Talk:Psychology of sexual monogamy

Released June 31, 2006

Under 'Other Reasons', the list of top 7 reasons couples stay together 15+ years only includes 6 reasons. 72.187.101.100 (talk) 04:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citations need in intro

There are quite a few normative/subjective ideas presented in the introduction (e.g. "Psychologists tend to be more interested in sexual non-monogamy, especially the causes and consequences of sexual infidelity.") that need citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChelseaH (talk • contribs) 01:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the language in the intro section dates back to the initial creation of this page in 2006. Section in question seems to be original research. Was tagged with citation needed for the better part of a half dozen years. Removing unsourced claim. --Kuzetsa (talk) 10:38, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Previous user's edits were highly biased in favor of monogamy. Wikipedia isn't a platform to argue your POV issues. The edits were removal of content to provide specific bias and hide related information (relevant links to other articles) that goes against the editor's POV. Corwinoid (talk) 20:00, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Change the name of the article to "Psychology of social monogamy"

Sexual monogamy and social monogamy are two very different subject, and the article is talking about Social monogamy, not sexual monogamy. You can check out the "monogamy" page on wikipedia to verify my claims — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.12.110.202 (talk) 15:49, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~Monogamy~ // does not // makes lasting changes to set points of satisfaction.

This talk page section is to address issues with some of the citations and claims in the article, mainly a sentence found in the 2nd paragraph of the "Normal rebound" section of this article. Marriage is not the same thing as monogamy. There's no way to define marriage as being the same thing as monogamy without going down the WP:SYNTH rabbit hole, to use a metaphor. Citations and discussion of marriage, and data about married people is not the same thing as discussion and data about monogamy:

Recent studies have suggested that set points of satisfaction may be easier to change than psychologists originally theorized,[9] although it remains unclear whether or not marriage makes lasting changes to set points of satisfaction.[10][11]

^ [9] is the "Fujita,Diener,2005" paper / article, did not address correlations between monogamy and LS (life satisfaction). "Fujita,Diener,2005" only mentioned another study which showed LS can change for better or worse with marriage, but that it variance from person to person:

Although Lucas et al. did not find that on average marriage permanently increased LS, they did find that this was true for some individuals. Some respondents increased their set point after marriage, even though they adapted to the event over time to some degree, whereas other people decreased in their long-term LS after marriage.

Marriage. It's not specifically related to monogamy. "Fujita,Diener,2005" didn't even mention monogamy once. The title of this wikipedia article is not psychology of marriage. On the basis of WP:SYNTH it's inappropriate to cite sources which mention nothing about monogamy, and barely even mention marriage. Similar issue with: "it remains unclear whether or not marriage makes lasting changes to set points of satisfaction" which is supported by the citation [11] "Lucas,Clark,2005" as in the abstract:

Although cross-sectional studies have shown a reliable association between marital status and subjective well-being, a recent longitudinal study (Lucas, Clark, Georgellis, & Diener, 2003) found no support for the idea that happiness increases after marriage. Instead, participants who got married reported short-term increases followed by complete adaptation back to baseline levels of well-being. However, researchers have criticized this study on two grounds. First, these results contradict cohort-based analyses from a nationally representative sample. Second, these analyses do not control for pre-marriage cohabitation, which could potentially inflate baseline levels of well-being. The original data (plus four additional waves) are reanalyzed to address these concerns. Results confirm that individuals do not get a lasting boost in life satisfaction following marriage.

Marriage is not monogamy, and it's original research / synthesis of published material to assert otherwise. --Kuzetsa (talk) 00:27, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Marriage is not the same thing as monogamy.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There are several dozen mentions of marriage on this article. Very few citations or sources are actually talking about the subject matter of the article: Psychology of sexual monogamy --Kuzetsa (talk) 00:34, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I'm not clear on what the actual question is here. (RfC's usually ask the participants to support or oppose something, or to select one from a limited number of specified choices.)
Richard27182 (talk) 04:56, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply. I wasn't intending to ask for, or suggest any specific action & was requesting commentary / insight only. I have a personal bias on this subject (monogamy is unimportant to my world-view, and I don't understand the basis of this article from the same standpoint as a monogamously-inclined "default attitudes" person might feel about this topic) and didn't want to be the first editor to suggest deletion, etc. The RfC has been up for long enough to get a few comments. Thank you. --Kuzetsa (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Summoned by bot. I too am a bit confused on what your RfC is regarding. Can you draft a new RfC statement or we can close it and start a discussion on what content you feel should be removed from the page? Meatsgains (talk) 17:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Article looks extremely problematic. It's questionable such a field of psychology exists in the first place. Its content is rather unfocused and widely tangential. It needs major reworking if not deleted. Mootros (talk) 06:39, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merger I have reviewed the subject and the article in detail. I now propose to merge this article with Monogamy. There is no established subject called: "Psychology of monogamy" or "Psychology of sexual monogamy". The article is a fantasy that seem to legitimize the creation of article on a topic that doesn't exist, by adding scientific content that has neither no relation to the subject or tangentially touches it. Mootros (talk) 04:00, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Psychology of monogamous marriage

Renaming this article might go a long way to fix several issues. Most of the claims (which are even supported by citations) are supported by studies and papers related to marriage. It's unclear to me if any of the studies explicitly use monogamy as a basis for the conclusions, or just use "marriage" as the primary eligibility criteria for the participants of the studies. --Kuzetsa (talk) 16:37, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]