User:Jlp504/sandbox

Article Topic: Fixed Action Pattern

The article that I have selected to edit is fixed action pattern. This article has a start class rating on Wikipedia, thus it requires some work. First I will expand on the six characteristics of fixed action patterns, as the article merely lists them. I will also expand on the topics of "sign stimulus" and "releaser", as the article does not go into much detail. I will add two sections to this article. These sections include: supernormal stimulus and exceptions to fixed action pattern rules. The purpose of adding these sections is to provide readers with a more in-depth understanding of fixed action patterns. Lastly, I will add the example of the herring gull to the list of examples of animals who demonstrate fixed action patterns

Article Evaluation

The following will be a breakdown of the evaluation of the classical conditioning article on Wikipedia.

Introduction

I have selected to evaluate the Wikipedia article on classical conditioning. The article aligns with what we've discussed in class, as we just touched on the basics of classical conditioning. This Wikipedia article was generally well written. According to the Pageviews Analysis feature on Wikipedia, the daily average number of views of the page is 1,933. This means that the page is essentially being evaluated for the quality of its content each day by 1,933 users. The higher the number of users that visit the site, the higher the likelihood of mistakes, factual errors, author's bias, historical inconsistencies, etc. being detected and rectified. This in turn increases the quality and reliability of the page.

Breakdown of Evaluation

Relevancy of Information

The majority of the information provided in the classical conditioning article was relevant to the topic. The article started off broad with the definition of classical conditioning and a brief history of its origin. As the article progressed, it became more in-depth, but provided information only relevant to the understanding of classical conditioning. In addition, all information included in the article was up-to-date. This can be attributed to the page watchers who are constantly updating and revising the article.

Article Neutrality

Scientific writing demands neutrality from the author. This is done by presenting the facts objectively without the author conveying their own opinion on the subject. The Wikipedia article on classical conditioning remains neutral by presenting the facts without the opinion of the author. The article has a number of contributors, but their opinion on the subject remains undetected throughout the entire article. At no point in the article does the viewer feel persuaded to take on a particular position due to author bias. Wikipedia page watchers do an excellent job keeping biases out of their articles.

Article Citations

I selected several links in the reference list to see if a) the link worked, and b) if the link supported the claims made in the article. Each link that I tried both worked and supported the claims made in the article. One of the links was to a website that provides definitions relating to psychology. The page itself had be reviewed by a board-certified physician and moreover, included two academic articles from reputable journals as being the source for the information contained on the webpage. Considering the fact that the source of the information on this webpage was retrieved from academic articles, it can be inferred that the information is both reliable and unbiased. The article is properly cited for the most part. However, there are several sections under the heading "Terminology" that could be more cited. The paragraphs under the headings "Delay conditioning", "Trace conditioning", and "Simultaneous conditioning" do not contain a single source. There is no way for the user to tell whether the information that they are reading under the aforementioned headings came from a reliable source. Referencing in this article is something that can definitely be improved.

The Talk Page

The talk page discusses ideas such as clarifying sentences and paragraphs, such as those in the introduction, to make them more user friendly (i.e., easier to comprehend). Other discussions include the writing quality of the information under the heading "Theories of Classical Conditioning". The writers discuss how the section is misleading and badly written. They then go on to rectify the issue by rewriting the section. It can be inferred from the conversations in the talk page that the individuals who contribute to the writing of the page want to present the information in a clear and concise manner that is both scientific and user friendly.

Article Rating

The article on classical conditioning has been given a Start Class rating. This means that the article is incomplete and the citations used may not be reliable. . The article satisfies fundamental content policies, but still requires work.

WikiProjects

The article is the subject of an educational assignment at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo supported by WikiProject Honors Psychology and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q1 term . The article is also of interest to the WikiProjects Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychology and Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Science and education in Russia task force.