Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Social comparison and emotion

Feedback

I think that it may be interesting to discuss the role of social comparisons and psychopathology! There has been research on how social comparisons play a role in psychological disorders such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. This article may help if you decide to include this: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X15301322?casa_token=8Th8-GnEsxMAAAAA:9xdejeo7CQXKh59jtRzHg1W--aPNRD1MVTXttKgRZtg2eeqyxI-b_5Xwx5OxcGVHDdBA4NrKk9k It is titled "At the core of eating disorders: Overvaluation, social rank, self-criticism and shame in anorexia, bulimia and binge eating disorder" by Duarte & Pinto-Gouveia (2016). This article is fairly recent and discusses how negative social comparisons impact on self-evaluations. Hope this helps ! :) --U3190016 (discuss • contribs) 04:50, 13 October 2020 (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 Capitalisation of the title has been corrected to be consistent with the book table of contents Sub-title missing User page Created Ad description about self 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. Add link to book chapter Social contribution None summarised with link(s) to evidence. Section headings Whilst headings are provided for social comparison, there is insufficient development of a planned heading structure to address the chapter topic: "What is the effect of social comparison on emotion?" 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 None provided - all content is from the generic template. Image An image (figure) is presented. Caption does not use APA style. could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text. Cite each figure at least once in the main text. References None Resources None

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:36, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion

Could be interesting to look at how social comparison can encourage postive change. For example, how people can be encouraged to act in a more pro-environmental manner when they are compared to others --Jackson McNee (discuss • contribs) 00:43, 17 October 2020 (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, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall Overall, this is an insufficient chapter, mainly due to the poor quality of written expression and overemphasis on social media. Social media could be used as an interesting case study, but should not become the focus of the chapter because such a focus is not specified in the chapter title or sub-title. In this way, the chapter deviates down a rabbit hole rather than maintaining focus on the broader topic. The Conclusion lacks clarity and makes unnecessary deviations into COVID-19 (not mentioned previously) and social media rather than providing take-home messages to key focus questions. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits. Theory Basic but sufficient coverage of relevant theory is provided. The Reeve (2018) textbook is overused as a citation - instead, utilise primary, peer-reviewed sources. Research Overall, this chapter provides a basic overview of relevant research. Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags). Some citations are poorly chosen (e.g., how is Suls (1977) relevant to online social networking - the internet didn't exist then). 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 below professional standard. UC Study Skills assistance is recommended to help improve writing skills. Use 3rd person perspective rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you")[1] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes. Direct quotes have been overused. They demonstrate nothing about author's knowledge or ability to express and synthesise concepts. If they are to be used, keep them short and embedded within sentences and paragraphs, rather than dumped holus-bolus. But the best way is to communicate the concept in your own words. "People" is often a better term than "individuals"; similarly "participants" is preferred to "subjects". Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences. Layout Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections. Learning features This chapter could be improved by formatting bullet-points, numbered lists, and interwiki links as demonstrated in Tutorial 1. 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. One images was presented. However, Figure 1 was uploaded from the Reeve textbook which is copyrighted by Wiley and falsely claimed Tomu3138325's own work. It has been requested for deletion from Wiki Commons. No use of table(s). Overuse of feature box(es). No use of quiz(zes). Basic use of case studies or examples. Grammar The grammar for many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags). Grammar-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance. Check and make correct use of commas. Use serial commas[2] - they are part of APA style and are generally recommended by grammaticists. Here's a 1 min. explanatory video. Check and correct use of that vs. who. Spelling Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. APA style 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: Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets. If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year. For example, either: in-text, Smith et al. (2020), or in parentheses (Smith et al., 2020) Multiple citations in parentheses should be listed in alphabetical order by first author surname. References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and correct use of capitalisation. Check and correct use of italicisation. Include the URLs for dois. Social contribution No logged social contributions.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:21, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Comments on resubmitted book chapter

These revisions have been reviewed. Comments:

1. Overview has been slightly strengthened.
2. Minor improvements to grammar and spelling, but the changes also introduced new grammar and spelling errors . Professional assistance is recommended to support the development of higher quality written expression.
3. There are some minor improvements to theory and research.
4. A quiz has been added. One of the questions is repeated.
5. There are minor improvements to the Conclusion.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:51, 13 December 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 an insufficient presentation. The presentation is over the maximum time limit - content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking and feedback purposes. Structure and content Comments about the book chapter also apply to this section. An appropriate amount of content is presented - not too much or too little. However, the selection of content is almost entirely focused on describing social comparison theory in an abstract manner. There is lack of connection between SCT and emotion. No examples are provided. No take-away messages for focus questions are provided. The presentation is poorly 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 basic use of relevant theory. The presentation makes no use of relevant research. The presentation makes no use of examples or case studies or practical advice. The Conclusion did not fit within the time limit. Communication The presentation makes basic use of text based slides with narrated audio. Well paced. The audio communication is hesitant - could benefit from further practice. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read. The visual communication could be improved by including some relevant images. Production quality The video is poorly produced and lacks the polish that comes with practice. The audio is missing for some slides (e.g., the opening sentence starts with "... comparison" rather than "Social comparison ..." and overlaps between some slides. Use the 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. Audio recording quality was poor. Visual display quality was basic. Two different copyright licenses for the presentation is provided - be consistent. A link to the book chapter is provided, but it is broken. A link from the book chapter is provided. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:33, 27 November 2020 (UTC)