# Talk:Psychodrama

I think this article is very good. It has valuble information, furthering the knowledge of exactly what psychodrama is. The only thing I would add more of is in the uses of Psychodrama. I found what you already had really interesting, but I found myself wanting to learn much more. Maybe find a case involving psychodrama to show an example? I think an every day example would really make this article good. With more citations to follow.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bglynn1 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 22 November 2011 (UTC) 
Heh. So what the hell is up with the "disputed" tag on this?  'blinded by the left's hatred' is the explanation.  Okay... So. er... Hard to assume good faith here. -Leontes
I was wondering if anyone is up to add some more "meat" on this article, it seems rather shallow, with a lot more to explore. I just created an account here, and I'm not sure about editing, or even how to discuss. I was also wondering if the reference I provid must be in english? I've got quite a deal of information with lots of reference. Any information about the procedures would be great. - Dr. Jack
The claim that psychodrama is "the" source of role playing in buisness education contexts needs to be verified and cited. Sarane Boocock in Simulation Games in Learning, 1968 give a much more complex picture involving Spencer, Dewey, Mead, Piaget, and others.  Indead Viola Spolin's theatre games had existed for a decade before the buisness game craze hit, as had Monopoly.  Psychodrama is part of a much richer story here.  Bmorton3 17:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
I observed Moreno directing a couple of these around 1963 at a theatre on Manhattan's West Side.  Having a wife then who spent hours in psychotherapy, I was fascinated by the possibilities, because it explores, through action going forward as opposed to psychotherapy, which explores through inaction going backward, the problems people might have.  As such, it became part of a backlash against psychotherapy in the 60s, which could often involve unending years out of a patient's life.  The method invites the patient to "act out" in ways that are not possible in real life.  An example might be to expose anti-social desires and behaviors, and "see what happens".  Just as the protaganist raises the prop knife to plunge into the antagonist's chest, Moreno would yell for a role reversal, perhaps while changing the lighting from red to green. And so the subject gains insight, finding out more about hidden desires, opposing POVs, and the futility. Actors and audience volunteers entered the mix. This is a really useful exercise for actors, and it sure saves months of therapy for the subjects.  It's all about being able to "act out" in a safe way. Oh, I put this here, so I don't have to act out on a Wikirobot. JohnClarknew 04:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
This is a pretty lame article given the numbers pf new applications being produced each year. Its clearly one of those all or nothing pages that major authors need to get involved with. Psychodrama is a large body of practice and there are colleges all around the world teaching psychodrama to practitioners. It is mainly taught as post graduate training.  Peter Howie May 2011  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Howie (talk • contribs) 11:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC) 

A group of undergraduate theatre students is going to try our crack at improving this article a bit as part of a psychology course.  We do agree, as has been stated above, that there is a great deal more to say about this topic than is currently addressed in the article.  Constructive feedback and help, as well as suggestions regarding what is most pertinent to address or expand upon in terms of editing, would be gladly received.
Mhildebr--I wonder if the "History and Key Practioners" section you added would be better off being labeled "Moreno," as he is considered the real founder of this practice.  I feel like more time and space can be given to him in this article.  In that same vein, I'd love to see the discussion of Moreno expanded in terms of his philosophy, inspiration, and legacy.  Something immediate--I really don't understand the second sentence of that paragraph.  I considered trying to edit it for clarity, but could not figure out what you were trying to say.  Can you take another look at it? Raybird618 (talk) 06:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
I agree with above comments, this article is very bare and it would be beneficial to add more meat to this article to make it more substantial.  In doing this, the article becomes more reliable to readers.  I believe it would also be beneficial to add specific examples of psychodrama, not just generalize the examples of theatre and businesses.  Perhaps go into specific examples of theatre, such as a famous play? Just something to consider.  In doing this the readers have a better understanding and can apply it to situations themselves.  Other than that, this article is very good.  I find the 3rd paragraph under "Psychological Issues" to be very beneficial because it explains the definition of psychodrama in a different way.  This is good because if the readers do not understand the definition in the beginning, this one is simpler to understand. Mcarey15 (talk) 18:38, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

