User talk:Trevor1902/sandbox

Testing out this talk page. --Trevor1902 (talk) 06:02, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Replying to your last message.--Trevor1902 (talk) 06:02, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

that a great idea--Trevor1902 (talk) 06:12, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Information to Add

 * 1) APA Division 24

References/External Links to Add

 * 1) Journal of Theoretical psychology (Connect through Dr. Council with Editor of journal Hank?)
 * 2) Society of Theoretical psychology
 * 3) Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology (Editor: Brent Slife)
 * 4) theoreticalpsychology.org
 * 5) Methods of Theoretical Psychology Book
 * 6) ISTP
 * 7) Review
 * 8) More research on names included in this paper
 * 9) Völkerpsychologie topic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevor1902 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Other things to Add

 * 1) More info on topic within theoretical psychology
 * 2) Theories

Feedback on Assignment 4
For all of you: On this and future assignments, please read instructions for the assignment carefully and follow them! This assignment was supposed to have been done in the sandbox, not sandbox talk page. Otherwise, nice job and good start, everyone! I'm impressed that you've mastered references so early in the game.

Alright we can do it on the sandbox page next time, I thought it made more sense to do the assignment on the sandbox talk page because the sandbox user page is specifically reserved for the article development and we don't want to move the information from the assignment 4 and future assignments out of the sandbox when we further develop our article and don't want the excess information from the assignments on the sandbox user page for clutter. Let me know your thoughts Trevor1902 (talk) 17:07, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The sandbox page will allow you to edit like you would a regular Wikipedia article. J.R. Council (talk) 21:25, 20 October 2015 (UTC)


 * For Caitlyn: A good place to start would be the website for APA Division 24, Society for Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology. Go to http://www.apa.org/about/division/div24.aspx . Read that, then click the link to the Society's website. Google Scholar will only link to the NDSU library resources if the library carries that journal.
 * For Trevor: Dr. Stam can be reached at stam@ucalgary.ca . If you write to him and ask him for suggestions, I'm sure he'll be happy to help. Also, see my response to Caitlyn, above.
 * For Faye: It won't be hard to improve the existing article. I think you should discuss the origins, development, and current status of theoretical psych, and also cover relevant organizations, and journals. You could also provide a bibliography of books on the topic. Regarding the group that struggled, I think that was mainly a matter of not putting much effort into actually reading up on the topic. You do need to master your subject before writing about it.
 * For Matt: Regarding older sources, that would not be a problem at all. Like I told Faye above, you'll need to talk about origins and development. Regarding current articles, I think scanning through a few issues of the journal and looking for popular topics/themes would be good.

J.R. Council (talk) 21:45, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Dr. Council's comments on Assignment 5
Hi Group 4 -- you've made an excellent start! Have you followed up on my suggestions to contact Dr. Stam at U. Calgary, and APA Div. 24? I think this group is in a good position to start writing leads for Assignment 6. However, you should be reading through the material you've found to improve your knowledge of the subject.
 * There's just one concern I have to raise, and that has to do with the amount of effort I see different group members putting in on this assignment. Namely, when I click View history, Trevor and Matt appear a lot, Caitlynn has made a few contributions, and I don't see anything from Faye. If the article history does not reflect the amount of effort group members have actually put into this article, you need to let me know. Thanks! J.R. Council (talk) 22:15, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

The rest of the group members do contribute for the parts they are responsible I User:Trevor1902 volunteered and am responsible for the editing and formatting for the article and I am practicing by editing and revising all the assignments we are doing. To practice making it look nice and presentable so I usually publish the information after the group member gave it to me or change the basic info and revise it to format it well. We have all done our part so far and we will let you know if anything changes as we are all still getting used to editing wikipedia as well. Thanks for your feedback and we will see to contacting Dr. Stam at U. Calgary, and APA Div. 24 soon as well as improve our knowledge by doing more research and reading articles. Trevor1902 (talk) 17:25, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Feedback on Assignment 6
Trevor: Good start! I would remove the word "simply". Try to have your writing be more simplistic. Keep in mind this is an encyclopedia. Try to have it be in a more neutral tone. I like the second paragraph and would remove the bullet points including rationalism, empiricism, and skepticism. Just try to extend upon the basic definition to give your reader an idea of the article without having to go into too much detail. Nice work.

Matthew: I like that you are already tagging other articles! The first sentence of your lead seems to be worded a bit funny. I like Trevor's recommendation there. Double check for grammatical errors and typos. Try to keep a neutral tone throughout and be careful when choosing adjectives so that you don't seem to be sided one way. Good start.

Faye: Great start! I like your idea of including Caitlyn's recommendations. I think that you have really nice flow in your writing and the content seems quite appropriate for a lead section.

