Talk:Parataxic distortion

"Placement rod by hole"? How about rephrasing this so it makes sense? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.61.36.185 (talk) 14:23, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

In Layman's terms, parataxic distortion = biased perception of others/acting according to a biased perception of others ("bias" based on past experience(s) involving a person or people with similarities to present subjected individual); parataxic distortion could be (in certain instances) a precursor to stereotyping and/or discrimination, perhaps? See referenced definition: parataxic distortion. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010. Retrieved November 21, 2010, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parataxic distortion BrookeBarber (talk) 09:40, 21 November 2010 (UTC)BrookeBarber

I rewrote a good deal of this article, saved all I could from the past.
Hi, this is my first time editing a wiki, but I was embarrassed by the grammar and writing of this article enough to get involved. I made quite a few changes and deleted what I thought were poor examples, explanations and superfluous descriptions of parataxic distortion that made the article seem juvenile in it's understanding. Sorry I couldn't enter any in-line citations, I barely have time to update the article as I did.

If anyone objects to my changes, I tried. If the article is reverted, please at least spend the time to fix the grammar issues and delete the paragraph where parataxic distortion is portrayed as a mental disease. The whole 'if it goes without treatment' paragraph warning it could send the user into an alternate reality no one else can understand...It just displays a complete misunderstanding of what a defense mechanism and parataxic distortion really is. I like to point my friends this way when they ask something interesting about psychology. I apologize if my edits are out of line with any rules wikipedia may have regarding the process.

I also added a few 'see also's'. This topic isn't easy to understand without the context of surrounding topics in cognitive psychology. I think the article is much improved. If I stepped on anyones toes, again, I apologize. Thank you. 206.48.240.166 (talk) 11:28, 20 September 2012
 * Great job! And it would be a yet greater job if you could add sources to your statements.  Lova Falk     talk   12:34, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've been trying to find resources online to cite here, but haven't had the time to dig deep enough yet. I made sure to leave the resources section untouched as well as any previously cited statements. I know that a good deal of the statements I've made can be weeded out and improved upon, so I'll come back with better information as I can find it. 206.48.240.166 (talk) 23:48, 24 September 2012