2

On the review queue I came upon this question:
What are the "Must Know" papers of Cognitive Science?

It gave me an idea to refine it into this:
What are the groundbreaking papers on "Perception Learning" within Cognitive Science?

What are thoughts about posting a series of questions like this about various topics, we have tagged; eg vision, learning?

Motive:

I think it might help attract people to the site.

Conditions

  1. It doesn't involve opinion or debate.. these type of answers can be deleted.
  2. There is no accepted answer, the natural votes will order the answers in usefulness.

If the community is in favor of this idea, we could set them up as community wiki or take turns in posting the questions.

| |
  • 1
    I'll repost Chuck Sherrington's comment related to this topic on the main site here: "As ThomasH has pointed out in his answer, this type of information really belongs in the tag wiki, rather than being a CW question. That way anyone can refer to it before asking a new question. This question is not an experiment that I'm eager to undertake." – Steven Jeuris Sep 5 '13 at 9:58
  • I edited your post to make it a bit more focused, hope you don't mind. I think it's an interesting point to discuss so also wanted to bump it in the process. – Steven Jeuris Sep 7 '13 at 0:39
  • In terms of the CW aspect, see blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/the-future-of-community-wiki – Chuck Sherrington Sep 7 '13 at 1:13
2

Adding a list of these seminal papers to the appropriate tag wiki is a better choice.

It minimizes the "laundry list of answers" aspect, there's a direct path on the site for curation and monitoring changes(via suggested edits), and it attracts more subject matter experts to the site (as anyone steeped in tag has already read the seminal papers and is eager to answer challenging questions that have a concrete answer that he/she can contribute).

| |
0

I'm definitely for more narrow scoped questions than that one catch all one. Perception might still be a bit broad, but it's definitely a good start. Try posting a particular new question you are interested in (read want to invest time in) and we will see what the community thinks about it!

I wouldn't edit the previous one though. It's up to the OP to edit it if he's interested in a more narrow scope, or make a case on meta that the question should be reopened the way it is currently phrased.

| |
  • I agree CW is appropriate in this case. – Steven Jeuris Sep 1 '13 at 17:26
  • We shouldn't however, post 10 of these at the same time and flood the site with them. That's what I was implying with pick one you are interested in. It is important to follow up on the question, up/down vote answers, comment on them, etc ... I think only moderators can turn them in CW, so just flag the post and we can do that for you. But before doing so I think we should try seeing what others think on this post here. – Steven Jeuris Sep 1 '13 at 17:32

You must log in to answer this question.