Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Crowds and emotion

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 Was missing - now added User page Very good I suggest using headings (per Tutorial 1) Consider linking to your eportfolio page and/or any other professional online profile such as LinkedIn. This is not required, but it can be useful to interlink your professional networks. Social contribution Good I suggest adding direct links to evidence like 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. Use a numbered list. Add a brief summary of each contribution. Section headings Well developed 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an overview paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings. Key points Key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters. Consider including more examples/case studies. Image Excellent Caption uses APA style ensure the caption explains how the image connects to the main text Cite each figure at least once in the main text References Very good For APA referencing style, check and correct: capitalisation Resources Very good See also Also link to relevant Wikipedia pages External links Include source in brackets after link

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:07, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Feature Box Suggestion

Hi, just a suggestion that you could add a feature box to your overview section to make your points stand out. Here is a link to a Wikiversity page that provides templates for feature boxes. --U3190415 (discuss • contribs) 00:20, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! Great stuff so far, I believe you are having trouble formatting your page as most of it is in a box. If you head to 'Edit source' you can change it so that the box only goes around your focus questions. You can delete { {Robelbox|theme=1|title=Focus questions}}

and add { {RoundBoxTop|theme=2}} Focus questions: 1) x 2) y 3) z {{RoundBoxBottom} } instead (minus the spaces in between) and see if that works? Hope this helps! User: U3189154

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, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall Overall, this is an insufficient chapter mainly because it does not make sufficient use of primary, peer-reviewed sources as citations. Non-peer reviewed sources are over-used. This chapter is well under the maximum word count. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits. Theory Basic but sufficient coverage of relevant theory is provided. Research Overall, this chapter makes insufficient use of research. Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags). When describing important research findings, consider including a bit more detail about the methodology and indicating 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 good. Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections. Learning features No use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding interwiki links for the first mention of key words and technical concepts would make the text more interactive. No use of embedded in-text links to related book chapters. Embedding in-text links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project. Basic use of image(s). No use of table(s). Basic use of feature box(es). Good use of quiz(zes). Grammar The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags). Use serial commas[1] - it is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists. APA style Use double- rather than single-quote marks for emphasis. Figures and tables Use APA style to refer to each Table and each Figure (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation). Citations are not in full APA style. For example: If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year (e.g., Smith et al., 2020). References use correct APA style. Move non-peer reviewed sources into the external links section. Social contribution ~4 logged, useful, social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:09, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's UCLearn 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. The presentation is over the maximum time limit - content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking and feedback purposes. Structure and content The presentation is reasonably well structured. Consider adding and narrating an Overview slide (e.g., with focus questions), to help orientate the viewer about what will be covered. The presentation makes good use of theory. The presentation makes basic to little use of research. The presentation makes basic use of one or more examples or case studies. A Conclusion slide is presented with a take-home message(s). The presentation could be strengthened by adding a Conclusion slide with practical, take-home messages. The Conclusion partly fitted within the time limit. Communication The presentation is easy to follow. The presentation makes basic use of text based slides with narrated audio. Well paced. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read. Some of the font size should be larger to make it easier to read. The visual communication is supplemented by images. Production quality The video is produced using simple tools. The chapter title but not the sub-title are used in the video title - the latter would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. Audio recording quality was excellent. Visual display quality was very good. Image sources and their copyright status are provided. A copyright license for the presentation is provided. A link to the book chapter is provided. A link from the book chapter is/not provided. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:32, 20 November 2020 (UTC)