Talk:PASS theory of intelligence

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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Cognitive science (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cognitive science, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Cognitive scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Cognitive scienceTemplate:WikiProject Cognitive scienceCognitive science

Unclear

I just read the article and the "description" is unclear. It refers to "3 systems" which are NOT subsequently mentioned and "4 processes" which are listed in an unclear way: "The 1st", "the 2nd", "X and Y"

Clarification would be much appreciated. Wikyvema (talk) 03:54, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality issues

This article cites as sources almost exclusively works by Das et al. who are the developers of the PASS theory. There's also a lot of puffery ("PASS theory is a further advance in this direction" etc.). The article should be rewritten based mainly on secondary sources that are independent of Das et al.--Victor Chmara (talk) 15:15, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As you note, Das et. al. are the developers of the PASS theory, this explains the abundance of references to this author. It is similar to other similar pages such as the Triarchic theory of intelligence which refer almost exclusively to the author of the theory. In addition, and as clearly stated in this article, PASS is one theory of intelligence. It does not promote PASS as a superior theory, but rather describes in great detail the PASS theory with a plethora of references from the primary authors. As for "puffery", I have edited the phrase cited above, but importantly note that writing style and word choice in this example is not related to neutrality. Other contributors are free to edit the writing as appropriate in this and other examples. However, this is not a reason to display a dispute warning on the page unless specific instances of non-neutrality are cited (for example: disputed parts of the PASS theory). As such, I have removed the warning pending further discussion V-man (talk) 15:17, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If the PASS theory is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia, then it should be easy to base the article on sources that are independent of the theory's originators. The fact that the Triarchic theory article also violates this guideline is not relevant. I added a more appropriate template at the start of the article. Wikipedia articles must not be based on primary sources.--Victor Chmara (talk) 14:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Intelligence citations bibliography for updating this and other articles

You may find it helpful while reading or editing articles to look at a bibliography of Intelligence Citations, posted for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human intelligence and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in these issues (and to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research. Several of the sources I have at hand mention the PASS theory of intelligence. You can help other Wikipedians by suggesting new sources through comments on that page. It will be extremely helpful for articles on human intelligence to edit them according to the Wikipedia standards for reliable sources for medicine-related articles, as it is important to get these issues as well verified as possible. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 01:51, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Journal of Intelligence — Open Access Journal

Journal of Intelligence — Open Access Journal is a new, open-access, "peer-reviewed scientific journal that publishes original empirical and theoretical articles, state-of-the-art articles and critical reviews, case studies, original short notes, commentaries" intended to be "an open access journal that moves forward the study of human intelligence: the basis and development of intelligence, its nature in terms of structure and processes, and its correlates and consequences, also including the measurement and modeling of intelligence." The content of the first issue is posted, and includes interesting review articles, one by Earl Hunt and Susanne M. Jaeggi and one by Wendy Johnson. The editorial board[1] of this new journal should be able to draw in a steady stream of good article submissions. It looks like the journal aims to continue to publish review articles of the kind that would meet Wikipedia guidelines for articles on medical topics, an appropriate source guideline to apply to Wikipedia articles about intelligence. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 21:13, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]