Talk:Social loafing

message: I agree that social loafing occurs less when tasks are more meaningful, but this is relative. I feel like the section describing rewards and decreases in social loafing should be edited to be more concrete. Doing group work with high anonymity often leads to social loafing until the reward far exceeds the ability to depend on someone else's contribution.
Just an idea.DB--Buttonda (talk) 19:42, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Causes 

message: I haven't the time to review this article for GA, but I've put a call out to Wikiproject Psychology for reviewers. I can offer some suggestions, though, that will make the GA process a bit easier.
* My first impressions: reliable sourcing, no apparent point-of-view pushing, a stable article with largely the right tone: the core qualities are good.
* for such a large article, the lead is quote short. Summarise more of the article in the lead and get the reader more excited about reading the full article. See WP:LEAD.
* Motivation strategies and Coordination strategies are two lists that appear at the end of the article. They are tantalising and suggest they need more explanation. They need to be worked into the narrative of the article, not under their own headings, e.g. [source] identifies the following strategies as effective at promoting motivation; then give the list (and explain any technical terms), then end it with a reference to the source(s).
* Wikipedia "runs very effective fundraising campaigns": not encyclopedic because it's an evaluation. A more neutral way to make the point would be to say that its fundraising campaigns involve tens of thousands of people, or raise millions of dollars.
* Encyclopedias try to avoid first-person language ("we").
* This is quite an important one: Psychology isn't about psychologists primarily, so it's not important to have the researchers' names in the headings. In fact it can be distracting. "Kraut & Resnick: Encouraging Contributions in Online Communities" should be "Encouraging contributions in online communities". (Note the capitalisation).
MartinPoulter (talk) 15:47, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some suggestions 

message: Thank you for your comments. We have increased the size of the lead summary, edited the Wikipedia fundraising campaign mention, removed first-person language, and revised the researchers' names in the headings.
Teslawlo (talk) 04:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice work! The article's coming along really well. MartinPoulter (talk) 13:11, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  In response to the above suggestions 

message: Should Socialism be mentioned in this article? Under Criticisms of socialism#Reduced_incentives, this phenomenon is discussed yet it is not named. I think this phenomenon should at least be mentioned in the Criticisms of Socialism article. Urumia (talk) 19:20, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  As a criticism of Socialism? 

message: Overall, this page was great and it explained social loafing thoroughly. However, I think one good way to show this theory is to explain how it relates to college or mainly educational environments. I know that when many students are assigned group work, there always seems to be this thought that we (each individual) needs to work less because there are more people. If this article talked about how social loafing can be seen in education, it would help improve the authenticity of this topic.Zbanihani14 (talk) 01:37, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions for Improving this topic 

message: — Assignment last updated by Samanthaconway25 (talk) 18:20, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Small Group Communication