Talk:Arousal

I

I find the topic of "arousal" highly unsatisfying. In some sources "arousal system" seems to mean a certain body of projections from the brain stem. Other sources focus more on endocrine facets. It would be a great resource if this article better distinguished and clarified these vantage points. MaxEnt 23:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC) ewfsexually aroused

Outline to add to Arousal

Arousal and personality • Introvert-Extrovert Difference • Emotional Stability • Hans Eysenck Personality Theories 4 Types: choleric, melancholic, sanguine, phlegmatic • Personality Types: calm, avoider, risker, hedonist

Arousal and emotion • Schachter-Singer Two-factor Theory • James Lange Theory • Cannon-Bard Theory

Arousal and performance • Motivation and Performance: The Yerkes Dodson Law Difficulty and drive; shock level

Arousal and memory • Detection • Selective Attention • Retention • Retrieval

Arousal and preference • Levels of arousal • Approach-avoidance conflict • Individual differences based on personality type (Eysenck) • Wundt and Berlyne • Reversal Theory

Following "Abnormally increased behavioral arousal," add Problems with arousal • Anxiety • Depression

Links that we will include: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/arousal.html http://personality-project.org/revelle/syllabi/205/205.wk6.arousaltheories.pdf (slides) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/019188699290025K http://changingminds.org/explanations/preferences/arousal_types.htm (4 types; hedonists, etc)

We will also tag the existing Wikipedia articles for Personality, Emotion, Performance, Memory, Preference, Substance Abuse, Anxiety, and Depression. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bristudent (talk • contribs) 20:48, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

It will be very interesting to read all this. Just a small note: Sentence case rather than title case is used in Wikipedia article titles and section headings. "Arousal and personality" etc. Lova Falk talk 10:01, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

These are all great ideas. You are on the right track with this outline. You have listed several theories above. Make sure you give enough space for each theory in how it describes arousal and personality. It is okay if you can't cover all of the theories, and you can just link them to the related wikipedia article. Looking forward to your article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.167.52.7 (talk) 15:03, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Where's the science?

Here's the current outline of the article, based on the (numbered) section titles:

   1 Importance
   2 Personality
       2.1 Introversion and extraversion
       2.2 Emotional stability vs. introversion-extraversion
       2.3 The four personality types
   3 Emotion
       3.1 Cannon–Bard theory
       3.2 James–Lange theory
       3.3 Schachter–Singer two-factor theory
   4 Memory
   5 Preference
   6 Associated problems
   7 Abnormally increased behavioral arousal

Whilst every aspect mentioned is relevant to the topic, so is one that doesn't appear: experimental support for the many theories canvassed. An article on the science of psychology surely needs to provide some evidence to allow the reader to assess the competing claims of these theories. I also find it bizarre that the ancient theory of four personality types seems to get as much air-time as more recent theories that do have some experimental support. yoyo (talk) 10:25, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

The lede fails to do its job

Strangely, the lede describes the neurophysiology of arousal in detail, which surely belongs in another section of the article. The role of the lede is to introduce the topic to the reader, allowing him or her to decide quickly whether to continue reading. This lede fails to do that. yoyo (talk) 10:25, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Arousal page is conflating two different definitions

I am currently doing research on (sleep) arousal detection for a university.

From this page on arousal I get multiple different definitions of arousal. We already have a separate page for sexual arousal, should we have more?

As mentioned before, the lede is not good enough. The first sentence leads me to believe arousal is about being awoken (from sleep), yet it also tells me it is something else. Later in the page references to "being awoken" are neglected. There is not even a single mention of sleep in the text, whereas the first two citations explicitly mentions the relation between arousal and sleep.

Arousals in sleep are separate from the psychological/emotional/personality aspects of arousal. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1365-2869.2004.00388.x There should be a separate page devoted to this.

(edit:) As mentioned by yoyo above, the science for the personality/emotional aspects are lacking. I get the impression these sections are piggybacking on the sleep arousal science, which does have a clear scientific underpinning. In order to not mislead readers into thinking that the science on sleep arousal supports these other theories I believe we should separate this.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Oranguh (talk • contribs) 09:54, 4 March 2020 (UTC)