Jump to content

User talk:TrentJohnson29

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Welcome![edit]

Hello, TrentJohnson29, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Additional Resources
  • You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:16, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello team, I found a possible topic we could use: Neurosis and Human Growth. Some positives to this is it is a relevant topic, so we will be able to find to new breakthroughs in this area, with that being said, this may be a research intense topic and a lot to go through. I believe it could be interesting and insightful.TrentJohnson29 (talk) 20:53, 5 February 2018 (UTC)Trent[reply]

I think that sounds interesting! I am open to looking farther into that and am up for a challenge. I found a topic as well: Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale. This topic does have a good start on information provided but needs to be expanded for reliable information. I think this is a good topic because there has been a lot of research done for children and ADHD but information is missing relating to adults. As we gain more knowledge of ADHD it could be a good idea to have an understanding of how to assess ADHD in adults as well as children. Baileergass (talk) 16:05, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Trent- I agree with you that it will most likely be pretty research intensive which can be daunting, however I think that having a lot of information to go through is better than the latter of not having enough so I'm up for looking into it a little more! Bailee- I think if we found enough information on Adult ADHD and how/if that differs from children with ADHD then that would be interesting! I know there are plenty of research studies done on individuals with ADHD using the self-report scale so having those studies to incorporate into our webpage would help it seem more credible. I checked through some of the "stub" articles that Professor Council provided for us and came across the topic of hyperprosexia. This condition affects one's ability to concentrate on one single thing without becoming distracted, which could be a spinoff of information we find regarding ADHD as those both involve our attention and concentration. I think all three topics put forth are something we can work with. Bailey.r.nelson (talk) 05:09, 7 February 2018 (UTC) bailey.r.nelson[reply]

Bailee- the Adult AHDH topic could be a good one to cover, there is a lot of new research in that area and it is now becoming more prevalent in our modern society, so more people may seek this information more often. Bailey: when researching the hyperosexia, I did found a good amount of older articles, yet nothing too recent. Dr. Council- Our top two choices are 1) Adult ADHD 2) Neurosis and Human Growth TrentJohnson29 (talk) 20:40, 7 February 2018 (UTC)Trent Johnson[reply]

Your topic choices[edit]

Hi Group 8

  1. I looked at Adult ADHD. Bad choice. The article is already long and well-developed. It would be hard to add to it in a systematic and substantial way.
  2. Neurosis and Human Growth. This is a good choice. It is a stub article about an important book by a major figure in psychoanalysis. I think you could add a lot. I would seriously recommend reading it yourselves. J.R. Council (talk) 17:33, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, your assignments should have been completed on the Sandbox Talk page. Bailee's is there. Please move these. J.R. Council (talk) 20:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article Review: One issue: This article is presenting facts and findings from a book published in 1950, while this may be useful to show where the field stemmed from, it should not be the main focus of the page. We could add a lot more of new and developing research.

Please note: the article is about the book, so that should be the focus. If it is not already linked to Karen Horney's Wikipedia article and other relevant articles, it should be.J.R. Council (talk) 20:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Two references:

  1. 1) Anderson, D. M. (2017). Reflections on a case study of neurosis. In J. M. Sandoval, J. C. Knapp, J. M. Sandoval, J. C. Knapp (Eds.) , Psychology as the discipline of interiority: 'The psychological difference' in the work of Wolfgang Giegerich (pp. 134-148). New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group
  2. 2) Miyabo, S., Asato, T., & Mizushima, N. (1979). Psychological correlates of stress-induced cortisol and growth hormone releases in neurotic patients. Psychosomatic Medicine, 41(7), 515-523. doi:10.1097/00006842-197911000-00002

Two Questions:

  1. 1) Do you want us to just focus on the book Neurosis and Human Growth? Or can we draw in other sources?

The article is about the book, so that should be the focus. If it is not already linked to Karen Horney's Wikipedia article and other relevant articles, it should be.J.R. Council (talk) 20:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]


  1. 2) Should we talk about the processes of both subjects?

TrentJohnson29 (talk) 17:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)Trent Again, focus on the book and its importance. Don't just discuss neurosis per se, for example. Discuss Horney's concept of neurosis as it is presented in the book. J.R. Council (talk) 22:28, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Article Review: One issue I noticed with the article is that it doesn't have a variety of sections with different information like most wiki articles do. There is currently a very small section with a brief outline of the book and a little about neurosis. I think this can be seen as advantage to our group as that leaves a lot of room for us to be able to expand and add more up to date and developing research (like Trent mentioned).

I agree, but keep your focus on the ideas Horney presents in her book. Her concepts of neurosis and growth are different and influential.J.R. Council (talk) 22:28, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References:

  1. 1) Isaacs, K. S. (1990). Affect and the fundamental nature of neurosis: Logic and reality. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 7(2), 259-284. doi:10.1037/h0079152
  1. 2)Ellis, A. (1951). Review of Neurosis and Human Growth. Psychological Bulletin, 48(6), 542-544. doi:10.1037/h0049944

Questions/Comments:

  1. 1) Is this article focusing on the theory of neurosis/human growth and just using the book as a reference or example? If so, do you think it would be useful to make subsections in our articles expanding on each of these independently?

Once again, the article is about the book, so keep your focus on that. You'll still have plenty to write about.J.R. Council (talk) 22:28, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  1. 2) I know in some of the wiki trainings it said we were not advised to include citations of previously conducted research studies, however I think that would be extremely beneficial for us considering this book was written in 1950 and I'm sure there has been a lot of advancement in the area of research regarding this topic. Thoughts? Bailey.r.nelson (talk) 04:21, 22 February 2018 (UTC)bailey.r.nelson[reply]

It's okay to cite relevant research from refereed journals. The research should be directly related to Horney's theory.J.R. Council (talk) 22:28, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TrentJohnson29&oldid=829142839"