Talk:Social psychology - Knowledge (XXG)

2022:(the paper appears to be open access), in which they report the outcomes of 100 replications of different experiments from top Cognitive and Social Psychology journals. Depending on how they assessed replicabilityie I(e.g. ndependent p values or aggregate data (meta-analytic) or subjective) they report replicability of social psychology studies between 23% (JPSP P values) and 58% (PsychSci - Metaanalytic) and between 48% p value, JEP and 92% metaanalytic PsychSci for cognitive studies. The paper is (to my judgement) be very carefully constructed and very thorough. It is not easy to interpret these percentages by the way as there is hardly any data from other fields about replication success rates. The only indications come from cell biology (see the science paper) where they are talking about percentages as low as 11% to 25% (probably based on p value alone). If this is indicative for all sciences (but I would not hazard to do so) it appears that psychology is neither much worse, nor much better than most. But that would be my own 1324:

is already well covered online. As for this article, the "content bloating" was my exact thought when I first visited the page. For the "Social Psychology" head page, it makes sense to focus on the characteristics of the discipline as a whole, and simply list the topics covered within the discipline. Expanding the history section to discuss the development and origin of Social Psychology would expand on important information to cover on this page specifically. The current history section is rather brief and is lacking references to reliable sources. Elaborating on the included information, adding new information, and attaching valuable references would add to the quality of this initial page. In addition, the methods section can be expanded and personalized to the Social Psychology discipline. Focusing on a more general approach to explain the overarching principles of the discipline might help to eliminate the ever present redundancy, and allow more specified information to be added in individual sub-articles.

901:

such as absolute terms as is now seems to me epistemologically wrong. For example, there are minority influence experiments, citing the classical Asch conformity studies, and dealing with sensory and perceptual effects of influence. Classifying those under Sociology because it says Minority on the package is simply wrong. I believe the encyclopedia article should discuss together the general area of social psychology, e.g. including both Attitudes (that are in 152.4 in Dewey, classified together with Emotions) and Minority Influence (Dewey 302, classified as Social Processes). Group Dynamics is an even better example, since several research programmes have addressed the field with tools including psychodynamic theory, naturalistic observation, experimental studies...

1213:

dynamics, is with argument inspiring paragraphs such as: Focus on Individual Processes or Social Situations, Qualitative or Quantitative Approach, or even Positivism or Hermeneutics, in order to accommodate critical discourse analytic social psychology. I would suggest cautiousness with the other criticisms: the statistics/methodological crisis is not specific to social psychology, or psychology in general. It also affect medicine, neuroscience and other fields. The liberal bias criticism is not very well substantiated (and how can one accommodate in a single mind the criticism that SP is conservative from critical discourse analysis, and that it is liberal, coming from 'skeptics'?). Thus, I think that such criticisms may belong to separate articles.

233: 392: 371: 2292:(who is a highly esteemed prof emeritus in soc-psy). His opinion may definitely count. But even worse, the claim that Triplett was first is seemingly backed by a reference, but that is a reference to the Triplett paper which is (1) unlikely to claim it is the first and (2) even if it were making that claim, it would be a primary source for that claim. So developing the section around Stroebe's analyses seems to be relevant in any case. Please go ahead. 1584: 1448: 930:

response to that review. It is well referenced and organized, and has stayed quite stable in content for the past year, leading me to believe that it is essentially complete. I'm upgrading the status to Class A. If there are any reasons not to have this article be Class A, let's talk about them on this thread and make the improvements. Thanks to all of you who have worked on this article and maintained it over the years. --

287: 266: 501: 476: 2314: 734: 681: 640: 599: 402: 563: 224: 487: 1783:. E.g. what is social psychology? What is the history of social psychology? What trends has the field experienced? Really I think that to try and provide here a “comprehensive coverage of social psychology ” is doomed to lead to a redundant, superficial, and unstable Knowledge (XXG) article. That being said, as always I am keen to hear other perspectives. Cheers all 1016:

1970s, but they have never been very persuasive to most social psychologists-- interpret that however you like. Brannigan's book addresses things like methodological problems, liberal bias, ethical questions, etc. Personally, I think the best way to handle these criticisms is on the level of the individual research topic, e.g. critiques of Milgram should be at

1024:" criticism section here, what we might want to do is include mention of Brannigan and similar works under "Further reading." We could even set up a "criticism" section under that heading. This would make the information available yet avoid a lot of battling editing on what particular weaknesses of social psychology deserve discussion in the main article. -- 297: 2059:

Seduction literature, the Playboy (lifestyle)." Unlike social psychology, the Wikiproject focus is on only one particular kind of behavior (seduction) and a lifestyle (the playboy lifestyle). The Wikiproject is inactive. I would like the social psychology editors also to know that this Wikiproject is closely related to the

2326: 2082:

It can be argued that seduction techniques draw on interpersonal psychology, which would fall under social psychology. I know of no Knowledge (XXG) policy or guideline that forbids a project to claim articles. Even if the claim would be utterly nonsensical if editors in a project maintain their claim

1828:

show the way forward how to clean up the field. At this moment I think social psychology is dealing with its problems caused by earlier fraud cases; and mucking out the garbage is part of that. If you compare this to how medicine responds to its fraud cases I think we are doing much better (of course

1774:

Hi there. While I agree that the page need serious work, I actually think the proposal here may well be the opposite of what is needed. What is being described seems largely to be to replicate a social psychology text book. There are plenty of those around and to me that such a replication would be a

1248:

scant. The reader can get the impression (falsely, perhaps) that this is a personal essay rather than an encyclopedic summary. I haven't found anything that looks out of place or that I disagree with: like I say, it's good quality text. It's just a matter of making sure it's all referenced. Happy for

1243:

I owe an explanation of why I downgraded the article. First of all, we can't use the A class: it's not used for Psychology articles and anyway an article can't qualify for A until it has been through Good Article review. I think the article at present is well-written, and it's great to see work being

1153:

