanations. Tried to keep it short and clear but obviously edit anything you want Bellebramer (discuss • contribs) 17:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

i've shortened / reworded my section and now its nearly in the word limit - ill make the final changes after we meet up on thursday in the seminar / friday after the ATK lecture when we get to read the whole thing as a finished chapter. Also, if you think ive taken any more important bits out from my full section (on google docs) then let me know and ill have a look! Thanks for the help in shortening it Sofie :) Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 22:15, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Heyy, so I've tried to shorten the intro a bit without cutting any info really, I'm not sure how big of a difference it made to be honest, but it's just so we have more words for the body of the chapter. Also, I realised some of us spell it 'sub-conscious' and others 'subconscious' and I don't know which one we should use, as long as we pick one and stay consistent, but we can talk about that tomorrow in our meeting after the seminar. Also, whether or not we capitalise "implicit association test"...idk these are details, but we can agree on something tomorrow. It looks great, guys! (Smogensen (discuss • contribs) 20:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC))

I've nearly cut my section down to fit the word count now so will soon put it up so we can finally start editing! Also there is a section of mine that potentially overlaps with some of Emily's section given a cross over between neuroscience and psychology experiments in one of the readings I found. This may help me cut my section down but as it is a conflicting argument it may still be something we could incorporate. I will show it to you guys today so you can let me know what you think! Phoebe C-S (discuss • contribs) 08:25, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Added my sections, left out the overlapping section I mentioned so if you have a read we can work out whether or not its worth keeping Phoebe C-S (discuss • contribs) 10:39, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

So to conclude today we'll all get our sections essentially completed tonight and then meet tomorrow. Tomorrow, we'll go over the whole thing together to ensure its all coherent and work to write an introduction and conclusion. As we discussed the most important thing is that this conclusion and introduction really needs to explain the value of our chapter and that we're writing it to justify interdisciplinary work and study. Therefore, we need to make it clear why the mono discplinary study we describe in our chapters 1) is insufficent 2) contradicts eachother and therefore why we need interdisciplinarity when looking at this issue of subconscious racism, fundamentally concluding that one discipline alone is not enough to understand subconscious racism. We could even question the concept of 'absolute' truth in itself and whether this can even be established in this case - perhaps the concept of 'absolute' truth is fundamentally monodiscplinary by indicating there is one idea that should be considered true when interdisciplinary study is not the case? Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 11:15, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * we also need to clarify about vancouver referencing and if the in text references contribute to our word count!! Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 11:16, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

The behavioral psychology section is still slightly over the word count but i am reluctant to get rid of the last paragraph as I'm feel like its quite important in terms of validating the IAT for its behavioral predictions with individuals scoring higher and gives the argument more variation. If you guys could look over it and tell me what you think would be best that would be great! Phoebe C-S (discuss • contribs) 20:42, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

To summarize what we've done so far today: we've worked through a conclusion and introduction, and collaborated in figuring out how to word it. We had a long discussion about what point we actually want to make in the conclusion, and went back and forth a bit between being too vague and too bold. In the introduction we struggled to keep the word count down while still defining the term 'truth' in relation to our topic, and more importantly explaining what the IAT is and how it works. We don't want to compromise on this explanation, as it is vital for the rest of the chapter, but we also struggled to be concise. Also, we talked through moving sentences between the intro and conclusion, and agreed on shifting ideas around to solidify the structure of our chapter. Overall, we've worked through many issues together and agreed on how we want to finish off this project. (Smogensen (discuss • contribs) 15:40, 7 December 2018 (UTC))

Hi guys, I've read over it one last time and changed any errors I spotted with grammar / punctuation. Please feel the same to do the same in my section as its easier to spot somebody elses mistakes! We just have a few more checks to do on references making sure we all have done exactly the same (commas in the same place etc.) but after that we're ready to send ! :) Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 13:13, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

So we've all checked over it and fixed eachothers mistakes and our final word count is 1196 from the start of the title to the end of the text! so now we can all submit :) Emilygracewheeler (discuss • contribs) 15:29, 9 December 2018 (UTC)