Talk:Jean Twenge

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jean Twenge article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on September 10 2008. The result of the discussion was Non-Admin Close.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women scientists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women scientists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women scientistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women scientistsTemplate:WikiProject Women scientistsWomen scientists articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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): Ashleymarie073, Unlikelypolicebeard, Tvenkateswaran2018, Cameronbassir, Delfri, Petemancilla.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Critique deletion?

An almost-single author user keeps wanting to delete a short critique of Twenge's work. THe critique first appeared in The Atlantic. It quite properly questioned the validity and reliability of Twenge's statements. The deleting User thinks this is too harsh and too vague. By contrast, I think it is a gentle critique that avoids WP:UNDUE but does link interested WP readers to the critiquing article itself. Otherwise, the article reads like WP:PEACOCK. Hence, I have reverted the deletion. Bellagio99 (talk) 20:46, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Psychology is not a science, folks, nor is steretyping generations. At best, latter falls in the domain of marketing, which is also not a science. 192.0.173.10 (talk) 07:27, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Critique deletion

Arnett's published criticism contained numerous falsehoods, as detailed in this article: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2167696812468112 This response of Twenge's could be included, but it seems easier just to delete the vague and non-specific quote with the criticism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bethmanning (talk • contribs) 21:18, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will defer to this article for now, but curious as to what readers of Prof. Twenge's work--and WP page think. PS: May I remind you to sign your Talk comments with 4 tildes. Bellagio99 (talk) 21:46, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see both the critique and Twenge's response to the critique. Not knowing the critique at all is very different from knowing that the debate exists and that Twenge has a good response to the critique (Bethmanning has argued that Twenge's response is good). Spidana (talk) 15:23, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I think adding a section on critiques with Twenge's responses are necessary considering how controversial some of her conclusions are. My classmates and I will try and add a section about this. We would also like to add a section summarizing her book iGen in particular. Tvenkateswaran2018 (talk) 14:43, 4 April 2018 (UTC)Tvenkateswaran2018[reply]

- In the introduction paragraph, there are a few sentences about her criticisms. Would it make more sense to put that in its own section with additional criticisms and responses? Tvenkateswaran2018 (talk) 14:59, 13 April 2018 (UTC)Tvenkateswaran2018[reply]

I agree, there should be a separate section for her criticisms from various sources, particularly iGen. --Delfri (talk) 17:18, 16 April 2018 (UTC)delfri[reply]

iGen Summary for Consideration

In IGen: Why Today's Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy--and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood--and What That Means for the Rest of Us, Jean Twenge examins the advantages, disadvantages, and consequences of technology in the lives of the current generation of teens/young adults generally known as "Generation Z" who she aptly names, iGen. Twenge claimes that "iGeners" are born in the mid-1990s to the mid-2000s and later. iGen is the first generation to spend their entire adolescence in the age of the smartphone.

Twenge's evaluations are based on four databases: Monitoring the Future, The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, The American Freshman Survey, and the General Social Survey. Each of these surveys asked students quantitative and qualitative questions to determine how being raised synergistically with technology has made them less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy, less resilient to the challenge of adulthood, as Twenge asserts. In addition to the databases, Twenge conducted interviews with young adults across the country to collect first-hand data about the challenges growing up with technology being presented to the current generation of teens and young adults.

^[1] Tvenkateswaran2018 (talk) 04:29, 9 April 2018 (UTC)Tvenkateswaran2018[reply]

Small grammatical errors in the original summary were made and more content was added to the body. --Petemancilla (talk) 04:48, 9 April 2018 (UTC)Petemancilla[reply]

New Summary for Consideration:

