Talk:Gratitude journal

Cleanup

This entry needs considerable cleanup to conform to Wikipedia standards. It does cite a number of sources (though not always where needed) but is very heavily slanted pro-gratitude journals, and reads more like an argument FOR gratitude journals than as a neutral encyclopedia article. I deleted the sentence about tips on how to keep one - I don't think that belongs in an encyclopedia article, although the link to info at the bottom is fine. I'm also pretty sure a Wikipedia article shouldn't have a "Conclusion" paragraph. I added the clean-up etc codes at the start. --Lijil (talk) 20:39, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Controversies section

The current Controversies section discusses some disagreement about the number of entries per session or frequency of sessions, but these do not appear to actually be "controversies" relative to the topic.

PhD4NRG (talk) 01:10, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Source to consider adding

- https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01973533.2017.1323638 - " seems more telling to be able to say that a gratitude intervention makes a difference when compared to a neutral activity condition. This was the case for many of the outcome variables, but the effects tended to be smaller than for the gratitude-versus-negative comparisons. Furthermore, the lack of differences between gratitude and positive intervention conditions certainly challenges the uniqueness of gratitude interventions. If gratitude interventions rarely prove preferable to other positive interventions, they should not be singled out as particularly effective practices but rather offered as one of numerous intervention options that might be beneficial to individuals....Adults seem most affected by the simple practice, compared to college students and children. " -Pengortm (talk) 04:04, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Introduction is not sufficient

Introduction of gratitude journal is not detailed enough to provide complete information to readers Optimistaaa (talk) 13:01, 22 February 2024 (UTC)