Talk:Personality and Individual Differences

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia'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.

Academic Journals

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals 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.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Resource Exchange

If you have access to this resource, or if you need to verify a citation from this reference, check out WikiProject Resource Exchange.Resource ExchangeWikipedia:WikiProject Resource ExchangeTemplate:WikiProject Resource ExchangeResource Exchange

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

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.

Merger

I oppose merging this article with International Society for the Study of Individual Differences. As a journal, it is a separate independent entry, and journals have (or should have) their own web pages on Wikipedia.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcbutler (talk • contribs) 19:02, 10 March 2008

I support if they can't be expanded much beyond current length. This is probably not the case though... we need to establish notability and sources first I think. Richard001 (talk) 03:14, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bizarre racism

I'm not sure how to do write this in wikipedia style, but this journal includes some wildly racist articles which have frequently been attacked and discredited, including lurid and bizarre meditations on "theory that Mongoloids are the most K evolved, Caucasoids somewhat less K evolved, and Negroids the least K evolved is examined and extended in an analysis of data for erect penis length". Reading this article, I have no sense of the race science background of this journal and its editors, nor does the listing of its paper citing metrics give me any idea about how it is dealt with in the broader academic environment. Infocidal (talk) 19:55, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This journal is the most cited source for this theory's article: Differential K theory. From what I have seen, few reliable sources have bothered to even give this theory the time of day, but there are some good sources explaining its many flaws. (If anyone knows of any more, please let me know or post on that article's talk page.) I would like to find reliable sources about this specific issue also. To give another, related example, this journal published a paper by Richard Lynn supporting J. Philiipe Rushton's infamous and discredited theories on race and penis size in 2013, long after it had been debunked, and mocked, by countless better qualified academics for years.[1][2][3][4][5][6][etc.]

We would need a reliable, independent source to include this in the article, however. Grayfell (talk) 04:34, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]