Mainstream SP accuses the qualitative researchers of sloppy, biased, and uncontrollable research. Research that can not be replicated as it depends fully on the specific context. Lack of generally agreed protocols, analysis, reporting standards. Lack of generalisability and theorising. - And they are

1553:

Finally, I would suggest that when you do start working on the article proper that you do so in sections. That is, you don’t perform your changes all in one hit. This will allow other editors to be selective if they have some hesitations about some of your contributions. In other words, it will help

1323:

I am an undergraduate student, and was asked to explore social psychology articles to see what improvements could be made. Our class has joined the Knowledge (XXG) Initiative for Psychology, and by evaluating existing articles, we can become familiar with the information about social psychology that

1169:

Interesting as well is a recent paper by Lynch jr and colleagues asking consumer psychology (heavily based on soc psych) to seriously consider the value of observation studies for understanding and picking up important real world phenomena (Lynch, John G., Jr., Joseph W. Alba, Aradhna Krishna, Vicki

1165:

More interesting in my view is the current re-evaluation of methods within (psychological) social psychology. This is e.g. by Kahneman's call for more replication studies and yhe recent series of (failed) replication of important studies, such as the Bargh priming study, the Dijksterhuis unconscious

1015:

I read the review of Brannigan's book. It sounds like it is a mixture of old and new criticisms, with some good points and a number of weak arguments. Just to put this into context, critiques over the "failure" or "crisis" of social psychology have been published with some regularity since the early

1212:

Many things mentioned in this criticism section reflect the foci of different research programmes. I think the best way to deal with this, in the context of a more comprehensive article describing and providing a general introduction to all psychological and sociological social psychology and group

1146:

The qualitative - quantitative issue is another. The problem here is that, while I agree that the mainstream experimental approach is focussing on irrelevant details, the qualitative methods have their own problems (lack of representativeness leading to lacking generalisability, reserarcher bias in

1279:

I also agree with you Martin. The quality of the content is great. There are a lot of supporting facts for each aspect of the topic of social psychology. However, I would have liked to see more cited references as well. My question is, how do we find the proper sources for what is already written?

1463:

Hello, my name is Travis Freetly a senior psychology student at Clemson University working under Dr. Pilcher. For my senior laboratory I will be doing edits of psychology related articles. For the social psychology article my goals are to improve the validity by adding reliable citations to the

1157:

On the other hand, postmodern qualitative scientists state that the researched social phenomena are irreducably complex, and that the work of experimentalists is therefore almost completely irrelevant in a real life context. And they are right to a large extent, however what is put in place makes

1088:

The problem with critical psychology is that it seems more a protest that a specific (according to its supporters important) effect is ignored; than a fundamental search for ugly practices in the field. The consequence is that critical psychology has, as far as I can get from the article, its own

900:

I also disagree with the disambiguation as is. I think that there should be a main Social Psychology page with a concise interaction to the whole set of research topics in the field, and a paragraph with more information on the different foci different research programmes have. The distinction in

1805:

I think there probably should be a section on the replication crisis which has particularly hit social psychology. The recent (as I write this) furor over a special edition of the journal "social psychology" on replication studies (many of which didn't replicate some core ideas) would be a good

1300:

Hi all. It seems like this article is getting pretty bloated with social psychological content. My feeling is that the increasingly comprehensive social psychological topic summaries are starting to get in the way of providing a simple and understandable encyclopaedic explanation of what social

1524:

To further the modification of this article, which I am editing as an educational assignment, I am in the process of adding supplemental information from my social psychology text book into the article. I am currently tinkering with the article in my sandbox, and hope to publish my edit to be

2058:

Hello social psychology editors, I was looking the article over today and see that there is a new addition in July, 2015 that : "This article is within the scope of WikiProject Seduction, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to Seduction,

1092:

There are problems in the field, no doubt. Methodological leading to false positives and too few replications being published important among them. There is a bias in topic and theory choice (but mind you, that is also present in other fields, compare the investments in military vs humanitary

929:

According to the Knowledge (XXG) guidelines, a Class A article is "well-organized and essentially complete, having been reviewed by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject, like military history, or elsewhere." This article went through the peer review process (see archives), and was edited in

1111:

psychology (as I understand it) is critical (of mainstream SP) in different ways to those you've highlighted. It does seem to stem from "the crisis" and loosely speaking promotes qualitative methodologies over the quantitative that dominate experimental/psychological social psychology. The

2263:

Presently, the "History" section includes the assertion that Triplett's (1898) paper was the first to be published in this area. Stroebe (2012) identifies work published by Féré (1887), and Binet and Henri (1894) that precedes Triplett's by some years, so this claim seems to be incorrect.

1464:

article. Also, I plan to clean up some of the redundancy in this article, as well as add any quality information that I come across while finding reliable sources. This is my first time editing articles on wikipedia so any constructive criticism or advice would be appreciated. (

644: 1120:. It also seems to be trying to position itself in some middle ground between psychological and sociological social psychology. I'm certainly no expert, but the subject has been around for over a decade and is a of the Open University undergraduate degree in psychology. I 1038:

I tend to like the idea of a criticism section, given some criticisms are field wide (liberal bias, false positives from Simmons et al., 2011 which is already briefly mentioned, etc.) If I get some time, perhaps I'll start such a section and invite others to participate.

2067:. Among other complaints about the group is that it uses pseudo-science to forward it's claims If the Wikiproject Seduction is attempting to falsely show alignment with Social Psychology, it would not be an appropriate and this link to the WikiProject should be severed. 1979:

As I was reading this article and read the replication crisis, my interest grew in this area. I look forward to the information mentioned above and seeing how to incorporate this into the article to gain a better understanding of how hard it is to get the same results.

