Talk:Information processing (psychology)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Information processing (psychology) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article focuses only on one specialized aspect of the subject. (October 2009) |
 | This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. (February 2010) |
 | This talk page is for discussion on how to improve the Information processing (psychology) article. If you would like to ask questions about the subject, please address them to the Reference desk. |
 | On 7 January 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Information processing. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
Definition
[edit]The definition of "tag" refers here but there is no relevant content. I was looking for a concise definition of an SGML/HTML/XML "tag".
Er...since this article is part of the 'literature of connectionism' and since Hayek is mentioned in it, it's not true to say Hayek is never mentioned in that literature. Sorry to be pedantic. I have amended according BScotland
Difference between data and information
[edit]One makes a fundamental error in the content, there is a big difference between data and information. For what mankind know now we are only certain that within life individuals can process data in such a way that that individuals decide to give it the quality brandmark information. This quality feature for that particular data set is individual. It is always data. Because data do not have to be "in form". It has to be in a certain form to understand it. For instance this text can be expressed in "011100010100000", it is still the same content, only it is data for me, but no information. I can not understand it.
Abraham Moles and Frieder Nake analyzed links between aesthetics and information theory. Nake's book Ästhetik als Informationsverarbeitung (Aesthetics as information processing) is perhaps most relevant to this article. The full reference is: F Nake (1974). Ästhetik als Informationsverarbeitung. (Aesthetics as information processing). Grundlagen und Anwendungen der Informatik im Bereich ästhetischer Produktion und Kritik. Springer, 1974, ISBN 3211812164, ISBN 9783211812167 . Fleabox (talk) 17:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
tags
[edit]If this article is restricted to psychology, then it should be renamed to information processing (psychology) or cognitive information processing. Otherwise it doesn't make much sense. Further, the intro lacks proper context(s). [1] gives: "S: (n) information science, informatics, information processing, IP (the sciences concerned with gathering, manipulating, storing, retrieving, and classifying recorded information)". Pcap ping 19:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Information Processing and Data Processing
[edit]Someone has already pointed out the difference between these two actions. Information processing takes place in every exchange between all types of matter and waves. Data and its processing involves a human or humans entering their already anthropologically interpreted data into a computer. Then letting it connect the relevant issues.
Please classify "information processing" as it applies to living and non-living interchange rather than as the specific act of the regurgitation of previously interpreted data by a computer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.66.202 (talk) 05:54, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Don't merge. Data processing involves with the processing of data (conversion of data into information), and Information processing involves the processing of information. The two concepts are completely different. --Wayiran (talk) 11:44, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Merge not done per above. Tag removed fm article --Ancheta Wis (talk) 22:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Disambiguation of psychology vs. computational information processing
[edit]This page seems to mainly be about psychological information processing, even though it includes information about Shannon's information theory in the introduction. It should be renamed "Information processing (psychology)" or "(cognitive science)", and the stuff about computational information processing should be put in an article named e.g. "Information processing (computer science)" - if computer scientists use such a term, or if not, perhaps redirected to a page about Shannon's information theory.Tigrennatenn (talk) 04:19, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Requested move
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 (talk) 04:43, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Information processing → Cognitive information processing – The article as it is now seems to confuse computational and psychological information processing. It mostly focuses on cognitive information processing, so I propose changing the name to that, and mentioning computational information processing on a disambiguation page (which I have already created). --Relisted Cúchullain t/c 13:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC) Tigrennatenn (talk) 04:57, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- Comment the introductory paragraph seems to say that this article covers that the universe is an information processor... so would also cover physics and mathematics as well. 70.24.251.208 (talk) 06:12, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose per 70.24.251.208. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 10:28, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
- I would like to recommend Information Interpretation as a title for this version of the article. And remove all Information Theory references to the Information Processor page. 97.65.82.66 (talk) 16:36, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Review
[edit]This article clearly needs some improvement. More sources in general would be valuable as well as making sure each sources is cited within the article. Make sure that there is no plagiarizing taking place. CITE, CITE, CITE. Furthermore, this article needs more depth and history added to the page. Lastly, the article is not as clearly written as it should be in order for the average person to understand.
Brandi Carolyn Hull 9/11/12 — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrandiCarolyn (talk • contribs) 05:38, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- Without the least attempt to improve the article, this comment is not helpful to anybody. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.4.79.21 (talk) 07:03, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Misused citation
[edit]The opening paragraph cites (Denings and Bell, 2012) with the definition of latent and manifest information. However, the cited text (available in http://denninginstitute.com/pjd/PUBS/AmSci-2012-info.pdf) does not define these concepts, instead defining meaning as the association between signs and referents, according to a model proposed by Paolo Rocchi.
Its view is that new information is generated when an association is created between a sign and its referent, in parallel to the act of creating an hyperlink in the Web. This strike me as counter to the premise that a single block of information has all there is to know, and processing is the act of removing confusion and writing down the in-betweens.
143.107.232.254 (talk) 15:03, 27 October 2013 (UTC) bruno.kim@usp.br
- I am also unable to find any mention of latent and manifest information in the work of Claude Shannon. A Google Scholar search for "manifest information" in work written by Shannon reports nothing; if Shannon actually did distinguish between latent and manifest information, it was in work that never made it into the Scholar index. A regular Google search returns the McGonigle book (which contains only a paragraph on this distinction and does not actually cite any work by Shannon) and plagiarized copies of the Wikipedia article. I am going to remove this unless someone can point to a more reliable source that indicates that Shannon himself actually said this. 72.140.133.233 (talk) 15:39, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
This article is hardly about information processing
[edit]I'm afraid this article is a bit of a disaster, starting with the first sentence, which is nonsense. "Cognitive Information processing is the change (processing) of information in any manner detectable by an observer." Detectable by an observer? Most human information processing is not detectable by an observer. Information processing IS about a change of information, but the article should give some examples of changes (moving, transforming, adding, etc.) It also needs to identify the key components of cognitive IP theory as information stores (LTM, STM, etc.) and processes that flilter and transform both sensory input and mental information (representations).The article asserts IP "types" as being sequential and parallel (without citation), but neglects to say that historical IP models are sequential or discussing any contemporary models that are parallel . This whole issue of sequential vs parallel is appropriate, but should be addressed after more foundational information is presented. This information is not handled competently or in detail and leaves out the really relevant historical researchers for someone the article admits is not associated with IP theory. Robotczar (talk) 01:15, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
What does Sternberg's theory have to do with information processing? I am aware of the contents of several textbooks on psychology and none identify Sternberg's Triarchic theory as an information processing theory. That theory does not view thinking or learning as the processing of information, it is basically a definition of intelligence. It should be omitted from this article. Ditto for Piaget, nothing about his views approach an information processing model which is inspired by the operation of digital computers (as symbol processing machines). Readers are certainly not served by the inclusion of this misleading information. Robotczar (talk) 00:49, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
I think there is a fundamental problem here
[edit]"[...] by an observer. As such, it is a process that describes everything that happens (changes) in the universe, from the falling of a rock (a change in position) to the printing of a text file from a digital computer system." This doesn't take in to account the effect of an observer on the object being observed. See: Double-slit experiment `anon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.92.130.172 (talk) 17:25, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
In Computing
[edit]In computing, information processing can be considered as the source that help to produce some meaningful results. The processing such as retrieval, assembly, recording, and dissemination of the information is known as information processing.[1] Latest researches have proved that the computer and brain does the information processing in the same way. Computer information processing is to store, record, receive and retrieve and similarly the human brain function.[2] So, from this we can conclude that in terms of computing the information processing is all about how it functions and then it is compared with human brain in the article.Stadepell (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
References
[edit]http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.ezproxy.ltu.edu:8080/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=7036466
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.ezproxy.ltu.edu:8080/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=7273480
References
[edit]In Computing
[edit]Computing platforms operating at the limits of energy-efficiency need to contend with the issue of robustness. This energy vs. robustness trade-off is fundamental in such systems. This Information referred to as Statistical Information Processing. Information processing has been the primary goal Whether it was being done manually or using sophisticated devices.
References
[edit]http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.ezproxy.ltu.edu:8080/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=7273480
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.ezproxy.ltu.edu:8080/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=7036466 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pola sumanth (talk • contribs) 23:45, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
In module
[edit]In these days big data is most popular, Big data has emerged as a new era of information generation and processing. Big data applications are expected to provide a lot of benefits and convenience to our lives. Cloud computing is a popular infrastructure that has the resources for big data processing. The circumstances that affect a firm’s intention to adopt cloud computing technologies in support of its supply chain operations are investigated by considering tenets of classical diffusion theory as framed within the context of the information processing view.
References
[edit]Requested move 7 January 2024
[edit]- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. – robertsky (talk) 10:05, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Information processing (psychology) → Information processing – Move over the redirect which points here. It is not appropriate for a page "Foo (bar)" to exist and be targeted by the page at the base name "Foo". The situation has arisen here because of a move by @Fgnievinski: at 19:22, 26 December 2022. If there is ambiguity then that should be resolved by hatnotes or a disambiguation page, noting that the current disambiguation page Information processing (disambiguation) is deletable because it only contains 2 entries. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Psychology has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:11, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Cognitive science has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:12, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Computer science has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Mathematics has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Physics has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. This article is not the primary topic. I have redirected the redirect and fixed the issues on the dab page.--Srleffler (talk) 19:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. I don't think this is the primary topic. For instance, the people I can find who are called "professor of information processing" (e.g. Deniz Gunduz, Stefano Rizzi, Pentti Kerola, or Klaus Fuchs-Kittowski) are all on the computer science or business side of things (the other two entries in the current dab page). —David Eppstein (talk) 20:04, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. See for example the Brittanica Information processing article which begins
i\Information processing , the acquisition, recording, organization, retrieval, display, and dissemination of information. In recent years, the term has often been applied to computer-based operations specifically.
StarryGrandma (talk) 11:05, 8 January 2024 (UTC) - Oppose. Clearly not the primary topic. If anything, that's Data processing. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:16, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: NmWTfs85lXusaybq swapped Information processing and Information processing (disambiguation) at 21:57 Jan 7, which was about 10 hours after this RM was launched. Should this be reverted while this RM is ongoing? Bensci54 (talk) 18:11, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
- I didn't notice this RM before the swap, but the RMCD bot has dealt with this case perfectly in WP:RMCD. Given that this RM will conclude with not moved even per WP:SNOWBALL, I don't think there's any benefit to swap them twice more. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 00:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- This RM was an incorrect solution to the problem. Swapping those two pages was the right solution, and renders this RM moot. This RM should be snow closed.--Srleffler (talk) 23:26, 13 January 2024 (UTC)