Caitlyn: Nice start. I am not sure about the wording in the first sentence. It seems a bit unclear to me what you mean by that. Try to keep the tone of your writing in a way that you are reporting facts. Try to make it less conversational sounding. Also be careful when using words like "important" that can denote a certain attitude towards the topic. Overall a really nice job.

For all: Great job everyone! It was nice to see a variety and I really liked the constructive feedback you provided to each of the members of the group. Nice to see some people already considering some of the suggestions too. Just a few notes for the group. Double check for grammar errors and typos. Make sure to bold the title of the article in the lead and make sure your title matches exactly with the way you put it into the lead. Also read through your lead and maybe even read aloud to see if you can make the tone more neutral. I would suggest further developing Faye's lead section with the inclusion of some of Caitlyn's. Nice work group :) Samantha.myhre (talk) 04:48, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Feedback on Assignment 7
Nice to see you're plugging away at this. Good changes, Trevor! J.R. Council (talk) 20:26, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Guys- I'm extremely frustrated. I was working on me sections last night and I made the mistake of closing my computer without saving the instructions. Today I had to refresh the page to sign in, and in the process it didnt save these changes. If you guys know any way to work around this or retrieve that work I had done, I would really appreciate it. If not, I guess I'll just have to redo it. Caitlyn.mcconnell (talk) 16:52, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I have lost changes before as well and just re did them, thats why I now save the page more often even if I am not done as like saving checkpoints so If it was to close I would only loose back to that saving checkpoint. Sorry!! Trevor1902 (talk) 15:54, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Dr. Council's comments on Assignment 7
Hello Group 4. I can tell you have been working hard on this article, since there is so much new content. However, it is very hard to follow. I assume that the last section, labeled "First Draft of Article to Publish with our changes," is what I mainly need to look at for Assignment 7. Here are my comments on each section:
 * First of all, in general, you need to do some careful proofreading. There's little that leaps out as really bad, but you need to be careful in your wording. For example, "Theoretical psychology is an approach that allows for many ideas about psychology to be opinionated as its inferences are not empirically based, rather hypotheses to be exchanged and further built upon from different perspectives." I know what you mean, but the wording is clumsy.
 * Don't use so many bullet points.
 * There are also comments interspersed through this article that are distracting and should be taken out.

Lead:
 * This looks good. Just close it up into one paragraph. Get rid of the bullets.

Section after lead: This starts with the sentence: "Theoretical psychology is a rational non-experimental approach to psychology." This should be the first major section after the lead. Title it, "Relationship to philosophy."
 * There are a lot of statements here that are not backed up with reference citations.

Current and Proposed Basic Definition/Origin: Fix this section title.
 * Again, needs references.

Pioneers: You should do more here than just list names. Say what they did that relates to the topic. Early Contributions: These aren't that early. In fact, I would call them "Contemporary contributors to theoretical psychology." List them in chronological order. Progression to modern day: A better title would be something like "Journals publishing theoretical psychology." Then just list the journals. Current and Proposed Research Methods:
 * Don't use value statements like "beautiful symbiotic relationship."

Current and Proposed Problems in Methodology and Practice:
 * What kind of sentence is this? "With the beginnings to desire knowledge we see wonder captivate the individual to ask questions of existence and being."
 * This is what I mean when I say you need to proofread.

Ethical Considerations: You should just leave this out. Pro's/Con's & Future research: Combine these sections into a final section titled, "Significance." This can be the end of your article. Don't bother with the stuff that comes after. J.R. Council (talk) 22:55, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Old Article Theoretical psychology To Improve
Theoretical psychology

Theoretical psychology is concerned with theoretical and philosophical aspects of the discipline of psychology. It is an interdisciplinary field involving psychologists specialising in, amongst others, cognitive, social, developmental, personality, clinical, perceptual, neurological, biological, evolutionary, historical, economic, political and critical psychology.

In the United States, one group focused on theoretical and philosophical issues in Psychology is The Society for Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology (formerly known as The American Psychological Association, Division for Theory and Philosophy of Psychology or APA Division 24). This society regularly hosts symposia, lectures, roundtable discussion, and poster sessions at the annual APA conference. In Europe Laszlo Garai developed a theoretical psychology based on the methodological proposal of Kurt Lewin and the theory of Lev Vygotsky.

References

External links
 * International Society for Theoretical Psychology
 * Laszlo Garai's writings in theoretical psychology, general psychology and brain research.
 * Theory of Psychology and other Human Sciences (Documents No. 9 and 10 in English)
 * The Society for Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology (American Psychological Association, Division 24)
 * The Ondwelle Home-page:- seeking micro-physiological explanations for Piagetian psychology. (Depends significantly on Physics and Info-tech at the cell and sub-cell level).

