Talk:Bandwagon effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Economics (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Sociology  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Bad writing deleted[edit]

Deleted a paragraph: Another example of the bandwagon effect is bandwagon supporters. These are those who start following a team as soon the team gets money or starts doing well. This is like Manchester City in the Barclays Premier League. Before it found its mega rich owner the club was nothing, now all of a sudden after spending 500 million the club is challenging for the tittle. Ilan Berkowitz is an example of someone who has "jumped on the bandwagon" for this club. Normally these people are scum. Rewrite it better if it's even relevant in the first place. Ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masalih (talkcontribs) 16:13, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Fixed[edit]

Somebody edited it so there's the word "poop" scattered about the topic. I'll fix it <<

What about sports bandwagons?[edit]

It is the social effect caused by the success of a certain sports team. When a team is experiencing a period of success (most commonly defined as winning), there is a spike in merchandise sales, television ratings, etc. Overall, there is an increase in attention paid to winning teams. The attention, in turn, is translated into an increase of the fan-base of that sports team. Examples: -Merchandise sales in the NFL are always dependant on winning success - especially top 5 teams. -The New York Yankees are probably one of the largest fan bases of any sports team that has ever existed, due to their success. They have won more than 20 World Series and appeared in more than 30.

Specific published sources of sports bandwagons might be put to good use in the article, but there needs to be a reasonable attempt to make the article encyclopedic, instead of simply a dictionary definition with a list of examples. Not only is there an etymological history of the term, but there is specific uses in various social sciences which (to me anyways) justifies an article entry, instead of a simple redirect to the Wikitionary Cuvtixo (talk) 17:08, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

help[edit]

were doing a school report on bandwagons and we need help on examples and practical uses of then if any one can help plez let me know

Response: See the research on ulcer treatment, by Prof. Barry Marshall \\\\\\\\\\\\\bnkjxxczjctad345R&link_type=ARTICLE&db_key=AST] " have anything to do at all with the topic? It apears to be more about the galaxy and does not mention 'bandwagon' once. Rudraksha 03:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


Good point, I looked this link over, and has no apperent relation to "Bandwagons" I hae deleted it --Robin63 04:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

music bandwagon add[edit]

Does anyone have a cite for this newly added 'Use in the Music Industry' bit? It doesn't seem to really differentiate from the main definition, but I don't want to delete it if there's real usage of this (as opposed to just trends and the whole existance of the Top 40). -Thespian 01:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I question the "in science" section[edit]

the examples and rationale in this seciton heavily resemble propaganda bandied about by the neo-creationist "Intelligent Design" movement to discredit the idea scientists study empirical evidence, implying scientists follow a bandwagon rather than arrive at similar conclusions because those conclusions are what the evidence empirically supports.

If a scientific study truly follows the scientific method, and its calculations are mathematically sound, then no matter how much you try to bias the conclusion you will be unable to change your findings. Under the presented rationale the color of chloroplasts (green) would be reported blue, yellow, or purple if scientists weren't introducing bias into their results.

Notice in the example the implication that the distance between the sun and galaxy center is "supposed" to "differ considerably" across publications because of different methods of measuremet, otherwise it's biased. A distance measured using a tape measure is the same distance measured using light is the same distance measured using radio reflection, and no amount of "rechecking calculations" will change that to a different value if the findings which established and confirmed the "accepted value" were sound. If this example is supposed to be a controversial topic then citations are absolutely required (showing both bandwagon mentality and evidence of tampering by "correcting calculations").

I suggest better and citable examples be provided, for instance, a study showing a lack of varying hypotheses (in the precise definition of the word) on topics in which there has not been enough empirical data to rule out possible alternatives. (4/30/2007)

I personally know of multiple examples which contradict the claims in the section on the bandwagon effect in science. I also searched for any paper on the subject, but found nothing, and googling "bandwagon effect in science" turned up this article as the first hit, with following hits having no direct relevance to the bandwagon effect existing in the scientific community. I don't have much experience here, so let me know if I am out of line, but it seems like the proper course is to remove that section until someone can find any source of source that corroborates the claims it makes. James McBride 15:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Origins[edit]

A different explanation is proposed at Talk:Benjamin T. Babbitt#Bandwagon: The soap was sold from brightly painted street cars with musicians, which led to the phrase "get on the bandwagon", ref to here.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:30, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

pack animals[edit]

how sad... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.8.2.0 (talk) 21:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Merge Fads and trends with Bandwagon effect?[edit]

Should Fads and trends be merged with Bandwagon effect? I think by merging them, a more rounded article would be created.  LinguistAtLarge  05:09, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

do all fads & trends result from bandwagon effect ? StefanoC (talk) 10:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Agree -I was about to write a lengthy explanation of how the "Bandwagon effect" is a much more specific term and its use in social sciences, but I just noticed how anemic the "Fads and trends" article is. I think a case could be made of getting rid of the "fads and trends" article altogether, but merging it with this might be a better solution. Cuvtixo (talk) 17:00, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
These proposals have been sitting around too long. My two cents: I don't agree with any of these merges (Bandwagon effect, Social proof, Fads and trends, Herd behavior). Certainly it is true that these topics all revolve around the same human weakness but they discuss unique facets of that set of topics. These are not synonyms and, taking a look at each, IMHO they each discuss notable topics that merit their own articles. Granted, the fads and trends article is very poor (and should be retitled) but the topic itself is still noteworthy and does not completely overlap the others.
If anybody still has an opinion, please register it or else these proposals need to be removed.
--Mcorazao (talk) 19:56, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
I agree with not merging. Lova Falk talk 06:27, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments. I'm comfortable with not merging at this time. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  17:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Obama Campaign[edit]

Someone added the Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2008 link at the bottom, which I removed as vandalism. 125.238.132.225 (talk) 02:12, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Polish wiki[edit]

Polish wiki link lead to uncorrect article. Here'sink to correct article: http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efekt_%22Bandwagon%22 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.229.50.61 (talk) 20:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Mitläufer redirects here but there's no indication in the article what "Mitläufer" means[edit]

"Mitläufer" is German for "some one who runs with" or "fellow traveler". So, if you know that, you would understand why "Mitläufer" redirects here. However, if you don't know what "Mitläufer" means, you would be puzzled by the fact that it redirects here. This article should mention "Mitläufer" somewhere in the lead so as to inform the reader why he has been redirected here. --Pseudo-Richard (talk) 05:10, 10 November 2011 (UTC)