693: 1347:, which seems a sensible way to develop the article. Could you say more about what should happen to the history section, about what sources or topics should appear there? And do you have an opinion on the discussion further down this page on section headings? 1756:

If it were up to may I would not add productivity and leadership. Would include in-group and out-group and intergroup all in the group dynamics section. Would add an "emotion" rather than aggression section, and would make a stereotyping sections instead of

1301:

psychology is. My suggestion would be to remove this content from this page and replace with a far more succinct list of topics covered (along with the existing history and research sections). This would also help avoid Knowledge (XXG) redundancy (e.g. keep

1821:

Personally I think the current "replication crisis" is one of the best things to happen to social psychology in years. It finally allows us to sort out the lucky hits from robust effects. I think not only the recent Social Psychology issue free access

746: 2030:

I think we should construct a brief section on the outcomes of this programme / paper for this article. I will think about it - but it may take some time (busy) and should be done with due attention to nuance, anyone else is welcome to start it.

2083:

I am not sure we can remove it. One way forward might be a community agreement that the project is no sufficient addition to the Knowledge (XXG) project and should therefore be discontinued, but that is another thing. How to disband a project?

828:(see Archive 4), I went ahead and made the change. Putting this material front and center on the social psychology page represents the majority approach to the discipline, but also preserves a separate article with a sociological approach on 237: 2385: 1184:

Sure. I wasn't really trying to make an assessment of the merits of any side in the debate, but I thought it was worth highlighting that they are still live. I have no idea what the definition of 'fringe' is in this context.

1547:

and had a look at your draft. I do have a couple of concerns. One is related to the citation density of your draft. Is this an area you have had the opportunity to work on yet? I of course understand that it is a work in

1093:

engineering and associated sciences and see the bias, see the global warming battlefield which seems more about biases than science, consider the funding for particle accelerators), so that might be larger than soc psy.

850:

an area of sociology. The article on social psychology should address both the European (sociological) tradition and the American (psychological) one. The main article on psychological social psychology should be titled

153: 1575:

Hello! Today I uploaded some of my edited content onto the Social Psych page, additions to the attitudes, persuasion, history, and cognitive dissonance sections. I look forward to hearing feedback about the upload

1397:

I plan to clean up/add citations under the Social Cognition sub-heading. For example: Researchers have found that depressed individuals often lack this bias and actually have more realistic perceptions of reality.

2375: 870:

Hi Shaulan. It has not been my experience that European social psychology is primarily considered to be a sub field of sociology. Do you perhaps have some materials that might substantiate that claim? Cheers

1604:

Currently, I do not think the article provides very comprehensive coverage of social psychology. I would like to propose the following sections, taken from numerous books that introduce social psychology:

1161:

So while part of the criticism may be right, the proposed cure embedded in more qualitative methods does not solve the issue, but (in my view) replaces one problem/bias with another which is at least as

603: 1779:, I think a better way forward would be to cut back dramatically on the coverage of social psychological research. This would be replaced with a concerted and detailed focus on social psychology as a 2390: 1070:

which covers some of the criticisms of mainstream social psychology. I don't think the criticisms are going to go away any time soon (certainly in the UK) and I think a criticism section (if not a

1658:

I also think the intrapersonal versus interpersonal division should be abandoned. I do not think there is such a clear demarcation within social psychology. Thank you for your consideration. --

945:

An editor recently downgraded this article to a C without discussion. I'm putting it at a "compromise" quality rating of B, but let's discuss it here if there are specific issues to address. --

2420: 1753:

I am not sure all of those are equally important, many of those are of a somewhat applied nature either dysfunctional (aggression, prejudice) or organizational (leadership, productivity).

1074:

page) would be useful to describe the criticisms that relate specifically to social psychology. I would agree that the core (epistemological) arguments apply to the field as a whole.

1867:

Extraordinary claims - how extraordinary is the evidence: (1) Unconscious thought is better than conscious - Systematic failure of replications (JDM). (2) Bem's precognition paper

1899:

Revisiting 50 years of social science: Attempt to consolidate and separate the important from the coincidental. Replications of important effects and their impact on the science.

1170:

G. Morwitz, and Zeynep Gürhan-Canli (2012), “Knowledge Creation in Consumer Research: Multiple Routes, Multiple Criteria,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22 (October), 473-485.

1154:

right. Qualitative research is not very well suited for these issues, and controlling researcher bias (especially in emergent coding, or grounded theory) is incredible difficult.

2244:

The second sentence begins "In this definition, the word scientific" but the first sentence, which gives us a definition of social psychology, does not use the word scientific.

1852:

Lead up to crisis: From the midst 1990's many interesting, often counterintuitive effects were studied. This escalated into a scattered field with the weirder effect the better.

1420:

Hi. I've done some cleanup of the article - quite a bit of it was making the references more consistent. I've tagged it with citation needed, clarify, etc tags where necessary.

1543:’s comments in mind. An undergraduate text book may not be written at an appropriate level and may therefore not be an appropriate source. Also, I just popped over to your 147: 2164: 1829:

medicine is only about life and death...... and loads of industry money demanding positive results - where social psychology is largely about reputations of academics).

516: 481: 353: 2425: 458: 79: 1760:

So all in all, I think this would not be a complete rewrite (which would make it an overly ambitious project), although some new sections should be drafted.

2370: 2415: 2400: 1496:

describes how to identify reliable sources for medical information, which is a good guideline for many psychology articles as well. With friendly regards,

448: 343: 1687:

Makes sense to some extent, although any classification will be imperfect, but such is the world. The current listing is -- linked to your topics above:

1941:

I did add the replication crisis. Please feel free to hack away at it. I haven't covered Bem's study here and a lot of your excellent suggestions.

762: 709: 656: 615: 44: 2405: 989:, absence of foundation, hasty generalizations, focus on the negative aspects, contradictory theories and post hoc theorizing. There are books like 2282: 319: 85: 2380: 2216: 1672:

I know the article already mentions persuasion. However, I think it could go into more depth about central and peripheral routes of persuasion.

424: 1834:

That said, not a bad idea, although I have little time to actually work on it. I could imagine a structure of the section to be something like:

1166:

thought theory studies, and the Bem precognition study. (although publication is still hampered by lack of willingness of journals to publish).

