Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2019/Two-factor motivation theory

Comments

I agree with your point that ignoring individual differences is a major weakness of the theory. you could expand your examples to include things like personality and how that affects workplace motivation. - U3156463 (discuss • contribs) 07:02, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Heading casing

FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for lower-cased headings (or sentence casing). For example, use: ==Cats and dogs== rather than ==Cats and Dogs== -- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:55, 26 September 2019 (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 and sub-title Good Sub-title corrected to match original listing User page Excellent I've added bullet points and numbered lists Social contribution Good Add direct links to evidence. To do this: 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 Making and summarising social contributions. Section headings Basic, 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic. See earlier comment about Heading casing. Key points Key points are well developed for most but not all sections, with relevant citations. Consider introducing one or more case studies earlier. Consider embedding one quiz question per major section rather than having one longer quiz towards the end. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles. Image Provided, with an APA style caption Consider increasing image size from default Cite each figure at least once in the main text. References Good. For full APA style: Use correct capitalisation Use correct italicisation 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 Excellent

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:55, 26 September 2019 (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 UCLearn Canvas, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall Overall, this is a solid chapter that explains psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem. For additional feedback, see comments below and these copyedits. Theory The theory is reasonably well explained. The theory could be better explained by constructing some simple case studies to highlight the independent role of the two factors in worker dissatisfaction and satisfaction. Did you consult Maslow (1954)? If not, this should be a secondary citation. Research Relevant research is discussed in relation to theory. However, the indepth focus on several specific studies means that there was a lack of big picture review and synthesis of research literature about the two-factor theory. The individual studies did help to provide some examples. When describing important research findings, consider including the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship. Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful. Written expression Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is reasonably good. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences. Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections. Learning features See also - also link to past book chapters Excellent use of interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. ## No use of embedded links to related book chapters. Embedding interwiki links links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project. Basic use of images. Basic use of tables. A better structure for Table 1 would be a 2 x 2 structure, with one factor in the columns and one factor in the rows. Basic use of feature boxes. Good use of quizzes. Basic use of case studies or examples. Grammar Use serial commas[1] - it is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect. Abbreviations Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses. Spelling Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour; fulfillment vs. fulfilment). Proofreading Remove double-spaces. APA style Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numerals (e.g., 10). Direct quotes need page numbers. Figures and tables Refer to each Table and Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1). Citations are not in full APA style. For example: (Sanjeev, Surya, 2016) -> (Sanjeev & Surya, 2016) Check and learn when/how to use et al. Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets. References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and correct use of capitalisation. Check and correct use of italicisation. Add full-stops and spaces between author initials. See new doi format. Social contribution ~13 logged, useful, social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:02, 12 November 2019 (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, sufficient presentation. This presentation makes effective use of simple tools. Structure and content The presentation is well structured (Title, Overview, Body, Conclusion). Well selected content - not too much or too little. Good to see the emphasis on applications, although perhaps more emphasis could be placed on the distinction between motivator and hygiene. The presentation is poorly structured. In particular, it lacks a Title, Overview, and Conclusion. Add and narrate a Title slide, to help the viewer understanding the focus and goal of the presentation. Add and narrate an Overview slide, to help orientate the viewer about what will be covered. A Conclusion slide is presented with a take-home message(s). Communication The presentation is easy to follow. The presentation makes effective use of text and image based slides with narrated audio. Well paced. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images. Production quality Very good production quality using simple tools. Audio and video recording quality is very good. Image sources and their copyright status are provided. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the video description but not in the meta-data. A link to the book chapter is provided, but it is a broken link. A link from the book chapter is provided. A written description of the presentation is provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:27, 16 November 2019 (UTC)