BlueBottle

Who Doesn't Love Kittens

Enjoy!

Bryochemist (talk) 19:57, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Welcome!

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

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

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 23:04, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review

Hi BlueBottle,

I have read your article, and I have created a few suggestions, I hope they are of good use. The Overview Section seems unfitting rather than include it create a section of Associationistic Theory explain why association is relevant in it or a brief introduction and then add the sections on Memory Mood, etc. Also, it’s unclear if Memory, Mood, and Associative Learning/Conditioning are explained through the Associationistic Theory because the structure appears to be confusing. Operant conditioning and Classical (Respondent/Pavlovian) conditioning have their own extensive Wikipedia Page. I would suggest reducing the information in both of this sections and provide information only of the relevance of associations and how it applies without attempting to explain each of the sections. Avoid using words like discussion since it’s not the purpose of Wikipedia. Also, in the introduction I would add behaviorism as one of the fields that focus on associations, I would recommend you to create a behaviorism section which contains information of both Operant and Respondent conditioning. There are some typos which can be fixed by re-reading the article. Overall the article seems to be going in an interesting direction but it needs some restructuring.

Best, Purple-chameleon —Preceding undated comment added 19:27, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Purple-chameleon ! I appreciate the review! This really helps, and I've already started making changes! BlueBottle (talk) 14:51, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review

Hi BlueBottle,

I found your post on association in psychology very interesting. Some points- the first thing that stuck out to me was talk of disagreement and discussion about the topic in the overview section. As we learned in the training modules, wikipedia is a place for unbiased information backed up by multiple sources. Perhaps instead you can just describe the different approaches and how they view association which would be more of a factual discussion better suited for wikipedia.

Also I think the structure could be better formatted. For example, classical and operant conditioning could be combined under a section about how associations can be trained. IAT could go under a section about testing for associations, etc. Finally, in general the section about implicit association could be expanded upon. I know there is a link to the page for the test, but that stuff is all so interesting with how they test for implicit association and how you can mitigate effects of implicit association etc and very related to associations. Perhaps providing examples would be interesting. Best of luck! Olivedesign (talk) 20:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! Very useful tips!! BlueBottle (talk) 22:17, 15 April 2017 (UTC)