Talk:Recency principle

This article was nominated for deletion on 16 March 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 13:55, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a real recency principle in psychology. I'm not convinced if all this police stuff is really very useful though. -- Mithent 03:31, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it is recent, and does relate to WP:Recentism. I was not able to find an article which discussed this. If there is a prior article with this discussed, please make it known. --Kevin L'Huillier 04:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Content is off-topic

The linked information at Robert Shuy's "Language Log" entry is referring to the application of a "recency principle" in a criminology aspect. This Wikipedia page misrepresents that linked information saying that it is used for self-incrimination, when really Shuy was describing how it misleads the jury. Additionally, Shuy is in turn misrepresenting any form of the recency effect/principle; it seems like he is actually talking some type of error in source memory.

The article should be scrapped and rewritten to include information on the actual recency principle, which was described by Edwin Ray Guthrie as part of his contiguity theory and is based on John B. Watson's law of recency. Here is a link with some relevant information: http://www.southalabama.edu/oll/mobile/theory_workbook/contiguity_theory.htm

I added this article to my to-do list, but it's not high on my priorities if someone else wants to get crackin' on it! If you do, you ought to write up the Primacy principle as well (also a Watson idea).

For now I am removing the link to the serial position effect as it is the recency effect and not principle which is referred to in the serial position effect. These are two separate ideas with completely different contexts.

Best, Adam Blake (talk) 00:52, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]