981:

Should this article mention criticism of social psychology? There seems to be a lot to criticize, such as lack of consensus among researchers,

2274: 2111: 846:

I see no consensus for this solution on that talk page. I strongly disagree with such a US-centric solution. In Europe, social psychology is

2395: 30: 2410: 1001: 310: 271: 886:

I think it would be beneficial to mention the connection between social psychology and sociology. They are very much interconnected.

2334: 1374:

suggested that I ask for comments and article improvement ideas here. I am most interested in ideas for expansion. Please respond at

415: 376: 99: 1927:

A lot of good ideas here I think. I may work up a *short* section (lacking time myself) and hopefully others will jump on board!

104: 20: 2190: 1480:

Welcome! Please remember that Knowledge (XXG) is not an academic paper or essay! Knowledge (XXG) articles should not be based on

810: 802: 794: 786: 194: 190: 1590: 1454: 168: 74: 2365: 1375: 1244:

done on such a centrally important topic. Thanks to Jcbutler and the other recent contributors. However, the referencing seems

1055: 246: 135: 1228: 852: 825: 643:

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available

602:

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available

65: 1125: 829: 2138: 1677: 1429: 891: 1481: 2115: 2064: 1544: 1371: 1364: 185: 129: 109: 997: 1071: 990: 961:

I just noticed the citation requests in the article. I'll look for some additional references in these areas. --

203: 2278: 2063:, which is controversial, and one of it's main leaders characterized as misogynist and hateful to women by the 1946: 1932: 1811: 1469: 252: 125: 2013: 1673: 1488:(for instance, journal reviews and professional or advanced academic textbooks) and, to a lesser extent, on 1352: 1254: 1005: 985: 887: 1216: 1043: 1823: 1775:

waste of Knowledge (XXG)’s unique functionality (e.g. wikilinks to other topics). Instead, as I suggested

1117: 860: 175: 55: 2072: 1264:

Thanks for your response Martin. And I agree, as I look at the article. It needs further referencing. --

1113: 423:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

318:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

2258: 856: 70: 1329: 1047: 223: 2060: 1942: 1928: 1807: 1742:

Intergroup relations (suggest: include in group dynamics - also make sure to include outgroup here)

1663: 1572: 1530: 1506: 1465: 1406: 1067: 1051: 161: 2259:

Triplett's (1898) paper on social facilitation as the first published article in social psychology

2317:

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between

1985: 1788: 1559: 1348: 1314: 1285: 1269: 1250: 1224: 1190: 1137: 1079: 1029: 1017: 966: 950: 935: 915: 876: 837: 770: 737:

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between

717: 684:

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between

664: 623: 208: 1493: 141: 2297: 2088: 2036: 2017: 1904: 1765: 1302: 1175: 1098: 607: 391: 370: 302: 51: 24: 2346: 2289: 2249: 2068: 1485: 1425: 1383: 1158:

often large claims (improved democracy is one) for which no convincing evidence is provided.

697: 205: 1583: 1447: 2267:

Reference: Stroebe, W. (2012). The truth about Triplett (1898), but nobody seems to care.

2020: 1489: 1342: 1325: 1129: 754: 750: 2023: 1399: 984:

theories are almost never falsified, flaws in methology of studies, possible liberal bias

987: 1659: 1534: 1497: 1402: 407: 1748:

Culture (suggest: Add - make sure to include cross-cultural psychology reference here)

2359: 1981: 1784: 1555: 1310: 1281: 1265: 1220: 1186: 1133: 1075: 1025: 962: 946: 931: 911: 872: 833: 766: 713: 660: 648: 619: 982: 2308:

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SU24 - Sect 200 - Thu

2293: 2217:"The sexist pseudoscience of pick-up artists: the dangers of "alpha male" thinking" 2139:"The Sexist Pseudoscience of Pick-Up Artists: The Dangers of "Alpha Male" Thinking" 2084: 2032: 1900: 1806:

place to start. If I have time I may start something, but invite others to help.

1761: 1306: 1171: 1094: 1021: 994: 701: 511: 507: 500: 486: 475: 2342: 2330: 2313: 2245: 1421: 1379: 733: 680: 639: 598: 571: 286: 265: 2050:

How come nobody talked about the Rich = Asshole experiment by Paul Piff 2011?

401: 397: 315: 292: 1554:

them avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Cheers and best of luck

207: 1525:

reviewed in the next few weeks. Thank you for any help you can provide me.

904:

Moreover, I think that the disambiguation prompt is very paradigm specific:

420: 2350: 2301: 2253: 2165:"Inside the 'manosphere' that inspired Santa Barbara shooter Elliot Rodger" 2092: 2076: 2040: 1989: 1950: 1936: 1908: 1815: 1792: 1769: 1681: 1667: 1563: 1513: 1473: 1433: 1410: 1387: 1356: 1333: 1318: 1289: 1273: 1258: 1232: 1194: 1179: 1141: 1102: 1083: 1059: 1033: 1009: 970: 954: 939: 919: 895: 880: 864: 841: 774: 721: 668: 627: 562: 2386:

Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles in Society and social sciences

1000:

that deal with these issues and can be used as reference material. --

824:

After allowing a full year for discussion on the relocation from

1578: 1442: 217: 209: 15: 2376:

Knowledge (XXG) vital articles in Society and social sciences

2012:

In August 2015 the open science collaboration (based in the

1776: 561: 1826: 1736:

Leadership (suggest: Do not add, or add to group dynamics)

993:(for a quick review which summarizes the main points see 1089:

branch of psychology, with its own biases, problems etc.

160: 2391:

B-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences

2008:

Open science collaboration recent science publication

728:

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

675:

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

634:

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

593:

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

1884:

Fraud by important academics: Stapel, Smeesters etc.

1825:, but also several reports in PSPR (no open access) 419:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 314:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 1150:

The problem is the lack of respect from both sides.

544: 174: 2421:Articles copy edited by the Guild of Copy Editors 2191:"Why I have no truck with the art of the pick-up" 526:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors 2054:Controversial group linking to Social Psychology 33:for general discussion of the article's subject. 1370:A respondent to my request for peer review of 1401:I am also interested in ideas for expansion. 8: 1589:This article is currently the subject of an 1453:This article is currently the subject of an 1124:this inclusion is partly influenced by the 1739:Prejudice (suggest: broaden to stereotype) 1214: 541: 529:Template:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors 470: 365: 260: 2026:and hence not useful for Knowledge (XXG). 763:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment 710:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment 657:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment 616:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment 2269:Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7 1309:page). What are others thoughts? Cheers 820:Move from Social psychology (psychology) 2426:Knowledge (XXG) articles as assignments 2103: 1733:Agression (suggest: broaden to Emotion) 761:Above undated message substituted from 708:Above undated message substituted from 655:Above undated message substituted from 614:Above undated message substituted from 472: 367: 262: 221: 2371:Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles 991:The Rise and Fall of Social Psychology 328:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Psychology 1296:Excessive detail and wiki-redundancy? 433:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Sociology 7: 1112:critiques are often associated with 998:Towards a balanced social psychology 413:This article is within the scope of 308:This article is within the scope of 1724:3.4 Interpersonal attraction -: --> 1492:(such as undergraduate textbooks). 251:It is of interest to the following 23:for discussing improvements to the 2416:High-importance sociology articles 2401:Top-importance psychology articles 2322: 2318: 1745:Productivity (suggest: Do not add) 1725:affiliation, attraction / intimacy 1147:data collection and analysis, etc. 742: 738: 689: 685: 14: 1609:social perception and attribution 1249:it to remain at B-class for now. 50:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome! 2325:. Further details are available 2312: 1720:3.3 Relations with others -: --> 1582: 1446: 1020:. Instead of trying to write a " 745:. Further details are available 732: 692:. Further details are available 679: 638: 597: 570:This article was copy edited by 499: 485: 474: 400: 390: 369: 295: 285: 264: 231: 222: 45:Click here to start a new topic. 2406:WikiProject Psychology articles 1376:Talk:Motivation crowding theory 996:) and journal articles such as 453:This article has been rated as 348:This article has been rated as 331:Template:WikiProject Psychology 2381:B-Class level-5 vital articles 2163:Dewey, Caitlin (27 May 2014). 1533:. Please don’t forget to keep 1357:12:44, 12 September 2013 (UTC) 1334:18:24, 11 September 2013 (UTC) 853:social psychology (psychology) 826:Social psychology (psychology) 807:- August 2006 to December 2006 532:Guild of Copy Editors articles 436:Template:WikiProject Sociology 1: 2341:— Assignment last updated by 2215:Steadman, Ian (4 June 2014). 2137:Steadman, Ian (6 June 2014). 1841:2000 Social psychology crisis 1514:16:22, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 1484:, but on reliable, published 1474:15:08, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 1411:00:40, 27 February 2012 (UTC) 1319:04:09, 18 December 2011 (UTC) 1195:21:08, 17 February 2013 (UTC) 1180:20:53, 17 February 2013 (UTC) 1142:18:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC) 1126:British Psychological Society 1103:16:38, 17 February 2013 (UTC) 1084:13:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC) 830:Social psychology (sociology) 815:- December 2006 to April 2011 799:- January 2006 to August 2006 427:and see a list of open tasks. 322:and see a list of open tasks. 42:Put new text under old text. 2302:11:01, 2 November 2018 (UTC) 2283:20:23, 1 November 2018 (UTC) 1990:06:28, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 1682:17:32, 3 February 2017 (UTC) 1388:16:37, 22 January 2012 (UTC) 1303:perspectives on self-concept 1290:17:46, 8 February 2018 (UTC) 1239:Why I downgraded the article 896:17:35, 3 February 2017 (UTC) 881:02:44, 18 October 2011 (UTC) 865:01:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC) 775:09:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC) 722:09:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC) 669:09:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC) 628:09:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC) 2396:B-Class psychology articles 2351:04:27, 17 August 2024 (UTC) 2189:Fogg, Ally (24 June 2013). 