Talk:Thomas J. Bouchard Jr.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Biography     (Rated Stub-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. Biography Portal Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] WikiProject Genetics      (Rated Stub-Class) This article is part of WikiProject Genetics, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to genetics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this page, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received an importance rating. WikiProject Psychology     (Rated Stub-Class) Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, which collaborates on Psychology and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project. Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it needs.

Does anyone actually know whether the 130 alleged papers published were published in refereed journals. This page needs sources, besides the webpage of Mr. Bouchard. Incidentally his page claims only 129 papers.

Viz

[edit] Question

Why does this article fail to mention Bouchard never subjected any of his work and methodologies on the Minnesota Twin Studies, other than the transracial one to peer-review or anyalysis from anyone else outside of his project, in the 10+ years since it's been put out?

[edit] Critiques of Reared Apart Twin Studies

Most references here are not pertinent. Some of them critique twin studies in general, but not separated twins in particular. An even-handed article would also mention the many articles that praise Dr. Bouchard's studies. As an aside, most of Dr. Bouchard's articles were published in peer-reviewed journals. The above signalled discrepancy (129 vs 130) in papers published is probably due to the fact that few academics keep their web pages up to date. To the people that posted the above comments, please sign them in future.

--Crusio 00:34, 3 September 2007 (UTC)