Category:Branches of psychology Category:Philosophy of psychology

Assignment 4
We all used the same formatting :)

Problem

 * The main problem with this article is there is no detail about Theoretical Psychology, there is basically just the bare basics of what theoretical psychology means. It also gives very little info on how, when, and where the concept of theoretical psychology came to be. The article lacks the components needed for a good wiki article on a psychological concept, which are:

• Lead section

• Context/history of concept

• Theory and/or experimental evidence

• Reception/implications

Questions

 * I was wondering if it is possible for you to point us in the direction of some good sources. Many of the sources I've found are only abstracts of books, and I either need a login or must by the book in order to gain full access to the information.
 * Secondly, I was wondering how Google Scholar hooks up to the NDSU library? I checked out Google Scholar and the NDSU only EBSCO library for resources and there didn't seem to be much information that overlapped. Thank you!!
 * Caitlyn.mcconnell (talk) 16:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Problem

 * The biggest problem with the article is that they fail to give us even a definition of theoretical psychology and its place within psychology and show us the "why" its important behind it and not just the how or what. I believe that we need to get a more clear consensus the distinction between theoretical psychology and philosophy.

Questions

 * I would like you to help us get in contact with Hank the editor of the journal and also help us to learn more about theoretical psychologies place in the history of psychology as it is in Division 24 in the APA and could potentially go back all that way to philosophy in which it stemmed from and therefore would be a lot of history leading up to the conception of psychology itself.
 * Trevor1902 (talk) 01:42, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Problem

 * While most of us will probably comment about this same problem, the article is clearly lacking in content. There needs to be a substantial amount of factual content, obviously with different main points:  What is Theoretical Psychology?, Basic Principles & History, Main Contributors, Studies & Concepts, etc.  Along with that, the reference section will obviously bulk up as the article does.  We are starting from quite bare bones, so we have a lot of work ahead of us in terms of just content alone.

Questions

 * My comment is that I would really be interested to hear what you believe our main points should be. We have discussed on how to split up this topic of theoretical psychology, and have suggested splitting up main points, but we have not began looking into what way we should split it up.
 * My question is about how past groups you've mentioned have tried to tackle this subject, but have struggled. What kind of advice do you have for us in covering this topic that other groups had such trouble with?  What is an obstacle they faced that we should be mindful of in approaching our writing?
 * Fstromberg (talk) 01:16, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Problem

 * One issue with the article is that it does not explain Theoretical Psychology, It mainly focuses on the Theoretical Psychology organizations. It does not give a basic definition of theoretical psychology or what it encompasses.

Questions

 * Is it appropriate to use dated sources (older) when making a wikipedia article?
 * How do we effectively use modern articles from the journal of theoretical psychology in our wikipedia article?

Matthew.j.benjamin (talk) 01:43, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Assignment 5
Here is our group efforts for Assignment 5 :)

To Do List

 * 1) Basic Definition/Origin (Lead) - Group Member: _Trevor_
 * 2) Pioneers of Theoretical Psychology - Group Member:__Trevor____
 * 3) Early Contributions - Group Member:__Matt__
 * 4) Progression to modern day - Group Member:_Matt/Faye___
 * 5) APA/Division 24 - Group Member:__Faye__
 * 6) Pro's/Con's - Group Member:_Caitlyn__
 * 7) Future research - Group Member:__Caitlyn__


 * Formatting: Trevor
 * References: Matt

Group Members: I added some of you to spots that you weren't yet on in order to fill all of our topics, as we dive deeper into the assignment we can also make subtopics where assistance can be added. If you don't like your current topics, feel free to change it; and as always, feel free to contribute to others topics. Matthew.j.benjamin (talk) 15:10, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

I have added more info to the outline, as well as those book references. As I explained in class, we can find these books in the library if you are interested. 3 of them are for sure at the NDSU library available for us to use! Also, added references for online sources. Take a look! :) Caitlyn.mcconnell (talk) 19:06, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Outline

 * 1) Basic Definition/Origin
 * 2) see Bergmanns Definition from "THEORETICAL PSYCHOLOGY"
 * 3) Pioneers of Theoretical Psychology
 * 4) Determine who is considered a pioneer and who is just a early contributor?
 * 5) Who is the "father" of Theoretical Psychology?
 * 6) Early Contributions
 * 7) Wittgenstein v. Chomsky
 * 8) Ludwig Wittgenstein
 * 9) Noam Chomsky Matthew.j.benjamin (talk) 15:46, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * 10) Progression to modern day
 * 11) Gergen-Uses of theory
 * 12) Kenneth J. Gergen  Matthew.j.benjamin (talk) 15:58, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * 13) Other notable influences
 * 14) APA/Division 24
 * 15) Research Methods
 * 16) Problems in Methodology and Practice
 * 17) Ethical Considerations
 * 18) Pro's/Con's
 * 19) Ways in which Theoretical Psychology has benefited other fields of psychology.
 * 20) What impacts has it had?
 * 21) How has this effected modern empirical research methods?
 * 22) Future research
 * 23) See Modern Journal of Theoretical Psychology, frequently addressed topics (unsure how to get to this? - Caitlyn)
 * 24) What are the interactions with culture and experimental research?
 * 25) Address how theoretical psychology will change in time.
 * 26) See also
 * 27) References
 * 28) Further Reading
 * 29) External Links

