Talk:Basic science (psychology)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Psychology (Rated Stub-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please begin to complete this entry. It serves to balance the entry for applied psychology. I created it so that there would be balance in the links on the psychology sidebar.Iss246 (talk) 05:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Quiddity, thanks for helping out with this page. Please continue. I also must confess that I am not happy with the name of the page. I need a name that distinguishes some parts of psychology from the fields under the rubric of applied psychology (e.g., educational psychology, i/o, clinical). The term "research psychology" that was once on the psychology sidebar does not work because a great deal of research goes on in applied psychology (e.g., clinical trials to compare the efficacy of rival therapies for depression; quasi-experiments comparing phonics to whole language instruction in the early grades). If you can think of a good title that embraces fields as diverse as neuropsychology and social psychology, please make a recommendation.Iss246 (talk) 21:36, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

The first problems with this article is that it does not cite any sources. All the content is just copied from the introduction of the subarticles. The other problem which is more important is that researchers in all of the areas listed conduct both basic and applied research. Even organisational psychology contributes to basic science. "Scientific aspects of I/O Psychology include both applied and basic science. Applied aspects are oriented around scientific solutions to human problems at work. Basic aspects are quite variable, following the investigator's interests. Examples include research on methods of behavioral measurement, communication, motivation, social interaction, and leadership. Source: The Science and Practice of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Reprinted with permission."[1]. We could just have a short description of what is considered basic and applied in psychology with examples. ----Action potential discuss contribs 02:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I wanted to get the page started. The material on the page is very general and reflects common knowledge. Please edit, and add to the page.Iss246 (talk) 04:36, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I vote to keep basic science (psychology) right here, and not fold it into the fundamental science page. The term basic science (psychology) dovetails better with the term applied psychology. This idea is in keeping with the division in the psychology sidebar. I think another argument against such a merger is that psychology not get lumped together with medicine, which is the mainstay of the fundamental science page. Psychology would be submerged by medicine.Iss246 (talk) 16:42, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

On the talkpage at "Fundamental science", I explain the error of this article's titling: To begin with, the article "Basic science (psychology)" is incorrectly titled. It ought to be titled "Psychology (basic)" versus "Psychology (applied)", or "Basic psychology" versus "Applied psychology", or simply "Psychology" with "Basic psychology" and "Applied psychology" sections, or simply "Psychology" versus "Applied psychology". In sum, there are a number of ways to correctly represent it, but not "Basic science (psychology)". For instance, the article on basic philosophy is titled "Philosophy", not "Basic humanities (philosophy)". The articles on applied philosophy are titled "Philosophy of science" or "Philosophy of mind" or "Philosophy of law", and so on.Occurring (talk) 08:45, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Intelligence citations bibliography for updating this and other articles[edit]

You may find it helpful while reading or editing articles to look at a bibliography of Intelligence Citations, posted for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human intelligence and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in these issues (and to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research. You can help other Wikipedians by suggesting new sources through comments on that page. It will be extremely helpful for articles on human intelligence to edit them according to the Wikipedia standards for reliable sources for medicine-related articles, as it is important to get these issues as well verified as possible. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 01:48, 26 October 2013 (UTC)