In IGen: Why Today's Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy--and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood--and What That Means for the Rest of Us, Jean Twenge examines the advantages, disadvantages, and consequences of technology in the lives of the current generation of teens/young adults generally known as "Generation Z" who she aptly names, iGen. Twenge claims that "iGeners" are born in the mid-1990s to the mid-2000s and later. iGen is the first generation to spend their entire adolescence in the age of the smartphone. Twenge's evaluations are based on four databases: Monitoring the Future, The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, The American Freshman Survey, and the General Social Survey. Each of these surveys asked students quantitative and qualitative questions to determine how being raised synergistically with technology has made them less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy, and less resilient to the challenge of adulthood, as Twenge asserts. In addition to the databases, Twenge conducted interviews with young adults across the country to collect first-hand data about the challenges growing up with technology being presented to the current generation of teens and young adults. Generational divides are said to be more prominent than ever and parents, educators, and employers have a strong desire to understand the newer generation. Social media and texting have replaced many typical activities that older generations grew up with, therefore, iGeners are spending less time interacting in person. That alone is said to lead them to experience high levels of anxiety, depression, and loneliness than seen in prior generations. Technology, however, isn’t the only thing that distinguishes iGeners from generations prior—the way in which their time is spent says a lot. Their behaviors and attitudes toward religion, sexuality, and even politics has changed. Twenge covers said topics in different chapters of the book. Not to mention their socialization skills and wants for the future have taken a turn towards an atypical yet safe route. “iGen is also growing up more slowly than previous generations: eighteen-year-olds look and act like fifteen-year-olds used to.” Twenge says that iGeners’ growth into adulthood requires the understanding of them in order to keep up with their new developmental ways because their impact on the future will be like no other. --Petemancilla (talk) 02:27, 23 April 2018 (UTC)Petemancilla[reply]

I made some edits and tweaks that I believe will improve the summary as a whole.

In IGen: Why Today's Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy--and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood--and What That Means for the Rest of Us, Jean Twenge examines the advantages, disadvantages, and consequences of technology in the lives of the current generation of teens/young adults generally known as "Generation Z" who she aptly names, iGen. Twenge claims that "iGeners" are born in the mid-1990s to the mid-2000s and later. iGen is the first generation to spend their entire adolescence in the age of the smartphone.

Generational divides are said to be more prominent than ever and parents, educators, and employers have a strong desire to understand the newer generation. Social media and texting have replaced many typical activities that older generations grew up with, therefore, iGeners are spending less time interacting in person. That alone is said to lead them to experience higher levels of anxiety, depression, and loneliness than seen in prior generations.

Technology, however, isn’t the only thing that distinguishes iGeners from generations prior—the way in which their time is spent contributes to changes in their behaviors and attitudes toward religion, sexuality, and politics. Twenge argues that iGeners’ socialization skills and wants for the future have taken a turn towards an atypical, yet safe route. She elaborates on these topics throughout different chapters of the book.Each of these changes factors into her overall argument: that iGeners’ are unlike any generation seen before, and earlier generations must learn to understand them in order to keep up. With their new developmental ways, their impact will be unlike any before them.

Twenge's evaluations are based on four databases: Monitoring the Future, The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, The American Freshman Survey, and the General Social Survey. Each of these surveys asked students quantitative and qualitative questions to determine how being raised synergistically with technology has made them less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy, and less resilient to the challenge of adulthood, as Twenge asserts. In addition to the databases, Twenge conducted interviews with young adults across the country to collect first-hand data about the challenges growing up with technology being presented to the current generation of teens and young adults.

Delfri (talk) 04:13, 23 April 2018 (UTC)Delfri[reply]

References

^ 978-1-5011-5198-9

image consideration

I would like to add an image of Jean Twenge and her book (iGen). Cameronbassir (talk) 17:09, 9 April 2018 (UTC)Cameronbassir[reply]

List of Books

I'd like to add a list of Jean Twenge's books. The introduction mentions her books but I think putting a formal list is a good idea. Here's what the list will look like:

The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement (2010) ISBN 1416575993

Generation Me: Why Today's Young Americans are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled - and More Miserable Than Ever Before (2014) ISBN 978-1476755564

Tvenkateswaran2018 (talk) 15:38, 16 April 2018 (UTC)Tvenkateswaran2018[reply]

I might add that it could be useful to add a list of the chapters in her book (iGen). Readers may be able to grasp a better understanding of the layout and what they could read about. --Petemancilla (talk) 02:25, 23 April 2018 (UTC)Petemancilla[reply]

[1] 978-1-5011-5198-9

[1]