Talk:Sensitivity training

Sensitivity training is not T-group, though the two are linked. A t-group is a group, sensitivity training is a procedure important enough to warrant a page in its own right. It was originated by Kurt Lewin in response to a state request, and has been associated with political correctness. I am therefore removing the merge request template. --Memestream 12:44, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The article mentions that According to its critics, it involves the use of psychological techniques with groups that its critics, e.g. G. Edward Griffin, claim are often identical to brainwashing tactics. Critics believe these techniques are unethical. Now, I ask myself, what these techniques are, which is not mentioned. Also, the critizized origins of sensitivity training, mentioned in the third paragraph, seem to have a relation to the still unexposed techniques. 92.227.189.90 (talk) 22:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I just googled for "sensitivity training techniques critic", finding a paper Some doubts about sensitivity training here: http://www.informaworld.com/index/782717656.pdf As I'm not a member of an american university or whatever that site requires, it asks me to pay 30$ which I'm not intending to do. 92.227.189.90 (talk) 22:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

NPOV tag

I tagged the article as not neutral since most of it is about criticism of the topic. It is also not at all clear what sensitivity training really is. Is the expression used in different ways? I mostly hear it used about classes given to employees to teach them to respect the feelings of other groups, etc. That does not sound like what the article is talking about. Wolfview (talk) 05:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Expansion of criticism section

Can we have more explanation to why it is considered brainwashing by critics? Also can we have some countercritism like mindcontrol is not part of accepted mainline science according to the Frye Standard of 1923? Also some exlenation as to why attack therapy is listed as a see also? Can we have a section comparing Sensitivity training and attack therapy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.166.218.69 (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Could Hypnosis also be used in sensivity training?

No mention article of just WHAT techniques are used in Sensitivty training. Maybe Hypnosis on some lev3l is involved?Stilletoblade (talk) 03:22, 27 January 2017 (UTC)