Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2017/Implicit judgement and emotion

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 promising chapter that is undermined by becoming too bogged down in theory, with too few examples and a lack of a Conclusion which emphasises practical, take-home messages. For additional feedback, see these copyedits. Theory A wide range of relevant theory is discussed, but in some cases there is too much detail and not enough big picture integration. The lack of a coherent Conclusion is telling. Research Several useful, relevant research studies are described, but in some cases, in too much detail, with too little connection drawn back to the book chapter topic. 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. Some statements are unreferenced - see the tags Written expression Written expression Several paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences. Use of more examples would help to make the heavily theoretical material easy for a lay reader to understand. 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. Learning features Adding more interwiki links for the first mention of key words would make the text more interactive. No use of images or tables. Basic use of quizzes. Good use of case studies, but these would be more effective if they were integrated/embedded to help illustrate key theoretical points. Spelling, grammar, and proofreading. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect. Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the tags). The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags). More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard. Check and correct use of commas. Check and correct overcapitalisation. Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour). Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's). APA style Citations A comma is needed before "&" for citations involving three or more authors. References are not in full APA style e.g., Check and correct capitalisation. Check and correct italicisation. Include author second initials. See new doi format. Do not include issue numbers for journals which are continuously numbered within volumes.

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, this is a reasonably good presentation. Structure and content Provide the Overview earlier - it is almost one minute into a three minute presentation! Well selected and structured content - not too much or too little. The presentation was theory-heavy - not much research. Consider including more examples. Communication The presentation is visually interesting to watch and well narrated. Production quality Audio recording quality was very quiet - review microphone set up. Use the full chapter title and sub-title on the opening slide and in the name of the video because this helps to match the book chapter and to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. The description of the license is CC, but the meta-data indicates a Standard Youtube license - be consistent.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)