Talk:Daniel Kahneman

message: The link to "hedonic psychology" goes to "psychological egoism." This is misleading and incorrect. Someone probably mistakenly believed that the word "hedonic" in hedonic psychology refers to "hedonism" and thus to a psychology of selfish hedonism. Hedonic Psychology is actually a field of psychology that attempts to analyze and measure what brings people happiness/welfare, etc. and need not be related to egoist motives. It is basically an attempt to update utilitarian/economic ethics/welfare theory in light of modern empirical techniques, including various survey techniques. If I had the time and the expertise I would create a hedonic psychology page. But until someone creates such a page, or another more suitable page is found, this link should be removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.192.2.49 (talk • contribs) .
The above post does a good job defining hedonic psychology. Since, as pointed out, there is currently no wikipedia page for hedonic psychology, I have inserted a brief definition given by Kahneman, Diener and Schwarz. It may be overlong - I leave that for others to decide. I would be happy to move the entire definition to a hedonic psychology page, if one is ever created (I might, but no promises). If anyone else would be supportive of such a page, let me know, and then if I do create a page, I'll be sure to bother you to help justify the new page's creation.
Chicagoshim (talk) 20:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed that there is still no wikipedia page for hedonic psychology, and I would've liked to know more about it. I think a page about hedonic psychology would be great! I think this article does need a better explanation of what hedonic psychology is and why it was important to his research. Airplane Rat (talk) 23:25, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment from subpage

message: would it not make more sense to lead with the book name rather than the author. Given this is his page I'm fairly sure most will know he's written them. 86.13.105.123 (talk) 22:49, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Books section format 

message: — Assignment last updated by LFCochran (talk) 14:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Management

message: COI acknowledged in  by User:Mc8708  Isaidnoway (talk) 01:20, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  COI tag (March 2024) 

message: Hello dedicated Wikipedia editors, 
I am a new editor and was not aware of Wikipedia's COI clause when I first began implementing some new edits to Daniel Kahneman's page. I have since read and understood the protocol as an editor with a COI and will proceed accordingly. The edits I made before I was aware of all of this, however, have all been linked to external sources that verify their claims and do not impact the overall neutrality of the article. Would someone please review this and remove the BLP and COI tags? 
Thank you,
Mc8708 (talk) 17:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Removal of BLP and COI tags 

message: I would like it if someone could add something about him embracing the open science movement.  It was very import for us to have him as a voice.  Also -- it was important that he repudiated the part of Thinking, Fast and Slow that extolled behavioral priming, acknowledging the huge failures to replicate many of those studies.  (I could write that, we have a paper together, but not soon.) BobbieS78 (talk) 18:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, tricky to cite a paper that's not yet been published (COI notwithstanding)? Do you have any source(s) for Open Science? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:03, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Open Science movement 

message: We would need sources saying that he's contributed to these areas- if they're already in the article, could they also be added against the relevant links in that section? Joseph2302 (talk) 15:40, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: * I clicked through several of these and they all gave Kahneman as a relevant researcher with a source.  So, this would just be busywork and WP:REFCLUTTER.  If the OP wants this done, they should do it themself per .  They could start by listing any cases which don't name check Kahneman.  Are there any? Andrew🐉(talk) 22:00, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: *Tend to agree. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:03, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: But well done to Ktin for adding all those anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable contributions section 

message: I would like to create a new section titled ‘Partnership with Amos Tversky’ after ‘Academic Career’, and before ‘Personal Life’. I realise that Kahnemann’s work with Tversky is itemised in the ‘Academic Career’ section, but believe the collaboration/friendship is significant enough to warrant its own section. For example, Nature magazine records how “They became almost inseparable for a few fervent years”; and in an interview in The Atlantic, Michael Lewis, author of ‘The Undoing Project - A Friendship That Changed Our Minds’, writes about how their relationship led to their Nobel winning work. The book records how “they are the Lennon and McCartney of social science…the relationship between Kahneman and Tversky was as intense as a marriage.” A review in the The New Yorker, records Kahnemann saying, “I wanted something from him, not from the world” and, as the relationship became splintered, “I sort of divorced him.” 
In summary, I think the relationship with Tversky was so important to Kahnemann's life that it deserves its own section. 
Is the consensus that it is adequately covered in ‘Academic Career’, or is it worth drafting a new section? Spinifex&Sand (talk) 23:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaboration / Friendship with Tversky