There is a good start on what psychodrama is and its history. I feel that there could be more on the uses of psychodrama and some examples. Karla.Koppendrayer (talk) 01:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)Karla.Koppendrayer

I think this is a good article but I think it needs more sources or related texts to help support it. Its got some but I think it needs more to explain better the article. Maybe try digging up some more evidence and support and adding more text to it so people know what exactly it is your talking about.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.69.226.19 (talk) 15:27, 9 November 2011 (UTC) 

In the the third paragraph of Psychological Uses, I would put in a few in-text citations to absolutely make clear where those quoted definitions came from. Otherwise, I found it interesting. Bluecat4 (talk) 23:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

In the first sentence of the beginning paragraph I think it would be important to explain what sorts of actions should be completed through psychodrama. Also in paragraph one, "unrehearsed expressions of mental states in the hear and now," confused me. Hear and now is a bit redundant, and doesn't enhance understanding. The last sentence of this paragraph doesn't need "in the group" at the end, because that too is redundant.
Paragraph two needs to give credentials to Moreno, to show the reader why he is a credible source. Does the sentence about the audience refer to other group members, or is there and audience that observes through the psychodrama process? Also is the sentence about the "wild universe" truly necessary?
The second sentence of the third paragraph runs on far too long, without reaching a clear explanation of the importance and relationship of creativity to spontaneity. I feel that it would be important to add what certifications a psychodrama director needs.
Psychological issue uses-

The first sentence is not needed be because it is stated in the beginning. The part that talks about the protagonist analyzing relationships should define what relationships this includes.
The second paragraph might benefit by explaining what sorts of situations become more spontaneous.
A link should be provided for "group psychotherapy," and there should also be an explanation given on why group psychotherapy is such a disservice. Also why is it widely used in business and industry, and how does it train interrelationship skills.
History-

watch out for using which too often, because it detracts from the comprehension of the article. Also please explain how Reich and Freud have contributed to this topic. Finally the part where it talks about Moreno beginning to work with kids then moving to large groups. Does this mean large groups of adults?
Other-

I think this article could benefit from a research section, showing how effective psychodrama is, and past and current studies on this topic.
Other than that with a few edits, this article is on its way to being great. Xadmanx (talk) 05:34, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Psychodrama/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) 15:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
I will review. My initinalt thoughts:

There are entire paragraphs without inline citations. Make sure the article is organized properly so that paragraphs contain distinct ideas and that each fact in the article is cited inline. Once you have done this there will be no paragraphs without inline citations.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  15:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Make sure that you are linking the first use of each term.  E.g., protagonist is not linked until the third time it is used.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  15:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Also, fix the broken dablink to the right.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  15:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
WP:LEAD
The LEAD is devoid of bluelinks to a lot of key terms like group therapy, protagonist. Many of these links appear later, but they should appear here.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  22:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
There should be no space between punctuation and the citation.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  22:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Methods
It seems like the first paragraph in this section is introductory. If it is going to introduce the various techniques, it should introduce the various session stages.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  22:25, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
"The session is broken. . ." should begin a new paragraph.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  22:25, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Psychological Applications
I don't know what clinical means so we need links for clinical and non-clinical.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  22:37, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
link to the proper type of Trauma.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  22:37, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Literary uses
Expand or merge this section.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  22:58, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
I am placing this on hold.  The issues should be fairly easy to address. I will reconsider the issues raised within a week to evaluate progress.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  23:01, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for addressing all the concerns above.  I seem to have overlooked the references on my first review.  You should add a bibliography section that includes isbn and publisher for texts that you use repeatedly. Then in the footnotes just put last name, p. ##. or pp.##–##.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  21:28, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
I have been waiting patiently for the final concerns to be addressed. There has been no response here for 2 weeks. If there is no response here by the end of the year, I will fail consider failing this.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  23:58, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I apologize. The concerns were largely addressed without any indication here.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  00:01, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey this page is looking pretty good and there is just one thing that I have noticed that doesn't look like it has been addressed yet and that is that you have multiple repeated references. References are able to be named once and used in text multiple times. Feel free to ask me any questions if you want help. Fredodin (talk) 03:35, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
I am satisfied with this article and am PASSING it now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  00:01, 28 December 2011 (UTC)