Talk:Social perception

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sychung31, Kmcarleton.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Dilemma

This article does not inform us about "social perception," but rather, about "perception". Wolfdog (talk) 21:53, 5 September 2009 (UTC) Social perception is, in psychology and other cognitive sciences, that part of perception that allows people to understand the individuals and groups of their social world, and thus an element of social cognition.[1]

Upcoming Updates to Page

Currently, the material on the Social Perception Wikipedia page is misguided. On the talk page the “Dilemma” states that the material explains the idea of perception but fails to identify social perception. Furthermore, the flow of the page is broken and the wording is convoluted. Upcoming edits will cover material up until “Testing”.

1. Adding background and history of Social Perception to the beginning paragraph. This will help establish a base knowledge for first time readers and provide an idea of how the following material covered fits into the overall topic of Social Perception.

2. Update Implicit Personality Theory Section. The current material is confusing and misleading. The section does not directly address how implicit theory relates to social perception in a way that is easily understood. The goal for updating this section is to refocus the information to illustrate how Implicit Personality Theory and Social Perception worth together to give meaning to how humans see the world.

3. Update Attribution Theory Section. The information in this section is hard to follow. The second half of the section is especially unclear when it talks about differences in “attribution” vs. “attributional” research. To combat this, updates will focus on explaining attribution theory in a clearer, more concise way and better illustrate how attribution theory works within the topic of social perception.

PSY 327 Updates

A.) We will edit the section on implicit personality theory. As it exists currently, this section has no citations, and fails to make it clear that implicit personality theories refer to the lay theories people use when making attributions about others. We will correct these issues by finding articles to back up the claims of this section (or removing the claims we cannot find evidence for). We will also use the information in Kim & Rosenberg (1980) to expand the page’s current discussion of the structures of implicit personality theories. We will also edit this section to be less conversational.

B.) We will adjust the definition that exists on the page now on Attribution Theory and Fundamental Attribution Error. We find the ways in which these are currently defined to be unclear and somewhat incorrect. We will also incorporate research-based examples to improve the clarity of the terms -- some exist now, but they are not quite accurate. This will involve some edits under the introductory paragraphs of the page. Citing will be a major focus of our work here. The comments at the top of the page that offer criticism note that the article “has an unclear citation style”. As of now, we intend to use Potter and Edwards (1990) as a basis for the knowledge we provide in this area.

C.) We will add to and expand the section on social biases. As it exists now, the section contains no citations (it even has an uncited quotation), and mostly just consists of a brief list of and description of various biases, several of which have a loose relation to social perception if any (such as the Dunning-Kruger effect). We will find citations to support the statements made in this section, decide which of the types of bias are truly relevant to social perception, and expand on the descriptions of the biases we consider relevant. We will also add descriptions of biases we consider to be relevant that aren’t currently discussed, such as the defensive attribution bias (Burger, 1981). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hasketdj (talk • contribs) 01:26, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Educational assignment

I have decided to edit this article for Psych 2410A King's 2012 Brianna91 (talk) 15:46, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

For the educational assignment in my course Psych 2410A at King's University College I am going to be proposing three steps that I plan to take in order to help improve the article. I would appreciate any feedback and/or suggests that anybody has to further improve my contributions.

3 Steps for Improvement:

1. Adding a section on Attribution Theories. This will explain social behaviour and give further insight on how as humans we determine the cause of an event and/or behaviour. Overall, this new section will provide readers with knowledge concerning judgments about the cause of people's actions and how it has important implications on one's own behaviour.

2. Re-work the Bias section by adding further information on each of the biases and tying them together with already stated information in the article. As well, adding three other relevant biases: the correspondence bias, bias blind spot and the overjustification effect.

3. Introducing an empirical study to the Bias section. The empirical paper I will use is from the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology:

The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes by Lee Ross, David Greene and Pamela House (1977)

Brianna91 (talk) 17:17, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at King's University College supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at King's University College supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page Mbritto5 (talk) 20:10, 25 September 2012 (UTC) Hi my name is Melanie and I will be editing this article. Mbritto5 (talk) 17:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article I have chosen to edit is called “social perception,” and the three sections I am interested in editing are the ‘Self-concept’ section and the section.

The first change I would like to make is also in the "self-concept section. A lot of the citations are missing or incorrect. I hope to fix them all so that they will be cited as it should be.

The second change I will be making is introducing a new empirical article to the theory of mind section. This empirical article will be related to the new subsection I will be adding about children who have autism and theory of mind. The third change I would like to make is in the ‘Self-concept’ section. This section is incredibly long and difficult to read. I would like to divide the section into sub-sections that will make it much easier to read and comprehend. I hope that when I’m done with it the ‘Self-concept’ section will be divided into digestible chunks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbritto5 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Melanie - looking forward to your contributions. You can create a new topic on this Talk page by using the "New section" button on the top right of the page. Can you show the address of the course page? You can edit it into your comment above. Ask if you need any help. Thanks in advance, MartinPoulter (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the article now, it's an unbelievable mess, because at least one article has begun, and other articles have been pasted, unformatted, at the end. Once you have decided what structure the article should have, be bold and remove material that you don't think belongs. If there is material that is interesting and sourced, but doesn't belong in this article (but could go into another article), then try copying it to this Talk page. We want to end up with just one references section. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 22:24, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

This article is a subject of an educational assignment at Florida International UniversityAnitayanci (talk) 01:06, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

My group was assigned this article for EXP-4005L at Florida International University in the Spring Semester of 2013. We are proposing various edits and additions, as well as omissions.

We will strive to provide a clear definition for both social perception and social cognition, as well as clarify how they are different, if they are. Using one format of citation is how we propose to fix the issue of the inconsistent citation style within the article. Adding studies to the section on intentional action that help to better understand and clarify the concept. Possibly delete study under “Empirical study of understanding of intentional action” section. Expand on the section about the attribution theory. In the Erik Erikson’s Eight Developmental Stages section, we want to link it to Wikipedia page “Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development”. We will try to re-word the article so it won’t be too technical for the average reader. Link different Biases to existing Wikipedia pages We want to re-work the section about M. Lewis’s Existential and Categorical selves and make it easier to understand, it seems unclear. We would like to know if Wikipedia readers would rather have just a summary for this section or have only hyperlinks instead, or maybe combine both? Possibly add more information to the testing section. Overall we want to focus on the clutter of this article and summarize those sections that are larger. Anitayanci (talk) 01:09, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Fiupsychology (talk) 04:51, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Advice For Improvement

The article is very complete and it leads very well into itself and its sections. It also appears very well written and structured. I had no trouble reading through the article, and it all made sense on a basic level.

However, I would suggest trying to find more sources. There are a couple places tagged as though they still require a citation. Furthermore, having more sources will improve the overall quality of the article. Tvondavi (talk) 16:36, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Article Feedback

In my opinion the article covers most of the important aspects of Social perception and gives a larger perspective by taking into consideration things like testing and bias. I think the article should expand a little more on what social perception is and its origins of how it came about and the main reason if any. The testing section could also be expanded to talk about earlier testing methods, how they failed or succeeded and what brought about the changes to arrive at the new testing method. There could be a csection in the article that concludes the research and analysis, instead of ending with bias.

Overall the articles reads really well and I am able to follow the logic throughout. It is well written and covers most of the important aspects of social perception. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjhaveri95 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at King's University College supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:15, 2 January 2023 (UTC)