This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 173.230.164.4 (talk) at 14:44, 24 March 2022 (→Section 4 "Attachment styles in adults" citation & reference problems: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 14:44, 24 March 2022 by 173.230.164.4 (talk) (→Section 4 "Attachment styles in adults" citation & reference problems: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Attachment theory article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | Attachment theory is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 25, 2010. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||||||
| Toolbox |
|---|
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 13 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rimbaud1230. Peer reviewers: Zhaozhhan, Ruhanh, HebaTea.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Long quotation in lead
It should be recognized "even sensitive caregivers get it right only about fifty per cent of the time. Their communications are either out of synch, or mismatched. There are times when parents feel tired or distracted. The telephone rings or there is breakfast to prepare. In other words, attuned interactions rupture quite frequently. But the hallmark of a sensitive caregiver is that the ruptures are managed and repaired."
For a quote of this length (is it too long to begin with?), the attribution needs to be direct and up front, and not just buried in a cite at the end. — MaxEnt 00:00, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Student Evaluation
Hello! I am a student at the University of Alabama working on article evaluations on topics in either relational communication or interpersonal communication. I just wanted to say that I found the information presented here to be both helpful and interesting. Part of our evaluation is to suggest a possible addition(s) for the articles we are reading. For this one, I certainly feel like it covers most of the principles and ideas surrounding attachment theory. My question as a reader might be about what research (if any) has been done recently to either back up the different theories or ideas presented, or contradict those ideas? There may not be a lot of research currently being conducted, but I think a section explaining what's happening now when it comes to expanding theories around attachment theory or what needs to be done in the future would be really interesting. Thanks!--Brand72093 (talk) 00:14, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
FAR needed
This article passed WP:FAC ten years ago, and is no longer in compliance with WP:WIAFA. The lead, in particular, does not comply with WP:LEAD (see the version that passed FAC). The article is over-quoted, and the TOC is no longer focused. There is a good deal of uncited text. A consistent citation style is not used. If the article cannot be brought to FA standards, it should be submitted to Featured article review. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
More application of theory on adult needed
Hi, I am a student from Georgetown University in CCT program, and we are peer reviewing some articles. This is the detailed explanation for attachment theory, with clear definition, case studies and related research. The article mainly focused on the children and how theory can apply to them, including the history, the transaction from children to teenagers and the practical applications. However, I found out the article has less information of how the theory apply to adults. The article has few paragraph for Attachment styles in adults, and I think you could look for more styles or evidence in this part, such as how theory can be used in marketing and business area. Maybe you could refer to the following section, crime. That is also the application of theory in adults and it is like the attachment to the main theory, with history, and other detailed introductions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhaozhhan (talk • contribs) 02:21, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Peer review
Hi Yibo, I hope you are doing well on building this Wiki page. It is a well-written article as it is rated as a B class article. Based on my view, there are some sections that you could improve on. First, when I viewed the content, I got confused by the title of “crime”. I understood “crime” meant that the theory has been applied in the discipline of criminology. I think it would be better if the term could be clarified in the content. Also, I think it would be interesting to add sources about the theory’s development in the era that AI has been a flourishing field if there is any study that has been conducted. I hope these ideas would help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruhanh (talk • contribs) 16:34, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Section 4 "Attachment styles in adults" citation & reference problems
Hi all,
I'm concerned about some of the citations (or lack thereof) in section 4, (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Attachment_theory#Attachment_styles_in_adults). There are several issues with the citations in this section:
1. There are uncited passages throughout the section that editorialize about the relationship between adult attachment styles and romantic relationships;
2. many citations for descriptions of cognitive & social phenomena do not reference peer-reviewed academic material, but popular and 'grey' literature (e.g. nos. 93 & 95, possibly 94); and
3. some citations are written in parenthetical format, not in standard hyperlinked footnotes.
To address these issues, I propose:
1. That uncited passages be immediately removed;
2. references to non-peer-reviewed accounts of cognitive & social psychological phenomena be removed, their respective sections revised, and these descriptions replaced with rigorous, scholarly accounts of these complex human behaviors; and
3. citations be standardized according to the (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Citing_sources).
Doing so will improve both the content of the section and its legibility; in turn, these revisions will help bring the article up to the (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Citing_sources). 173.230.164.4 (talk) 14:44, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Categories: