Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2018/Natural euphoria

Comments

There is a really great psychiatrist named Stanislav Groff who has a breathing technique that can be used to induce euphoria. Could be worth looking at. --U3151994

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 01:03, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Topic development 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 the chapter plan. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Topic development marks are available via UCLearn. 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 and sub-title weren't provided - I've them in now. User page Not created Social contribution None summarised on user page Section headings Reasonable development of top-level headings Key points Under-development of key points to be covered in each section, including in the Overview and Conclusion No citations are key sources are currently provided Image Currently, there there is no use of images References Useful list of references. Identify the key ones and cite these. Resources None provided - need customised See also and External link resources that are directly relevant to the topic.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:03, 24 September 2018 (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 promising, interesting chapter with a rich combination of theory and research. The chapter makes good use of interwiki links. However, the chapter is undermined by the poor quality of written expression. For additional feedback, see comments below and these copyedits. Theory The theoretical coverage about neurophysiological is excellent, as is the material about love. Music is covered lightly. The material about video games seem to wander off into anti-video game viewpoints/debate, losing the primary focus of the chapter which is on ways to induce "natural" euphoria. The coverage of exercise-induced euphoria is very good. Consider connecting this topic with "peak experiences" Research Relevant research is well reviewed and discussed in relation to theory. Some statements are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags). When describing important research findings, consider including a bit more detail about the methodology and 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 Overall, the quality of written expression is problematic and not of a professional standard, mainly due to be poor grammar. The chapter could benefited from a better developed Overview (e.g., include focus questions) and Conclusion (e.g., providie some more practical take-home messages about natural ways to induce euphoria). Layout The chapter uses a basic, but effective structure. Learning features Interwiki links are particularly well used. Excellent use of images. No use of tables. No use of feature boxes. Excellent use of quizzes. No use of case studies. Grammar The grammar for many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags). Check and make correct use of commas. Use serial commas[1]. Check and make correct use of affect vs. effect. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's). Check and correct use of semi-colons (;) and colons (:). Spelling Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the tags). Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour; fulfillment vs. fulfilment). Proofreading Remove unnecessary capitalisation. APA style Refer to each Table and each Figure at least once within the main text. Citations are not in full APA style. For example: Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets. A serial comma is needed before "&" or "and" for citations involving three or more authors. References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and make correct use of italicisation. See new doi format.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:06, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's Canvas 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 basic presentation that was not published online. Structure and content Add an Overview to explain the purpose of the presentation. Add a Conclusion with take-home messages. Several relevant examples are provided. Theory is explained, with limited research coverage. Communication Audio communication lacks assurance and confidence. Audio communication is well paced and not overly complicated. Visual communication is overly detailed - be more selective about key points to reduce the amount of text which is more than people can reasonably read and digest in the time allowed. Images are well used, but there is no acknowledgement of copyright - copyright is likely to have been violated. Production quality Overall production quality is poor because the presentation doesn't satisfy the basic requirement of being published online.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:04, 16 December 2018 (UTC)