From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Psychology (Rated Stub-class)
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.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This entry needs to show the source where the information came from.

It also needs to not be total sheep's bollocks that someone just made up off the top of their head.

Also, there are tons of typos...


This article doesn't need a simple cleanup, it needs a complete rewrite. There is not a single source given, the grammar and orthography are simply abysmal and the sarcastic and judgemental undertone is annoying as hell - and certainly does not contribute in the least to the few facts that actually might be there. If there is a single word that can not be considered original research in this article, I couldn't find it. If there is anyone ready to waste his time replacing this mess certainly everyone here would be very grateful. --TheOtherStephan 11:11, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, in regards to what this article consisted of before it was shortened to a single paragraph, it certainly was one of the most overtly biased and opinionated articles I have come across on this website, period. Perhaps this concept should simply be discussed on Wiktionary, as it really doesn't seem like something that ought to have an entire encyclopedic article devoted to it, a consise dictionary defintion would likely work better. Overall, this concept seems rather similar to Romanticism, perhaps it should redirect to that, although their may be subtle differences that I missed. 23:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
On a side note, I would highly suggest that the author of this article read "Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain" by Antonio R. Damasio. (Although somewhat unrelated, I personally find it rather amusing that said editor seemed to exhibit a rather angry tone in his typing despite the entire point he was trying to defend, poorly, was the supposed irrationality inherent to emoting.) 23:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


This article, given its format, really seems like it would work better in Wiktionary. 22:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Psychology 101[edit]

this artcile did not have alot to it. i would suggest maybe adding some examples of emotionalism and ways that is was or could be studied.--Saraheliz 19 (talk) 17:09, 19 September 2011 (UTC)saraheliz 19


There's this wierd sentence: "A figure often associated with emotionalism is Adolf Hitler, for he often used emotionalism to entice his followers. He would appeal to his audience's emotions while speaking, which led to massive encouragement from the Germans in whatever he wanted to do." I'd suggest this needs a reference,or to be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:46, 5 April 2014 (UTC)