Depending on what available resources we find some of this might be more relevant than others. So we will obviously add and delete based off of that, but we also may want to make some of our categories into sub categories ( Because 10 categories is becoming a really lengthy article).Matthew.j.benjamin (talk) 13:40, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Possible order of Headings
 * 1) Basic Definition/Origin/Etymology
 * 2) History
 * 3) Inception and beginnings and stem from
 * 4) Pioneers of Theoretical Psychology
 * 5) Early Contributions
 * 6) Progressing schools of thought and dichotomies within
 * 7) Progression to modern day
 * 8) transition from beginning to organization and knowledge of the field today
 * 9) Current organization and knowledge of the field today
 * 10) APA/Division 24
 * 11) Themes
 * 12) Pro's/Con's
 * 13) Applications Today
 * 14) Mental Health
 * 15) Education
 * 16) Work
 * 17) Military and intelligence
 * 18) Health, well-being, and social change
 * 19) Religion
 * 20) Theoretical Research methods
 * 21) Issues in Methodology and Practice
 * 22) Ethics/Morality
 * 23) Humans Beings
 * 24) Other beings (animals)
 * 25) See also
 * 26) References
 * 27) Sources
 * 28) Further Reading
 * 29) External Links


 * 1) Future research — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthew.j.benjamin (talk • contribs) 02:22, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

New References To Add

 * 1) Journal of Theoretical psychology (Connect through Dr. Council with Editor of journal Hank?)
 * 2) Society of Theoretical psychology
 * 3) Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology (Editor: Brent Slife)
 * 4) theoreticalpsychology.org
 * 5) Methods of Theoretical Psychology Book
 * 6) ISTP
 * 7) Review
 * 8) More research on names included in this paper
 * 9) Völkerpsychologie topic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevor1902 (talk • ###contribs) 17:40, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * 10) What is Theoretical Psychology?
 * 11) THEORETICAL PSYCHOLOGY
 * 12) Challenges to Theoretical Psychology
 * 13) Methods of Theoretical Psychology
 * 14) The promise of a flourishing theoretical psychology
 * 15) The sensory order: An inquiry into the foundations of theoretical psychology
 * 16) Problems of Theoretical Psychology
 * 17) Theoretical Psychology-critical contributions
 * 18) Element theoretical psychology
 * 19) Methods of theoretical psychology
 * 20) The sensory order; an inquiry into the foundations of theoretical psychology

Assignment 6
Check out WP:lead for helpful info.

Lead Section- Trevor Haugdahl
Theoretical psychology is simply a rational non-experimental approach to psychology. In psychology as with any field of study there are three philosophical perspectives and methodologies of ways in which we derive knowledge about the reality of the world in which we live in.


 * Rationalism (using the intellect and reason of the mind)
 * Empiricism (use of our individually experienced sensorium)
 * Skepticism (knowledge beyond mere appearance is not able to be studied)

Theoretical psychology is based solely on the rationalism methodology, as opposed to nearly all other branches of psychology except for parts of existential psychology are based on the empirical and some fewer based on skepticism as a methodology. Theoretical psychology is not experimental or clinically based and focuses on non-experimental ways to acquire knowledge about psychological topics.


 * critique: I think that this gives a good idea of theoretical psychology. I think the sentence beginning with Theoretical psychology is based solely... could use some work.  It seems kind of choppy and lengthy.  I am not sure if stating the ways skepticism is used is necessary or talking about existential psychology is necessary for the lead? Nice Job Matthew.j.benjamin (talk) 13:22, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Critique: I honestly think our lead section should be a little longer. We are covering a lot of information in our article and I believe the lead is supposed to incorporate all of the components of the full-length article. I think a brief mention of the history or people involved might be a nice little bit of info to add. But this looks pretty good! Easy to understand and very simplified, I like it. Caitlyn.mcconnell (talk) 15:14, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Critique: This is a really good structural set up of content for the lead - It gives some contrast and comparison as if to say, "Here's what you're getting yourself into."  I think some expansion on more of what it is rather than what it is not.  Ben and Caitlyn brings up lots of information that would be great for readers to take in at a glance.  I think it is very important we start with a definition so our readers understand right out of the gate what we are exploring here.Fstromberg (talk) 17:17, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Lead Section- Matthew Benjamin
Theoretical Psychology can be described as the philosophy of the science psychology. It explores the theoretical knowledge behind it's encompassed ideologies. Often times this includes but is not limited to non experimental critiques to different schools of thought, and the usefulness of psychological concepts. Theoretical Psychology also deals a large amount in turning non scientific common words (hypothetical constructs) into scientifically objective terms (intervening variables). Theoretical Psychology requires full agreement on the different viewpoints to be able to see it as a truth, therefore many of it's topics remain in continuous debate.

