Talk:Engineering psychology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Added category[edit]

Why did all the (Pages needing expert attention | Articles to be expanded | Articles lacking sources | All pages needing to be wikified | Wikify from October 2006) jumped into categories box? Mtjs0 15:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Also it literally sounds like a retarded person wrote this — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:14, 7 November 2012 (UTC)


Do we really need another buzzword. There are 172,000 hits of "engineering psychology" and 10,500,000 hits on ergonomics. This page should either merge or be used exclusively to contrast the differences if any. Oicumayberight 19:01, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

It's the same thing but if it is merged I think engineering psychology should be included in the introduction. Mtjs0 22:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Merge - I agree with Mtjs0. --Ronz 23:39, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

While there are shades of difference between "human factors" and "engineering psychology", I have mostly used these terms interchangeably in teaching and writing. So I vote for "merge". Pmjones 22:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Seems to be an old discussion (e.g. The fact that several books have been written on the subject and many universities teach it should result in an article in its own right. Human factors includes many parts (e.g. anthropmetry) that have nothing to do with engineering psychology. Martin Hollender 20:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

If the entire scope of engineering psychology can be explained within the context of engineering ergonomics or human factors, then it is a subset of either and should be part of that article to avoid duplication at the risk of becoming inconsistent or incomplete information on the wikipedia. The fact that there isn't much to be said about engineering psychology out side of the context of ergonomics or human factors, explains why this article is so small compared to those articles. Personally, I think the term is potentially ambiguous. It could potentially refer to the study of the psychographics of engineers. Oicumayberight 20:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Lede is too many things[edit]

Editors-- Please try to settle on one definition of Engineering Psychology. The introduction presents three similar, but different definitions of what the discipline represents. This issues was discussed heavily during the deletion discussion as a problem, and I hope it will be resolved soon. Also, there is no evidence that engineering psychology and applied experimental psychology are the same, so I am removing this until a source is found that equates these two terms. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 03:00, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Redirected to ergonomics[edit]

Per the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Engineering psychology and above, I've done a redirect. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 01:46, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

The result of the discussion was Keep, not Re-direct. Dolphin (t) 02:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
That means "don't delete," not "don't touch." It's not at all unusual for articles to be redirected as the rsult of these discussions, and I frequently close as "keep" when there is consensus that the article needs redirected or merged. Those actions don't need adminstrator's tools. See this section on my talk page for the administrator's comments on this close. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 03:06, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
The discussion was that it was different than ergonomics, and thus notable enough for its own article. I undid your redirect which would've eliminated this article. Dream Focus 11:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request[edit]

I would like to make an informative addition to this page detailing some of the importance of and engineering psychologist. The edit i would like to make is in my sandbox( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trinirebel (talkcontribs) 03:02, 8 May 2013 (UTC)