2093:17:52, 13 August 2015 (UTC) 2077:15:46, 13 August 2015 (UTC) 2065:Southern Poverty Law Center 2041:14:28, 30 August 2015 (UTC) 1712:3.1 Social influence -: --> 1701:2.3 Social cognition -: --> 1128:. There are also various 2442: 2411:B-Class sociology articles 2288:I don't know the paper by 1564:03:49, 12 March 2013 (UTC) 1434:02:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC) 1372:Motivation crowding theory 1365:Motivation crowding theory 1072:Critical Social Psychology 1060:16:06, 10 March 2012 (UTC) 1034:19:33, 27 April 2011 (UTC) 1010:16:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC) 940:19:27, 18 April 2011 (UTC) 842:19:27, 18 April 2011 (UTC) 459:project's importance scale 354:project's importance scale 1793:12:39, 17 July 2013 (UTC) 1770:17:46, 16 July 2013 (UTC) 1716:3.2 Group dynamics -: --> 1709:3 Interpersonal phenomena 1690:2 Intrapersonal phenomena 1668:17:13, 16 July 2013 (UTC) 1393:Social Cognition Citation 1233:16:35, 7 March 2017 (UTC) 920:16:21, 7 March 2017 (UTC) 569: 540: 494: 452: 385: 347: 280: 259: 80:Be welcoming to newcomers 2254:17:50, 4 July 2018 (UTC) 1951:23:05, 30 May 2014 (UTC) 1937:21:13, 30 May 2014 (UTC) 1909:13:41, 30 May 2014 (UTC) 1816:12:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC) 1698:Attitude/behavior change 1621:attitude/behavior change 1339:Thanks for this comment 520:, on 11–13 January 2021. 2114:. Intelligence Report. 2024:original interpretation 2016:) published a paper in 2014:Center for Open Science 1721:affiliation, attraction 1705:2.4 Self-concept -: --> 1633:affiliation, attraction 1274:18:40, 9 May 2011 (UTC) 1259:09:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC) 971:18:15, 8 May 2011 (UTC) 955:13:54, 7 May 2011 (UTC) 791:- Start to January 2006 2366:B-Class vital articles 1591:educational assignment 1455:educational assignment 1416:Have done some cleanup 1118:social constructionism 566: 311:WikiProject Psychology 75:avoid personal attacks 2329:. Student editor(s): 2112:"Misogyny: The Sites" 1697:2.2 Persuasion -: --> 1114:discursive psychology 749:. Student editor(s): 696:. Student editor(s): 647:. Student editor(s): 606:. Student editor(s): 565: 523:Guild of Copy Editors 517:Guild of Copy Editors 482:Guild of Copy Editors 416:WikiProject Sociology 245:on Knowledge (XXG)'s 238:level-5 vital article 100:Neutral point of view 1693:2.1 Attitudes -: --> 1651:intergroup relations 105:No original research 2061:seduction community 1068:Critical psychology 574:on 5–10 March 2012. 545:Previous copyedits: 334:psychology articles 2327:on the course page 1801:Replication Crisis 1674:LisaBlakeleySnyder 1630:prosocial behavior 1482:WP:primary sources 1132:s on the subject. 1066:I added a link to 1018:Milgram experiment 888:LisaBlakeleySnyder 753:. Peer reviewers: 747:on the course page 700:. Peer reviewers: 694:on the course page 645:on the course page 604:on the course page 567: 514:, a member of the 439:sociology articles 247:content assessment 86:dispute resolution 47: 2018:Science (journal) 1781:topic unto itself 1600:Proposed sections 1597: 1596: 1486:secondary sources 1461: 1460: 1235: 1219:comment added by 1063: 1046:comment added by 590: 589: 586: 585: 582: 581: 578: 577: 506:This article was 469: 468: 465: 464: 364: 363: 360: 359: 303:Psychology portal 216: 215: 66:Assume good faith 43: 25:Social psychology 2433: 2353: 2335:article contribs 2324: 2320: 2316: 2290:Wolfgang Stroebe 2232: 2231: 2229: 2227: 2212: 2206: 2205: 2203: 2201: 2186: 2180: 2179: 2177: 2175: 2160: 2154: 2153: 2151: 2149: 2134: 2128: 2127: 2125: 2123: 2108: 1713:Social influence 1702:Social cognition 1624:social influence 1612:social cognition 1586: 1579: 1541: 1540: 1511: 1510: 1504: 1503: 1490:tertiary sources 1450: 1443: 1346: 1062: 1040: 777: 744: 743:27 November 2019 740: 739:4 September 2019 736: 724: 691: 687: 683: 671: 642: 630: 601: 552: 542: 534: 533: 530: 527: 524: 503: 496: 495: 490: 489: 488: 478: 471: 441: 440: 437: 434: 431: 410: 405: 404: 394: 387: 386: 381: 373: 366: 336: 335: 332: 329: 326: 305: 300: 299: 298: 289: 282: 281: 276: 268: 261: 244: 235: 234: 227: 226: 218: 210: 179: 178: 164: 95:Article policies 16: 2441: 2440: 2436: 2435: 2434: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2356: 2355: 2340: 2310: 2275:157.157.140.235 2261: 2242: 2240:Second sentence 2237: 2236: 2235: 2225: 2223: 2214: 2213: 2209: 2199: 2197: 2188: 2187: 2183: 2173: 2171: 2169:Washington Post 2162: 2161: 2157: 2147: 2145: 2136: 2135: 2131: 2121: 2119: 2110: 2109: 2105: 2056: 2048: 2010: 1803: 1602: 1536: 1535: 1522: 1508: 1507: 1499: 1498: 1441: 1418: 1395: 1368: 1340: 1298: 1241: 1041: 979: 927: 925:Article quality 822: 783: 760: 730: 707: 677: 654: 636: 613: 595: 550: 531: 528: 525: 522: 521: 484: 455:High-importance 438: 435: 432: 429: 428: 406: 399: 380:High‑importance 379: 333: 330: 327: 324: 323: 301: 296: 294: 274: 242: 232: 212: 211: 206: 121: 116: 115: 114: 91: 61: 12: 11: 5: 2439: 2437: 2429: 2428: 2423: 2418: 2413: 2408: 2403: 2398: 2393: 2388: 2383: 2378: 2373: 2368: 2358: 2357: 2323:24 August 2024 2309: 2306: 2305: 2304: 2260: 2257: 2241: 2238: 2234: 2233: 2207: 2181: 2155: 2129: 2102: 2101: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2055: 2052: 2047: 2044: 2027: 2009: 2006: 