I was recently invited to have a paper published.
Unfortunately, a similar paper is about to be published on the practical/fun aspect of the project so I've had to re-frame the topic to focus on what we understand about the need for the project rather than the fun stuff itself.
The new paper required discussion on some aspects of psychology. I need to justify why I, as someone not in the field of psychology, felt capable of identifying it as a subject relevant to the discussion and presumably why I have slightly more than a fleeting grasp of the concepts. The gist is a long history of interacting with professionals on what defines my mental processes.
What would be the best way to say the discussion is best accompanied by an overview of the side subjects?