Template talk:Neuropsychology sidebar

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Neuroscience This template is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience 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. Psychology This template 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.

Fine work

This template is quite an eye opener. Is neuropsychology as controversial as apartheid? Gregorydavid 01:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite Suidafrikaan 06:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose some experts disagree. Anyway, if you have Brain Injury, should we not have Brain tumor too? Cheers, Gregorydavid 06:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point you're raising. The brain injury article actually refers to TBI which means injuries as a result of external causes. Tumors (along with diseases and illnesses such as meningitis) form part of a category called non-traumatic BI. It does not look like there is a NTBI article which would include reference to tumors, etc). I have replaced the link to brain injury with one to the brain damage article which is at a more appropriate level of abstraction. Suidafrikaan 07:36, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Being diagnosed with a brain tumor must be one of the most traumatic and stressful things one could experience. Gregorydavid 08:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trauma in this context refers to an injury (generally to the head or spine) with an external cause i.e. originating outside of the body, such as a bump to the head. It is therefore conceptually unrelated to "an extremely negative emotional response". But yes, assuming one is conscious of or aware of trauma to the head or spine and the injury is severe, it is likely to be quite emotionally traumatic. So, brain damage can arise as a result of congenital, traumatic (external), non-traumatic (internal) and degenerative factors. I'm not sure that these distinctions are well set out in the brain damage article. In addition, damage can be primary (occurs immediately) or secondary (occurs later), permanent or temporary, disabling or non-disabling.--Suidafrikaan 09:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pain

What about Pain and nociception, how does that fit in the scheme of things?Gregorydavid 09:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pain, which may or may not originate in pathology of the central nervous system, is generally addressed by the discipline of Behavioral Medicine a peer of neuropsychology.

Language

I have changed the link labeled language to point to natural language, which is about language in humans. Language itself is a much more general phenomenon, and that is what the article language needs to be about. —Tox 23:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Libet as well?

Shouldn't Benjamin Libet be included in this template as well? His work was highlighted once again at the recent Tucson Science of Consciousness Conference in plenary session 2. He received the "Virtual Nobel Prize in Psychology" in 2003. --EPadmirateur (talk) 04:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive length

This template's size impedes readability on several articles, and creates issues with WP:ACCESSBILITY and WP:LAYOUT. Short vertical templates usually work fine, but because of its extreme length, this template would be much better applied if it were converted to a horizontal, rather than vertical template, so it can be correctly placed at the bottom of articles per WP:LAYOUT. As it is now, it creates huge amounts of white space when correctly placed as a vertical template, per WP:ACCESSIBILITY. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:36, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree: a horizontal banner-type layout at the bottom of the articles would be much better, for the reasons you give: go for it! --EPadmirateur (talk) 00:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've created Template:Footer Neuropsychology from this template and tried it out on Benjamin Libet. Any comments? --EPadmirateur (talk) 02:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great. Who has to approve it before it gets rolled out as a replacement? Tomythius (talk) 13:53, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missing person?

Any thoughts on including Clive Wearing?  _{Guy M | Talk}  14:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adding “Consciousness after death” to the topics

What happens to consciousness after dead is, imo, a very important topic. Considering that even phrenology made it to the list, I don't think any harm would be done by adding this topic. I'm waiting to see if any objections will be made. However, I see that this talk page hasn't been active for almost three years, so I don't expect much out of posting here. If no objections will have been made by tomorrow, I'll do as suggested. Everything Is Numbers (talk) 09:35, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removals and Additions

I removed some of the less related topics and replaced them with some that are more relevant to neuropsychology in general. Most had neuropsychological aspects to them, but weren't really major areas of neuropsychology befitting a neuropsychology template. I also removed some of the tests that clearly weren't neuropsychological tests and replaced them with some of the more well known neuropsych tests. MitchMcM (talk) 03:27, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]