Talk:Imagination inflation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 9 June 2012 by reviewer Matthew Proctor (talk · contribs).

Psychology Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 February 2020 and 2 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ritapsych250. Peer reviewers: Angelinafrances92118.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review of 'Imagination Inflation'[edit]

I thought that the introduction includes some good clear and concise sentences, which pave the way well into the topic of imagination inflation. Links need to be added in the later paragrpahs, which could also be a bit longer, although it is possible that this article isn't finished yet. A way to lengthen the article by providing more information could be to elaborate on some of the studies that have been done, such as is briefly mentioned the study of eg 'breaking a toothpick'. More detail could be given about this study as it would also serve to give exact examples of what imagination inflation entails (there's nothing like a good example to aide understanding).The sentence '...have happened, or not' before 'breaking a toothpick' would make more sense just to say that imagination inflation is found for events that have not occurred. Some of the stranger examples such as 'shaving a peach' from the study would be relevant to add to this point. Some of the sentences (under Early Reserach) need tidying up, there are a few grammatical errors such as 'explains' instead of 'explain' (under Implications), and 'imagines' instead of 'imagining' (under Early Research). Also one sentence starts 'in another interrogation technique' but the word 'another' is confusing because there isn't a prior technique mentioned (at least not immediatley prior that I can see). I thought that including a paragraph on criticisms is great, as it serves for a well-balanced article that is charitable to its opposition. Overall, some really good points have been written well (such as the second paragraph in the intro that imagination inflation may occur via increased familiarity, for example)and although it probably needs a little more work I think it's a good contribution to the information that is out there on the topic of imagination inflation. Johunter (talk) 14.18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Additional research[edit]

I think that this article could benefit from additional research, especially in the related fields of study mentioned in the introduction. The section on implications, for example, could be expanded. There are more implications of imagination inflation other than the effects on criminal justice. Recent research could also be added. Ritapsych250 (talk) 00:59, 17 April 2020 (UTC) Ritapsych250[reply]

I also propose cleaning up the sections and section headers to follow along with the article's lead section. Early and further research could be combined (and if the section is too long or confusing, subheadings could be added) Ritapsych250 (talk) 16:31, 18 April 2020 (UTC) ritapsych250[reply]

I really liked the edits that you made! Adding the different causes of imagination inflation was an awesome idea! I also like how you added more information about the initial research study. One thing that I might add is more information about the different possible causes. Are there any studies that you could cite to provide more backup to the different arguments?Katie24569 (talk) 17:02, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I really like that you edited the sections and flow to make the article more readable! I agree that more concise headings, with subheadings as needed, is the most effective here. I also like that you added more details about one of the studies to give readers more background and to solidify the claims explained a little bit more. I wonder if you could also expand a little bit on the first line (the definition of imagination inflation) with an example maybe so that the concept is absolutely clear to the reader, even if they've never heard of it before. Ak509ak509 (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't be more impressed with how you reorganized the entire page! You broke the article down into much more intuitive chunks that will definitely make the information easier for the audience to digest. My only idea for you (and I know it could be considered nit picky but) would be to try to avoid using the term in your definition for it. Perhaps instead of saying "imagining" you could say "visualizing", for example. All in all, great work! Angelinafrances92118 (talk) 02:04, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment[edit]

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Victoria University of Wellington supported by WikiProject Psychology and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q1 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:56, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]