Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2017/Counterfactual thinking motivation

Comments

Awesome lay out, very well structured with clear easy to read headings! Looks neat and easy to follow!

Suggestions

Hi, I came across this article detailing a study out of the University of California/Haas School of Business. It states that counterfactual thinkers are more motivated and analytical in organisational settings. This may be useful when detailing the implications of this motivation on everyday life - University of California, Berkeley / Haas School of Business. "'Counterfactual' thinkers are more motivated and analytical, study suggests." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 9 February 2010. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100209100800.htm>. Another study by Chan, Caputi, Jayasuriya and Browne (2013) looking at 'counterfactual thinking and anticipated emotions enhance performance in computer skills training' found that positive anticipated emotions were associated with improvement in task performance for the counterfactual group but not the control group. This shows that combining positive anticipated emotions and counterfactual thinking results in improved task performance. Although this is based around computer skills training, it may have implications for future training and education. Depending on where you hope to take you topis, I hope this helps. --U3038747 (discuss • contribs) 02:00, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Hi, upon looking at your book chapter progress I noticed that your references were not formatted with a hanging indent as per APA. I have added this for you. Incase it is deleted or you would like to assist others with this, you can achieve a hanging indent by copying and pasting the code from this post/the reference list by going into edit source.

Very interesting topic, I look forward to reading it when it is completed! --U3143144 (discuss • contribs) 22:47, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Heading casing

FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for lower-cased headings. For example, use: ==Cats and dogs== rather than ==Cats and Dogs== -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:43, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Topic development review and feedback

The topic development has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is provided below, plus there is a general feedback page. Please also check the chapter's page history to check for editing changes made whilst reviewing through the chapter. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Topic development marks will be available later via Moodle. Keep an eye on Announcements. Note that marks are based on what was available before the due date, whereas the comments may also be based on all material available at time of providing this feedback.

Title, sub-title, TOC Title fixed Authorship details removed - authorship is as per the page's editing history User page Created, minimalistic Social contribution One contribution listed but not summarised Indirect link to evidence - the best links go to direct evidence of the contributions made. View the page history, select the version of the page before and after your contributions, click "compare selected revisions", and then use this website address as a direct link to evidence for listing on your user page. For more info, see the book chapter author guidelines. Section headings Well developed 2-level heading structure. Consider perhaps explaining types of CFT prior to theories. Consider integrating discussion of theory, research, and examples, rather than having stand-alone theory sections. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an overview paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings. Make sure to avoid providing too much background/generic material. Instead briefly summarise background concepts and provide wiki links to further information. Then focus most of the content on directly answering the core question posed by the sub-title of chapter. Key points Key points are reasonably well developed for each section, with relevant citations. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles. Consider including more examples/case studies, especially early on so that the reader is really clear about what counterfactual thinking is and what types of CFT exist. Consider embedding one quiz question per major section rather than having one longer quiz towards the end. Image Excellent References Not APA style. For full APA style: Use correct capitalisation Use correct italicisation Use full journal names Use correct citation of website sources Use the new recommended format for dois - http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2014/07/how-to-use-the-new-doi-format-in-apa-style.html Do not include issue numbers for journals which are continuously numbered within a volume Resources See also Good External links None provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:43, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Feedback

Overall this is a great layout for your book chapter. Seems like an interesting topic. My suggestion would be to put more emphasis on how counterfactual thinking can enhance daily life - which is the overarching theme of the book. I realise there is a section which states the pros and cons but perhaps in your conclusion explicitly state HOW the pros can help people from day to day. Wishing you good results! U3119288 (discuss • contribs) 03:07, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Feedback

Hi Wishmi! I really enjoyed reading through your chapter. I can see from your contents that you did quite a lot of research on your topic. I really like the way you have laid out your book chapter especially how you have included a quiz section midway through (it's a great refresher) as well as one towards the end of the book chapter. Something I feel you could have included within your chapter is a case study so we can associate it more to everyday life. But overall, great work! I can see you worked really hard on this. Good with the rest of semester! :) U3151881 (discuss • contribs) 05:52, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Reference

Hi Wishmi,

This is a really good structure for your book chapter and I would just like to recommend the following article:

Roese, N. J., & Epstude, K. (2017). Chapter One – The Functional Theory of Counterfactual Thinking: New Evidence, New Challenges, New Insights.

