| Display title | Hollywood Psych |
| Default sort key | Hollywood Psych |
| Page length (in bytes) | 44,061 |
| Namespace ID | 0 |
| Page ID | 7852 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 1 |
| Counted as a content page | Yes |
| Number of subpages of this page | 1 (0 redirects; 1 non-redirect) |
| Edit | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Move | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Delete | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Page creator | prefix>Import Bot |
| Date of page creation | 21:27, 1 November 2013 |
| Latest editor | Robkelk (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 21:19, 14 April 2022 |
| Total number of edits | 19 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 180 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
| Transcluded templates (5) | Templates used on this page:
|
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | Research is hard. While this is generally true of all science, psychology in particular is vulnerable, as it's a very, very new field still under heavy development. Only recently has psychology emerged as a mature science with robust theories, and supposed "facts" of the past are still in popular culture despite being debunked. Writers fail to recognize this, and the supposed professionals in their stories will quote woefully out-of-date representations of Sigmund Freud's theory of the unconscious, Carl Jung's collective unconscious archetypes, or Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs. This is the equivalent of a modern physicist discussing luminiferous aether, or a biologist believing Lamarck Was Right. |