2005: 2004: 2003: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1992: 1964: 1963: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1955: 1954: 1953: 1943:StoneProphet11 1929:StoneProphet11 1916: 1915: 1914: 1913: 1912: 1911: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1889: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1870: 1869: 1868: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1836: 1835: 1831: 1830: 1808:StoneProphet11 1802: 1799: 1798: 1797: 1796: 1795: 1782: 1758: 1754: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1746: 1743: 1740: 1737: 1734: 1728: 1727: 1726: 1722: 1718: 1717:Group dynamics 1714: 1710: 1707: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1656: 1655: 1652: 1649: 1646: 1643: 1640: 1639:group dynamics 1637: 1634: 1631: 1628: 1625: 1622: 1619: 1616: 1613: 1610: 1601: 1598: 1595: 1594: 1587: 1573:Travis Freetly 1569: 1567: 1566: 1550: 1549: 1531:Travis Freetly 1521: 1518: 1517: 1516: 1466:Travis Freetly 1459: 1458: 1451: 1440: 1437: 1417: 1414: 1394: 1391: 1367: 1363:Please review 1361: 1360: 1359: 1297: 1294: 1277: 1276: 1240: 1237: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1205: 1204: 1203: 1202: 1201: 1200: 1199: 1198: 1197: 1167: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1148: 1090: 978: 975: 974: 973: 958: 957: 926: 923: 908:in society... 884: 883: 821: 818: 817: 816: 808: 800: 792: 782: 779: 729: 726: 686:7 January 2019 676: 673: 635: 632: 594: 591: 588: 587: 584: 583: 580: 579: 576: 575: 568: 558: 557: 555: 553: 547: 546: 538: 537: 535: 504: 492: 491: 479: 467: 466: 463: 462: 451: 445: 444: 442: 425:the discussion 412: 411: 408:Society portal 395: 383: 382: 374: 362: 361: 358: 357: 350:Top-importance 346: 340: 339: 337: 320:the discussion 307: 306: 290: 278: 277: 275:Top‑importance 269: 257: 256: 250: 228: 214: 213: 204: 202: 201: 198: 197: 181: 180: 118: 117: 113: 112: 107: 102: 93: 92: 90: 89: 82: 77: 68: 62: 60: 59: 48: 39: 38: 35: 34: 28: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2438: 2427: 2424: 2422: 2419: 2417: 2414: 2412: 2409: 2407: 2404: 2402: 2399: 2397: 2394: 2392: 2389: 2387: 2384: 2382: 2379: 2377: 2374: 2372: 2369: 2367: 2364: 2363: 2361: 2354: 2352: 2348: 2344: 2338: 2336: 2332: 2328: 2315: 2307: 2303: 2299: 2295: 2291: 2287: 2286: 2285: 2284: 2280: 2276: 2272: 2271:(1), 54--57. 2270: 2265: 2256: 2255: 2251: 2247: 2239: 2222: 2221:New Statesman 2218: 2211: 2208: 2196: 2192: 2185: 2182: 2170: 2166: 2159: 2156: 2144: 2140: 2133: 2130: 2118:. Spring 2012 2117: 2113: 2107: 2104: 2100: 2094: 2090: 2086: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2078: 2074: 2070: 2066: 2062: 2053: 2051: 2045: 2043: 2042: 2038: 2034: 2028: 2025: 2021: 2019: 2015: 2007: 1991: 1987: 1983: 1978: 1977: 1976: 1975: 1974: 1973: 1972: 1971: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1966: 1965: 1952: 1948: 1944: 1940: 1939: 1938: 1934: 1930: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1910: 1906: 1902: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1880: 1879: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1851: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1840: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1833: 1832: 1827: 1824: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1813: 1809: 1800: 1794: 1790: 1786: 1780: 1778: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1767: 1763: 1759: 1755: 1752: 1747: 1744: 1741: 1738: 1735: 1732: 1731: 1730:That leaves: 1729: 1723: 1719: 1715: 1711: 1708: 1704: 1700: 1696: 1692: 1689: 1688: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1679: 1675: 1670: 1669: 1665: 1661: 1653: 1650: 1647: 1644: 1641: 1638: 1635: 1632: 1629: 1626: 1623: 1620: 1617: 1614: 1611: 1608: 1607: 1606: 1599: 1592: 1588: 1585: 1581: 1580: 1577: 1574: 1570: 1565: 1561: 1557: 1552: 1551: 1546: 1542: 1539: 1532: 1528: 1527: 1526: 1520:Modifications 1519: 1515: 1512: 1505: 1502: 1495: 1491: 1487: 1483: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1456: 1452: 1449: 1445: 1444: 1438: 1436: 1435: 1431: 1427: 1423: 1415: 1413: 1412: 1408: 1404: 1400: 1392: 1390: 1389: 1385: 1381: 1378:. Thank you! 1377: 1373: 1366: 1362: 1358: 1354: 1350: 1349:MartinPoulter 1344: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1331: 1327: 1321: 1320: 1316: 1312: 1308: 1304: 1295: 1293: 1291: 1287: 1283: 1275: 1271: 1267: 1263: 1262: 1261: 1260: 1256: 1252: 1251:MartinPoulter 1247: 1238: 1236: 1234: 1230: 1226: 1222: 1218: 1196: 1192: 1188: 1183: 1182: 1181: 1177: 1173: 1168: 1164: 1160: 1156: 1152: 1149: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1139: 1135: 1131: 1127: 1123: 1119: 1115: 1110: 1106: 1105: 1104: 1100: 1096: 1091: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1081: 1077: 1073: 1069: 1065: 1064: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1031: 1027: 1023: 1019: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1011: 1007: 1003: 1002:84.251.222.22 999: 995: 992: 988: 986: 983: 976: 972: 968: 964: 960: 959: 956: 952: 948: 944: 943: 942: 941: 937: 933: 924: 922: 921: 917: 913: 909: 907: 902: 898: 897: 893: 889: 882: 