''* I know this is not complete, so far the first sentence is not very clear and does not give us the right accurate information. A better beginning sentence would be "Theoretical Psychology is described as the philosophy of psychology stemming from a branch in the philosophy of science within philosophy. I like your sentence "Theoretical Psychology also deals a large amount in turning non scientific common words (hypothetical constructs) into intervening variables (scientifically objective terms)." Trevor1902 (talk) 05:28, 28 October 2015 (UTC)''

Lead Section- Faye Stromberg

 * Theoretical psychology is concerned with theoretical and philosophical aspects of the discipline of psychology (unchanged from original). Of the philosophical perspectives, rationalism is the most pertinent to this discipline of psychology.  Theoretical psychology is a discipline that bases its information through inferential information, rather than empirically acquired information.  Theoretical psychology is an approach that allows for many ideas about psychology to be opinionated as its inferences are not empirically based, rather hypotheses to be exchanged and further built upon from different perspectives.
 * (I would like to integrate some of Caitlyn’s contributors, as I do believe we should mention those four main originators of TP: Gustav Bergmann, Egon Brunswik, Neal E. Miller, and K. W. Spence.)  Progression & application in theoretical psychology is not without its shortcomings as with any other field of psychology that run into issues ethics, methodology, and practice.  However, theoretical psychology has offered many new ideas to be formulated for the field of psychology, allowing for the expansion of this relatively new science.

My own critique: I tried to stick to the original lead section of T.P. to get an idea of what the original contributor thought was important, integrate what some of us have already discussed about what we've found about T.P., and what I would want to know as somebody who has no idea what T.P. is at all. I think it is important in this age to specific, but lead the reader to want to look at the rest of our article. It's important to get the basics in, but also give them a few key facts to walk away with if they don't look at anything else. First and foremost, I think the lead should give them brief, accurate information. So nothing too long, but not too vague either. NOT easy finding that sweet-spot, but we'll manage somehow! Fstromberg (talk) 17:44, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I think that this is a good basis for our Lead, and if we integrate some of the details from of the other group members it could make a great lead paragraph, We should change it so every sentence doesn't begin with the words "theoretical psychology" though.Matthew.j.benjamin (talk) 14:08, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Lead Section- Caitlyn McConnell
in progress critique: I think you actually might have to detailed of information for a lead? I'm really excited to integrate this information into our whole article tho. Do we want to put specific names in the lead? Because I'm still very uncertain about who's actually seen as the main people of theoretical psychology, and we don't want minor characters in the lead. If you got more details and know they are key figures we should definitely keep them there. Nice work! Matthew.j.benjamin (talk) 13:29, 28 October 2015 (UTC) Side note, you can response to mine any time now, I decided that what I have will work for now.
 * Theoretical Psychology is the logic of psychology and all of its components. This means when theories within psychology oppose or compete, theoretical psychology does not select which is correct or more correct. It simply describes the nature and composition of psychology's many ideas. To explain the logic of psychology, there has been an unspoken conclusion of the principles belonging the three classified areas. Psychology is built off the principle of being able to reference overt behavior, physical environment, and/or physiological states. The principles were formulated by researchers like Gustav Bergmann, Egon Brunswik, Neal E. Miller, and K. W. Spence. The contributors have played an important role in defining the meaning of more recent theoretical psychology. But in addition to Bergmann, Brunswik, Miller, and Spence were two contributors Ludwig Wittgenstein and Noam Chomsky, philosophers interested in psychology. Theoretical Psychology is an important aspect that continues to play a role in modern psychology. While there are some downfalls to theoretical psychology, there are also many strengths and benefits it has brought to the field of psychology. Theoretical psychology has played an important role in the history of psychology and will continue to impact and interact with psychology in the future.

