Talk:Body image (neuroscience)

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Neuroscience Low‑importance

	This article 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.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Body image (medicine) and body image articles: tenuous dichotomization of a continuum?

As of this writing, the article asserts an idea that body image (medicine) is a "separate topic" from body schema, as two things "not to be confused"—but I suspect that this is at best a dichotomization of a continuum, and that it is probably even a tenuous dichotomization, at that. At best one might say that one can lie further along the psychiatric portion of a neuropsychiatric spectrum, whereas the other lies further along the neurological portion. But whereas a differentiation like the one just mentioned makes sense (that is, isn't tenuous) for discussing some substantial difference between body image in an eating disorder and body image (medicine) in perceptual and proprioceptive dysfunction, I am not convinced that it makes sense for asserting any alleged substantial difference between body image (medicine) and body schema. And in fact I was just this evening reading a book by a neurologist who mentioned "body image or body schema" in a way treating them as synonymous or at least overlapping. I am no expert on these topics, and I doubt that any such (real) expert anytime soon will even show up here to weigh in on it. Unless or until that happens, my suggestion to any reader of Wikipedia who may read this talk thread is to be suspicious of Wikipedia's current assertion that they are "separate topics". — ¾-10 02:23, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking about it more, I suspect that only on degree of discretization makes sense—a dichotomization between the higher-level psychiatric senses of the terms and the lower-level neurological senses. I suspect that trying to split them into 3 articles, not 2, as currently done, is a tenuous way to discretize them. — ¾-10 02:28, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After writing the above, I was halfway placated by reading Body schema#Confusion with body image—"Historically, body schema and body image were generally lumped together, used interchangeably, or ill-defined ... Efforts have been made to distinguish the two and define them in clear and differentiable ways." OK, so I am satisfied, in keeping with that explanation in that section, that one can differentiate two things—a dichotomization between the higher-level psychiatric senses of the terms and the lower-level neurological senses. And one should call them body image and body schema, respectively. I still maintain, though, that trying to have this article, body image (medicine), be a separate article from body image is a misapprehension that does not stand up to analysis. So like I said, 2 articles, not 3, would be what makes sense. — ¾-10 02:45, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Writing 10 Dean

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 August 2022 and 16 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yiyirt (article contribs).