878: 874: 869: 868: 867: 866: 862: 858: 854: 849: 844: 843: 839: 835: 831: 827: 819: 814: 813: 809: 806: 805: 801: 798: 797: 793: 790: 789: 785: 784: 780: 778: 776: 772: 768: 764: 758: 756: 752: 748: 735: 727: 725: 723: 719: 715: 711: 705: 703: 699: 695: 690:26 April 2019 682: 674: 672: 670: 666: 662: 658: 652: 650: 646: 641: 633: 631: 629: 625: 621: 617: 611: 609: 605: 600: 592: 573: 564: 560: 559: 556: 554: 549: 548: 543: 539: 536: 519: 518: 513: 509: 505: 502: 498: 497: 493: 483: 480: 477: 473: 460: 456: 450: 447: 446: 443: 426: 422: 418: 417: 409: 403: 398: 396: 393: 389: 388: 384: 378: 375: 372: 368: 355: 351: 345: 342: 341: 338: 321: 317: 313: 312: 304: 293: 291: 288: 284: 283: 279: 273: 270: 267: 263: 258: 254: 248: 240: 239: 229: 225: 220: 219: 200: 199: 196: 192: 189: 187: 183: 182: 177: 173: 170: 167: 163: 159: 155: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 137: 134: 131: 127: 124: 123:Find sources: 120: 119: 111: 110:Verifiability 108: 106: 103: 101: 98: 97: 96: 87: 83: 81: 78: 76: 72: 69: 67: 64: 63: 57: 53: 52:Learn to edit 49: 46: 41: 40: 37: 36: 32: 26: 22: 18: 17: 2339: 2311: 2273: 2268: 2266: 2262: 2243: 2224:. Retrieved 2220: 2210: 2198:. Retrieved 2195:The Guardian 2194: 2184: 2172:. Retrieved 2168: 2158: 2146:. Retrieved 2143:New Republic 2142: 2132: 2120:. Retrieved 2106: 2098: 2057: 2049: 2029: 2011: 1804: 1671: 1657: 1642:productivity 1603: 1571: 1568: 1537: 1523: 1500: 1462: 1419: 1396: 1369: 1322: 1307:self-concept 1299: 1278: 1245: 1242: 1215:— Preceding 1211: 1121: 1108: 1042:— Preceding 1022:kitchen sink 980: 928: 910: 905: 903: 899: 885: 857:Skaulan Jgen 847: 845: 823: 811: 803: 795: 787: 759: 731: 706: 678: 653: 637: 612: 608:Dusavage2012 596: 515: 454: 414: 349: 309: 253:WikiProjects 236: 184: 171: 165: 157: 150: 144: 138: 132: 122: 94: 19:This is the 2319:22 May 2024 2069:Cityside189 698:Miguellee15 508:copy edited 148:free images 31:not a forum 2360:Categories 2099:References 1757:prejudice. 1645:leadership 1627:aggression 1343:Mtierney01 1326:Mtierney01 755:Daisyroyal 751:Minakhaaal 325:Psychology 316:Psychology 272:Psychology 2046:Paul Piff 1694:Attitudes 1660:1000Faces 1648:prejudice 1618:attitudes 1548:progress. 1538:Lova Falk 1501:Lova Falk 1439:Citations 1403:Plroseman 1107:Critical 1048:Avalongod 977:Criticism 848:primarily 812:Archive 4 804:Archive 3 796:Archive 2 788:Archive 1 430:Sociology 421:sociology 377:Sociology 241:is rated 88:if needed 71:Be polite 21:talk page 1982:Rush1775 1706:The self 1636:intimacy 1615:the self 1494:WP:MEDRS 1430:contribs 1282:Archiea1 1266:Jcbutler 1229:contribs 1221:Ngyi1983 1217:unsigned 1187:Earcanal 1134:Earcanal 1076:Earcanal 1056:contribs 1044:unsigned 1026:Jcbutler 963:Jcbutler 947:Jcbutler 932:Jcbutler 912:Ngyi1983 834:Jcbutler 781:Archives 767:PrimeBOT 714:PrimeBOT 661:PrimeBOT 649:Archiea1 620:PrimeBOT 186:Archives 56:get help 29:This is 27:article. 2294:Arnoutf 2226:10 June 2200:10 June 2085:Arnoutf 2033:Arnoutf 1901:Arnoutf 1777:in 2011 1762:Arnoutf 1654:culture 1545:sandbox 1305:on the 1172:Arnoutf 1122:believe 1095:Arnoutf 702:Rcocker 512:Dhtwiki 457:on the 352:on the 243:B-class 154:WP refs 142:scholar 2343:Zq2197 2331:Yz9988 2246:Vorbee 2174:7 June 2148:7 June 1785:Andrew 1556:Andrew 1422:Allens 1380:Selery 1311:Andrew 1109:social 873:Andrew 572:Allens 249:scale. 126:Google 2122:8 May 230:This 169:JSTOR 130:books 84:Seek 2347:talk 2321:and 2298:talk 2279:talk 2250:talk 2228:2014 2202:2014 2176:2014 2150:2014 2124:2014 2116:SPLC 2089:talk 2073:talk 2037:talk 1986:talk 1947:talk 1933:talk 1905:talk 1812:talk 1789:talk 1766:talk 1678:talk 1664:talk 1560:talk 1509:talk 1470:talk 1426:talk 1407:talk 1384:talk 1353:talk 1330:talk 1315:talk 1286:talk 1270:talk 1255:talk 1246:very 1225:talk 1191:talk 1176:talk 1162:bad. 1138:talk 1130:book 1116:and 1099:talk 1080:talk 1052:talk 1030:talk 1006:talk 967:talk 951:talk 936:talk 916:talk 906:mind 892:talk 877:talk 861:talk 838:talk 832:. -- 771:talk 741:and 718:talk 688:and 665:talk 624:talk 449:High 162:FENS 136:news 73:and 2337:). 1529:Hi 765:by 712:by 659:by 618:by 510:by 344:Top 176:TWL 2362:: 2349:) 2300:) 2281:) 2252:) 2219:. 2193:. 2167:. 2141:. 2091:) 2075:) 2039:) 1988:) 1949:) 1935:) 1907:) 1814:) 1791:) 1768:) 1680:) 1666:) 1562:) 1476:) 1472:) 1432:) 1428:| 1409:) 1386:) 1355:) 1332:) 1317:) 1292:) 1288:) 1272:) 1257:) 1231:) 1227:• 1193:) 1178:) 1140:) 1101:) 1082:) 1058:) 1054:• 1032:) 1008:) 969:) 953:) 938:) 918:) 894:) 879:) 863:) 855:. 840:) 773:) 757:. 720:) 704:. 667:) 651:. 626:) 610:. 551:/ 193:, 156:) 54:; 2345:( 2333:( 2296:( 2277:( 2248:( 2230:. 2204:. 2178:. 2152:. 2126:. 2087:( 2071:( 2035:( 1984:( 1945:( 1931:( 1903:( 1810:( 1787:( 1764:( 1676:( 1662:( 1593:. 1558:( 1468:( 1457:. 1424:( 1405:( 1382:( 1351:( 1345:: 1341:@ 1328:( 1313:( 1284:( 1280:( 1268:( 1253:( 1223:( 1189:( 1174:( 1136:( 1097:( 1078:( 1050:( 1028:( 1004:( 965:( 949:( 934:( 914:( 890:( 875:( 859:( 836:( 769:( 716:( 663:( 622:( 461:. 356:. 255:: 195:2 191:1 188:: 172:· 166:· 158:· 151:· 145:· 139:· 133:· 128:( 58:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index