I was thinking as we learn more about theoretical psychology we can make changes to our leads! but I think it should be this detailed right? At least the link on lead sections sounds like it's a written intro of all the info that will be covered in our outline and we have a pretty large outline. Caitlyn.mcconnell (talk) 15:08, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I think It's probably good for now. Detail is good, but it's not supposed to be to detailed, I'm still struggling to figure out what the perfect in between is. Hopefully we can narrow our outline down so that it is more manageable soon. This is what I found on the WP:lead section that might clarify for us [ "It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies.[1] The notability of the article's subject is usually established in the first few sentences. The emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic, according to reliable, published sources. Apart from basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article."]Matthew.j.benjamin (talk) 15:15, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

This is a super great, detailed lead - this would be ideal for the people that don't want to read the whole article to get the gist of what is going on in theoretical psychology. But I think that might also be a point to get at. I think we should leave our readers wanting to look a little deeper, go further into the content. So I don't know if we should go into much more detail than this lead, perhaps try to even be a little more overarching. The organization is perfect though! That is something to note! Fstromberg (talk) 17:13, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Group

 * Combined and agreed on Lead (Just an example of combining our already written leads above - feel free to change or move things around!)

Theoretical psychology is a rational, non-experimental approach to psychology. It entails the logic of psychology and all of its components.Psychology is built off the principle of being able to reference overt behavior, physical environment, and/or physiological states. This means when theories within psychology oppose or compete, theoretical psychology does not select which is correct or more correct. It simply describes the nature and composition of psychology's many ideas. In psychology, as with any field of study, there are three philosophical perspectives and methodologies of ways in which we derive knowledge about the reality of the world in which we live in. Rationalism (using the intellect and reason of the mind), Empiricism (use of our individually experienced sensorium), and Skepticism (knowledge beyond mere appearance is not able to be studied) characterize the three perspectives in which we can begin to understand theoretical concepts relating to laws which help us to understand larger theoretical theories.

Of the philosophical perspectives, rationalism is the most pertinent to theoretical psychology. It is not experimental or clinically based and focuses on non-experimental ways to acquire knowledge about psychological topics. It explores the theoretical knowledge behind rationalism's encompassed ideologies. Often times this includes, but is not limited to, non-experimental critiques to different schools of thought, and the usefulness of psychological concepts. Theoretical psychology is a discipline that bases its information through inferential information, rather than empirically. Theoretical psychology is an approach that allows many opinionated ideas, such that hypotheses can be exchanged and further built upon from different perspectives. Theoretical Psychology also deals a large amount in turning non-scientific common words (hypothetical constructs) into scientifically objective terms (intervening variables). Theoretical Psychology requires full agreement on the different viewpoints to be able to see it as a truth, therefore many of it's topics remain in continuous debate.

To explain the logic of psychology, there has been an unspoken conclusion of the principles belonging the three classified areas. Psychology is built off the principle of being able to reference overt behavior, physical environment, and/or physiological states. Theoretical Psychology is an important aspect that continues to play a role in modern psychology. While there are some downfalls to theoretical psychology, there are also many strengths and benefits it has brought to the field of psychology. Theoretical psychology has played an important role in the history of psychology and will continue to impact and interact with psychology in the future.

Individual
Add details to the outline


 * 1) Basic Definition/Origin - Trevor - Initial drafts are below Trevor1902 (talk) 01:13, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) Pioneers of Theoretical Psychology -I have listed some names covered in our course that have used theoretical information. I am currently working on finding more information on specific theories they have presented and what warrants being included (if any)Matthew.j.benjamin (talk) 17:34, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * 3) Early Contributions - I have included some key theoretical psychologists. I am currently looking deeper into these individuals to determine who should be included in our article.  Once narrowed down I will put this section into paragraph form.
 * 4) Progression to modern day - I have listed some Different subsections of psychology that have led to current theoretical psychology, and have listed some current positions of modern theoretical psychology. This will require more research.
 * 5) APA/Division 24 -I suggest changing this section to APA/Division 24 and other organizations. I have listed some prominent organizations.This was just present in my article, feel free to add or edit. Matthew.j.benjamin (talk) 17:34, 9 November 2015 (UTC)   I looked at what you posted for this section Matthew, those look like great ways to tackle the subject.  I'm not sure how in depth this section will be, so I think I'll dip into some of the other topics as well with what resources I've found for this specific topic of TP.  I'll add to what you have below and we'll have to collab about what we want to stay in, take out, or anything to add.  Fstromberg (talk) 04:50, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * 6) Research Methods - Trevor - Initial drafts are below Trevor1902 (talk) 01:13, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * 7) Problems in Methodology and Practice - Trevor - Initial drafts are below Trevor1902 (talk) 01:13, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * 8) Ethical Considerations - Sent out a group message about this - is this assigned to somebody?  I see some of Trevor's content covers this, maybe we can extract those points and paste them here?  Fstromberg (talk) 05:36, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * 9) Pro's/Con's  -I added a brief pro/con list that was included in my article I was readingMatthew.j.benjamin (talk) 17:43, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * 10) Future research  - TP plays a vital role in the future research to be conducted and contributing to the field of psychology.  Every concept in the field stems from a hypothesis, a theory.  It is this concept that proves the importance TP will play in the future of research in the field.  TP will continue to change through time with new thoughts and attitudes.  Fstromberg (talk) 05:31, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * 11) See also -
 * 12) References -
 * 13) Further Reading - Possibly, Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology.  Fstromberg (talk) 05:31, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * 14) External Links -

