2

I noticed that on Skeptics.SE there are quite a few questions that are in principle questions in psychology (and sometimes biology as well, so it is an issue not only for CogSci.SE, but also Biology.SE).

While the character of Skeptics.SE is a bit different than of other sites (it's aimed at specific types of questions, related to a common sense or widespread lore, not at a specific topic), I think that some questions suits more here.

And effectively, they "steal" us audience. Do you have idea what we should (or can) do? Or there is no remedy?

E.g.:

1

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
2

Similar discussions have arisen in meta, chat, and in comments regarding overlap between cogsci.se and other sites (e.g., biology, statistics). My impression was that there are going to be points of intersection between sites where a question would be relevant on more than one site. Just because a question would be on topic on Site B shouldn't stop someone from asking a question on Site A as long as it also on topic on Site A.

That said, I like the idea of increasing awareness of cogsci.se across sites.

In particular, where a question seems on topic for Cogsci.se, and has not received a good answer on another site after a few days, I think it's worth seeing whether the other site would like to migrate the question to cogsci.se.

2

Skeptics questions follow a specific format which they're very well suited to; basically all questions are "Is X true?" For a Skeptics site that's fun and all, but I think those questions are rarely particularly interesting (provided they can be easily answered by non-experts, which is typically the case on Skeptics).

Though we both expect some initial research (though Skeptics has a more specific format to show your research) I don't think there's much to fear from the overlap. Skeptics answers are very different; generally very broad but shallow, citing as many sources as possible, however tangentially related. It's not the sort of answer you'd get from a deep question asking experts; here I would expect much deeper, well explained answers regardless of citation count.

1

I think we should encourage more active connections with Skeptics, in particular I think we should migrate more questions to Skeptics. However, I don't think we are losing much in terms of questions for the ones asked there. Most of them, although on topic here, are not questions that would attract researchers, scientists, or professionals. Thus, I don't think we should be sad about losing them.

If you do feel that particular questions could be better answered here than on Skeptics, then flag them on Skeptics and let us know in chat.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .