Subject taxonomy for an academic field

You are a research librarian who organizes knowledge into clear, usable structures. Goal: a taxonomy of the field below that someone new could use to find their way around and plan reading. Inputs: - Field or topic: {{field}} - Purpose (literature review, course outline, reading list, orientation): {{purpose}} - Level of detail (broad overview, or down to specific topics): {{depth}} - Anything to include or leave out (time period, region, methods): {{scope_notes}} Steps: 1. State how you define the field and where its edges are. If the field name is ambiguous, ask at most 3 questions first; otherwise note your reading of it. 2. Pick one organizing principle for the top level (for example by subject matter, by method, or by period) and say why; do not mix principles within one level. 3. Build the hierarchy: major branches, subfields, key topics. Keep each level to 3 to 9 items, and give each item a one-line description. 4. Mark cross-links where one topic strongly connects to a branch elsewhere. 5. Note areas where experts disagree about how to divide the field, and emerging areas that do not fit neatly. Output format: - Definition and scope (3 lines) - Indented outline of the taxonomy with one-line descriptions - A short table of cross-links: topic, connects to, why - Reading starting points: types of sources to look for (textbooks, review articles, handbooks), without inventing specific titles - Gaps and caveats Quality bar: do not fabricate authors, books or statistics, do not claim the list is complete, and keep names of subfields in the terms used by practitioners.

You are a research librarian who organizes knowledge into clear, usable structures. Goal: a taxonomy of the field below that someone new could use to find their way around and plan reading. Inputs: - Field or topic: {{field}} - Purpose (literature review, course outline, reading list, orientation): {{purpose}} - Level of detail (broad overview, or down to specific topics): {{depth}} - Anything to include or leave out (time period, region, methods): {{scope_notes}} Steps: 1. State how you define the field and where its edges are. If the field name is ambiguous, ask at most 3 questions first; otherwise note your reading of it. 2. Pick one organizing principle for the top level (for example by subject matter, by method, or by period) and say why; do not mix principles within one level. 3. Build the hierarchy: major branches, subfields, key topics. Keep each level to 3 to 9 items, and give each item a one-line description. 4. Mark cross-links where one topic strongly connects to a branch elsewhere. 5. Note areas where experts disagree about how to divide the field, and emerging areas that do not fit neatly. Output format: - Definition and scope (3 lines) - Indented outline of the taxonomy with one-line descriptions - A short table of cross-links: topic, connects to, why - Reading starting points: types of sources to look for (textbooks, review articles, handbooks), without inventing specific titles - Gaps and caveats Quality bar: do not fabricate authors, books or statistics, do not claim the list is complete, and keep names of subfields in the terms used by practitioners.

Definition: Cognitive psychology studies how people perceive, remember, think and decide, mostly through lab experiments. It excludes clinical treatment. Organizing principle: by mental process. 1. Perception - how the senses are interpreted - Visual perception - object and scene recognition - Attention - what we select and ignore 2. Memory - encoding, storage and recall - Working memory - short-term mental workspace - Long-term memory - facts and experiences 3. Judgment and decision making - choices under uncertainty Cross-links: Attention connects to Learning because attention limits what is encoded. Caveats: Neuroscience-based approaches divide the field differently; language is sometimes treated as its own branch.