Talk:Personality
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I was very surprised to see no mention of Eysenck in the section on trait theories. I have now added some lines on Eysenck. Cardamom
Hi, I'm Moazzam. I'm looking for a comprehensive article on "personality". If you have some material regarding this toipc then please mail it to me @ moazzamshafique@gmail.com.
Thank you in advance...
I noticed that Holland was mispelled. I looked it up, to double check, and then corrected it. I plan to write an article on John L. Holland however, with my my summer class and comps comming up, it may be a good while. --Joseph Wayne Hicks 03:44, May 21, 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Personality development
I'd like to see information about how personality develops added to this article/section. Also, whether a person's personality changes and the change can be controlled (e.g. can an introvert purposely change to an extravert).
[edit] Yes to merging in Personality Psychology
Personality Psychology is a historical term and is now considered synonmous with Personality studies in psychology. Interesting to note that the APA has personality and social psychology in the same division, #8 - Society for Personality and Social Psychology. Rsugden 23:33, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
- Merge. Agreed, just started my class on theories of personality and there's no other discipline than psychology that studies personality. --Janarius 13:02, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- If we're going to merge, which page would be the primary one? Personality or personality psychology? I also include my draft for this page.--Janarius 01:46, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] AID to Personality?
To the problem of cleaning up, beefing up, and organizing this section, I'd be glad to one of those who takes it on but I need to know about the "comprehensive" nature of the page. Most pages I have seen in WP are quite cursory, then some are truly encyclopedic (e.g., astronomy). So, I propose that a general outline with focus on history of and list of current approaches and controversies. These would be linked to seperate pages(?) so that the head page isn't too large. My approach would be fairly academic, as a base, and brances out to controversies and new developments. These two areas are where I think WP is ahead of the game to other standard sources which have quite a lag with new developments. So, what do people think? Any helpers? I like the idea of the Holland article (be careful to disambiguate him from John H. Holland of complexity theory). Rsugden 23:42, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Another YES
Seems obvious to me. HalD 21:02, 9 September 2005 (UTC) Halcatalyst
[edit] And Another Yes
It seems to me that the Personality page should be the primary page with the personality psychology merged in. The Personality page mentions the Big Five anyway so it would just be a case of beefing that up a bit and adding the other bits of info in as appropriate. Thats what I reckon anyway. --Catz747 18:09, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