Second Section of Assignment 7
Read over handouts

Third Section of Assignment 7
New material added to the page, we all can comment on the talk page and all accountable for references and grammatical fixing. I will ensure formatting is good :) Trevor1902 (talk) 01:08, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Beginnings of Theoretical Psychology
Theoretical Psychology emerged from philosophy and more specifically from the philosophy of science, which strives to understand nature and structure of concepts, the laws in which these concepts occur, and the theories that combine the laws together. A specific branch of philosophy of science is theoretical psychology itself. Trevor1902 (talk) 01:20, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Philosophy of science does not use the scientific method to empirically derive truths about our physical world through conducting experiments and interpreting results. Yet, it is about science and even more so the logic and rationality behind science itself, and gives light to what we are not yet able to explain empirically. It’s more metaphysically and epistemologically focused how humans are in our world and other possible worlds and the nature and essence of human knowledge. Just as the philosophy of science is to science, theoretical psychology is to psychology in that it is the logic and rationality within psychology applied to concepts, laws, and ultimately theories, Yet theoretical psychology is not in place to discern which theories are more truthful or more correctly instantiated in reality. Many people erroneously categorize their support or rationalization of an “idea” to why a psychological theory is more “truthful” as theoretical psychology. Yet this is not the case. Theoretical Psychology is scientifically grounded in the truth of what we know through epistemological insights focused on the psychology of discovery. Trevor1902 (talk) 01:20, 29 October 2015 (UTC) Theoretical psychology existed much before any branches of traditional empirical and experimental psychology, and therefore there is much more depth and breadth of knowledge to draw from and it is less common for new developments to come about in our present day as much because many “new” approaches are drawing from and revitalizing past theories bringing new knowledge and frames of reference and mindsets to these foundational theories. Ideas take longer to develop and gain momentum that our brother fields in empirical based empirical psychology. Trevor1902 (talk) 01:17, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Theoretical psychology’s place in psychology, philosophy, and science
Theoretical psychology is not at all opposed to empirical psychology and together they form a beautiful symbiotic relationship. Theoretical psychology is not constrained by empirical research or laboratory studies and is free to constantly search for knowledge that we have yet to be able to study empirically or are not even capable of studying yet empirically. Yet theoretical psychology, its strength lies in the realm of rationality, focused on big picture ideas yet is not in itself a complete way to gain particular knowledge of the reality in which we live in our world. This is where the empirical based branches of psychology has its strength. Theoretical psychology can “know” a truth about human nature that is universal yet we don't know why or how it happen in the world on a more community or individualistic way. Empirical psychology is best at giving us insights on these big picture ideas at a more palatable applicable and individualistic and useful way.Trevor1902 (talk) 01:21, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Theoretical psychology is not a universal psychological theory able to explain all topics without the use of empirical research and data it is not a fundamental or comprehensive theory of psychology, yet is critically important to supplement empirical psychology and give reason to topics and produce theories until they can be empirically verified by the other branches of psychology. Trevor1902 (talk) 01:17, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Methodology
With the beginnings to desire knowledge we see wonder captivate the individual to ask questions of existence and being. Then the individual rationally reflects on their own experience about the topic exploring. Then the individual practices a thing called dialectics, examining what others have said about the topic being explored with the hope that it is possible to obtain the knowledge in question. Trevor1902 (talk) 01:21, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Theoretical Psychology, a branch of the philosophy of science is known as the philosophy of psychology and serves and the bridge between the philosophical roots of psychology and the present day empirical psychology. Today this bridge had its main emphasis and focus on forming concepts from moments of explicit behavior that are observable to everyone and not introspective mental events within individual consciousness.Trevor1902 (talk) 01:21, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

From these concepts are formed psychological laws that are derived containing one concept and also contain concepts from the individual’s environment of internal physiological states. These laws then are categorized into causal (statistical) or deterministic/mechanistic (nonstatistical) of which relate simultaneous parallel traits or predict future from present or past respectively. Trevor1902 (talk) 01:21, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Then these laws are organized into theories based on connections logically deduced together and open to new laws yet to be discovered or empirically verified. With the ultimate and logically possible goal of theoretical psychology being to create an exact and comprehensive psychological theory. Trevor1902 (talk) 01:21, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Concepts that are immediately observable are still abstract and difficult to define even in a basic law in an important solid theory as they relate to no physical object we can make sense of or interact with using our sensorium and empirical approaches. As they are not instantiated in the world and in virtue of this they are called theoretical concepts. Trevor1902 (talk) 01:17, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Categories Theoretical psychology explores