The article goes into solid detail about the functional theory behind counterfactual thinking and some of the criticisms behind the approach. I think it makes for a good supporting article and includes some of the challenges behind the theory.

All the best with it Edward EdwardFarrell (discuss • contribs) 22:34, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Additional Reference for Consideration

Hi Wishmi,

Following on from my previous recommendation, I recommend the following article: 'Upward counterfactual thinking and depression: A meta-analysis' - Broomhall, Phillips, Hine and Lois.

The article goes into the correlation between upward counterfactual thinking and depression, it would make a valuable reference for both the 'upward thinking' and the cons of counterfactual thinking.

I hope this is of value.

Edward EdwardFarrell (discuss • contribs) 20:06, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Feedback

Hey there! Sorry that I am a little late to add on some feedback to your topic. But just in case you had interest in tightening up the chapter later I have some little notes!

I found reading over it very interesting! Your structure is very simple and easy to follow. I like that you used a large number of quiz questions; however it might have been useful to remove the "these are example quiz questions" - and create your own subtitle, as they aren't examples anymore - they are your quiz questions (as I'm pretty sure that sentence was from the template providing us with example quiz questions). An addition of an image in the 'counterfactual thinking' section could also really help break up the big block of writing and make it easier to read.

Also, readers might benefit from additional information; possibly in the way of brackets - alongside any links you provided in the external links section. This would help them understand what they are about to open on their computer, and make a decision as to whether they really need to/find it interesting.

Overall - congratulations on your topic!!

Demibree (discuss • contribs) 22:16, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's Moodle site. Written feedback is provided below, plus see the general feedback page. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below. If you would like further clarification about the marking or feedback, contact the unit convener.

Overall Overall, ... Structure and content Well selected and structured content. Perhaps cover the simple definition of CFT first, then provide the initial examples. When the latter examples are presented, perhaps take the time to also narrate them. This would require some simplification of the earlier theoretical content, which would help to make a more engaging presentation. Add a Conclusion slide with practical, take-home messages. Communication Well narrated - well-paced Visual communications/animals are easy to follow and interesting. Production quality Use the full chapter title and sub-title on the opening slide and in the video name of the video because this helps to match the book chapter and to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. Audio and video recording quality was excellent. Consider muting the music during narration to help the viewer concentrate on the combination of visual information and narrated audio. Consider providing a more detailed description of the video in the description field.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 13:25, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Chapter review and feedback

This chapter has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is provided below, plus there is a general feedback page. Please also check the chapter's page history to check for editing changes made whilst reviewing through the chapter. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Chapter marks will be available later via Moodle, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall Overall, this is a good chapter. For additional feedback, see these copyedits. Theory Theories are well described and explained, with practical examples. Research Basic but sufficient coverage of research involving the relation between the target constructs is provided. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship. Greater emphasis on major reviews and meta-analyses would be helpful. Written expression Written expression Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses. Layout Sections which include sub-sections should also include an introductory paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings. The chapter was well structured, with major sections using sub-sections. Learning features Adding interwiki links for the first mention of key words would make the text more interactive. Basic use of images. No use of tables. Good use of quizzes. Good use of examples. Spelling, grammar, and proofreading. Check and correct use of commas (in general, more needed). Check and correct consistency of capitalisation. More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's). Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour). APA style Use APA style for Figure captions. Citations A comma is needed before "&" for citations involving three or more authors. A full stop is needed after et al. Use semi-colons to separate listing of multiple citations in parentheses. References are not in full APA style e.g., Check and correct punctuation. Check and correct capitalisation. Check and correct italicisation. See new doi format.