Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Evidence in Time Perception

=Notes about the group organization =

Overall organisation We discussed working on time perception during the first seminar after reading week and directly chose to work on our ends to find our first sources for the chosen disciplines : philosophy and neuroscience before sharing them on zoom. During the first zoom meeting, we first discussed clearly that our main point was the relativity of time perception and we split the team into 2, 2 of us working on philosophy, and the 2 others on neuroscience. It was decided that once that was done, we would work jointly on the conclusion, expliciting the interest of this interdisciplinary approach in the field of psychology.

For the philosophy part, we communicated with my partner, took respective notes and merged them into a final paragraph.

For the neuroscience part we respectively wrote a paragraph on the wiki page. We then discussed about them on zoom to see what ideas were the most relevant and to finally merge them into a new paragraph.

During the whole process, we mainly communicated with our Whatsapp group chat, sharing any link or source that might be relevant for any of the disciplines. On a weekly basis we had a zoom call with the whole group, discussing with the other team how to assemble our paragraphs together and how to structure the article. In addition, we used a shared Google document to keep track of the general progress and save links for interesting resources.

Group contributions

Introduction: written by everyone.

Neuroscience part: written by Mia and Victor.

Philosophical part: written by Blanche and Nathan.

Conclusion: written by everyone.

Notes on Zoom calls

November 16th:

- We discussed about the subject we wanted to chose and the issue to approach it.

- We also thought about disciplines through which this issue in this subject could be approached.

- We then started doing some research about the disciplines we could use in the article.

- We started a google docs to gather all our ideas and sources of information.

November 21st:

- We chose the subject, the issue and the disciplines.

- We gave different tasks to each individuals: giving the neuroscience paragraph to two of the students and the philosophy paragraph to two others.

November 29th:

- Every one is finishing his paragraph.

- We are starting to think about ideas for the conclusion.

December 6th:

- Both paragraphs are basically done.

- We are putting references on the wiki page.

- We are now confronting both disciplines to explicit the main tensions and common grounds between them. - We are organizing our ideas into notes for the conclusion on the google docs so we can share and format them on the next meeting.

December 13h:

- The conclusion is finished.

- We have rewritten the article so that it fits into the 2000 word limit.

- Some changes mostly relating to writing have been done.

- The article is ready to be submitted.

=General discussion= Hey guys I just created the wikibooks page for our chapter with the outline we determined together. I also already included the part on philosophy on which we worked with Blanche. By the way Blanche we have to do the referencing soon. You two can post the part on neuroscience when it is ready so we can all work on introduction and conclusion soon. -Nathan-
 * Hey ! Yes let's do referencing in the beginning of the week.

Hi I just added a paragraph in the neuroscience section as well as an introduction. I haven't added the referencing yet neither. I am planning to do it later tonight. -Victor-

Hey guys, I've just seen you put your part on neuroscience, it looks great ! Maybe you could divide it into subsections like we did with philosophy so it looks homogeneous ? -Blanche, 6/12/2020-

I think something to focus on in conclusion as a clash between disciplines is the conflict between objective and subjective evidence - which is more valid, why, why are you only able to get one or the other in certain situations. objective vs subjective evidence might be more appropriate than using qualitative vs quantitative to compare disciplines - Mia


 * Yeah i agree, we just have to show how the two meet in the field of psychology in order to show how these tensions in evidence can be exploited differently and together in order to understand time perception better -Nathan-

I don't think we should talk about them meeting specifically in the field of psychology as that would be introducing a whole new discipline in the conclusion that we do not have enough words to explore in sufficient depth. maybe we can try to analyse the clash in a more general way - Mia
 * I thought of something we could bring up as a conclusion confronting objective/subjective evidence and mentioning concisely psychology using our research in both disciplines, that might work for all of us. I will have time to write it properly tomorrow so you can all have a look at it :) Lmbs2506 (discuss • contribs) 12:57, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey im working on the first draft of the conclusion its nice and pretty much what I thought we should do I was gonna say it in the zoom. Much of what you said goes with what i wrote in the Google docs so i will fuse both of them together. For the ultimate paragraphe, are we sure we want to go in this direction to describe philosophy? i think it can work well i just wanted to know if we were dropping the idea of using a particular study to show how this domain used both evidence -Nathan-
 * Yes, thanks !! :) I updated the conclusion on the wiki page with the improvements you have made + added a bit of referencing! I think it works well and was not able to find a study that clearly states what we want it to so that it would fit exactly what we need. So, unless that others have one, I think our reasoning is quite logical and well supported in terms of evidence and sources so we could stick with that Lmbs2506 (discuss • contribs) 18:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi! I saw the conclusion you updated from the google docs pas onto the wiki page. I think it's really good as it identifies both the tensions and the similarities of evidence in the two discipline and also the approach which suits best to the meeting of these two disciplines (psychology for time anxiety) which we chose in our zoom call.

I think we now need to sum up our paragraphs so that the article fits in the 1200 words limit. We can also try to look for anything that needs to be rewritten or better structured.
 * I agree, I saw you managed to sum it up for it to fit in the word limit, thanks !! I'll read it through again tomorrow to see if anything could be rewritten. Lmbs2506 (discuss • contribs) 20:38, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, sounds good! I saw you rewrote some important details, thx. Maybe we should now upload each our PDF on the moodle page.