 * (Still in process of adding more)


 * 1) Existential questions
 * 2) Religion
 * 3) Ideological
 * 4) Also seeks to review empirical ideas from the research not the actual theories themselves’s Trevor1902 (talk) 01:21, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

First Draft of Article to Publish with our changes

 * old article published on WIKI

Assignment 8 decision
Hello Group 4. Your article has really come a long way. I'm going to forward it to Ian to vet for publication. However, it has some problems you'll need to fix. Most importantly, it is very wordy, and lacks the encyclopedic tone. J.R. Council (talk) 04:18, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Feedback
BOLD = DONE

Nice work here. A few thoughts on how you might develop this draft

* Similarly, the Current Issues in Methodology and Practice section seems odd when sourced to a work from 1953.
 * Lead: The lead is supposed to be a short (1-3 paragraph, depending on the length of the article) overview of the article, not an introduction. It should include all the major points of the article. You should make sure that they major things the article discusses are covered in the lead, but also that the lead doesn't dedicate (much) space to things that are not discussed in the article.The long list involved disciplines shouldn't be there - rather, this might be discussed in a section on 'Scope'. (You might also want to combine the "relationship to philosophy" section into this "Scope" section, or make it a subsection of it.) Also, the Society for Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology probably doesn't belong in the lead and the information about symposia, lectures, etc., is probably too specific for this article.
 * In some places, including the Relationship to Philosophy section, the references seem a bit thin. At the very least, there should be a ref at the end of a paragraph.
 * Be careful when it comes to tone. You're documenting what people have said, not trying to convince people of the truth. For example, "Many within the field consider theoretical psychology as the support or rationalization of an “idea” within psychological theory that some believe is more “truthful”. However, this is not the case." In this pair of sentences, you're taking a pair of competing ideas, saying that one's correct and the other is not. This isn't the way Wikipedia articles are supposed to work - we aren't supposed to take a side. (Now, granted, it is entirely appropriate to show what's wrong with one idea - using sources - but you should document both sides. This statement is a bit more problematic: "Theoretical Psychology is scientifically grounded in the truth of what is known through epistemological insights focused on the psychology of discovery." "Truth" is a tricky concept, and one that we should avoid relying on, especially by declaration. Equally problematic is the fact that this statement about "scientifically grounded...truth" is based on a source from 1953. A lot has happened in the past 60-some years, especially in our understanding of what constitutes "scientifically grounded...truth".
 * The lists of "Pioneers" and "contemporary" workers isn't bad, but would it be better served as a paragraph? When you discuss "origins", for example, why not name the people who did the foundational work? That's more "show me don't tell me" - their work is more meaningful discussed in the context of the development of the field. When it comes to the "contemporary" list this is even more true - calling work from 1971 'contemporary' seems to be a bit of a stretch. If, on the other hand, you discussed their work in a section on "modern" or "contemporary" theoretical psychology, it would stand out as less odd. In addition, you would be able to put their contribution in context better.

'''** Ian thank you for your comments, As with this specific point above we see that since theoretical psychology is based and almost the bridge between psychology and philosophy we see it take on characteristics from philosophy. One characteristic is foundational and unchanging practices and laws of logic that don't change over time as rules for rational reflection is the same and does not change over time. It is a non-empirical form of the scientific method. This is why an old source was used to show the consistency and credibility over time. Just as we see the rules of logic dating back to Aristotle still used today as are just as valid now as they were thousands of years ago. This is the same with the theoretical psychology methods, in that the current methods all have root back from when psychology was a field just beginning to separate from philosophy and becoming its own field. Therefore, 1953 is in a sense a really new source as the methods were created long before this time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevor1902 (talk • contribs) 20:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC) '''

'''**We just edited the title to be "Issues in . . ." leaving the "current" part of it out so that we can keep this pertinent and relevant information. 134.129.90.66 (talk) 23:19, 3 December 2015 (UTC)''' Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * 'Some of your writing is a bit wordy. Consider: "One aspect of Theoretical psychology is that theorists must be strategic and knowledgeable when shifting though experimental psychology as psychology continues to be a growing field of study". This could easily be condensed down a bit; something like: " One aspect of Theoretical psychology is that t Theorists must be strategic and knowledgeable when shifting though experimental psychology as psychology continues to be a growing the field of study grows''."
 * Finally, I would move the list of journals down a bit, just about the "References".'''

Approved to publish!
Okay - thumbs up to move this to the main article space. Nice work, everyone! Please see the instructions on Blackboard following Assignment 9 on how move the article over to main space.J.R. Council (talk) 18:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

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): Trevor1902, Matthew.j.benjamin, Caitlyn.mcconnell, Fstromberg.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)