Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Mental toughness in the workplace

Some initial ideas

@KubeChu:

• Mental toughness has sport psychology origins but is being increasingly examined in other domains such as education and work
• Consider workplace domains which are particularly demanding from a mental toughness point of view e.g., elite sport, military etc.
• Search out and build on previous related chapters e.g.,
  • Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Mental toughness
  • Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Work

Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:35, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Topic development feedback

The topic development submission 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 for editing changes made whilst reviewing this 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.

Title The title is correctly worded and formatted The sub-title is correctly worded and formatted However, I made a typo in the sub-title previously, so that has been fixed Remove author name – authorship is as per the page's editing history Headings Abbreviate "What is mental toughness?" - there is a separate chapter about this topic. Link to it for further info. Check and correct capitalisation Check and correct grammar (4C's -> 4Cs) Useful that some top-level headings use questions Revise clarity of wording for some sub-headings Consider simplifying to a 2-level structure Embed quiz questions rather than having a stand-alone section Overview Add a scenario in a feature box at the start to help catch reader interest Use Australian spelling (e.g., ize -> ise) Overview of problem provided Image added (but consider using a workplace image) Focus questions are good; could be expanded Key points Citations provided, but insufficient development of key points in each section Strive for an integrated balance of theory and research Conclusion (the most important section): Hasn't been developed Figure A figure is presented The caption does not relate to the text (i.e., MT and workplace) Learning feature Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters A table is presented - remove bold in cells. Measurement scales are not of major relevance to the topic. Instead consider a table which illustrates how difference aspects of MT might apply in the workplace. Consider including more examples/case studies, quiz question(s), table(s) etc. References Very good Minor but noticeable typos, formatting errors Resources See also Excellent External links Very good Use sentence casing User page Created – minimal, but sufficient Very brief description about self provided – consider expanding Consider linking to your eportfolio page and/or any other professional online profile or resume such as LinkedIn. This is not required, but it can be useful to interlink your professional networks. Link provided to book chapter Social contribution Indirect links to 3 direct page edits Also provide comments on talk pages Also contribute to discussion forum or Twitter If adding the second or subsequent link to a page, create a direct link like / 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.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:34, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Heading casing

FYI, the recommended Wikiversity heading style uses sentence casing. For example: Self-determination theory rather than Self-Determination Theory Here's an example chapter with correct heading casing: Growth mindset development -- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:03, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Book 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. Chapter marks will be available via UCLearn along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall Overall, this is a basic, but sufficient chapter For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Reasonably good Explains the problem or phenomenon The rationale for the choice of case study is unclear. The Kobe Bryant example is probably more applicable to a MT and sports topic - perhaps this case study reflects a personal interest rather than a case study which might appeal to a broader, international audience? How about using a more applicable workplace MT example? Promising focus question(s) The focus questions could be improved by being more specific to the topic (i.e., the sub-title) Theory A good range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained The section about mental toughness traits could be improved by providing more explanation about how resilience and hardiness are similar to, and different from, MT The chapter could be strengthened by: Focusing more directly on MT (and less on related concepts) Focusing more directly on MT and the workplace, whilst providing embedded links to other chapters about MT in other contexts Build more strongly on other related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters in this category: Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Mental toughness) Reasonably good depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) No use of tables and/or lists are to help clearly convey key theoretical information Limited use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Lack of sufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) In the workplace, is MT best considered an individual or a collective quality? Research Insufficient review of relevant research It is unclear how the section about measurement scales helps to address the topic or any of the focus questions; it would be better to provide a more indepth review of MT in the workplace research More detail about key workplace MT studies would be ideal Any systematic reviews or meta-analyses in this area? e.g., https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=mental+toughness+workplace+systematic+review Lack of sufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Critical thinking about research could be further evidenced by: describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies discussing the direction of relationships considering the strength of relationships acknowledging limitations pointing out critiques/counterarguments suggesting specific directions for future research Claims are referenced Some/Many claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags) Integration Basic integration between theory and research Conclusion Basic summary and conclusion Remind the reader about the importance of the problem or phenomenon of interest Address the focus questions Add practical, take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is good Some paragraphs are overly long. Communicate one key idea per paragraph in three to five sentences. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. Convey one idea per paragraph using three to five sentences. Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections See earlier comments about heading casing Include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see tags) Grammar The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags) Use serial commas[1] – they are part of APA style and are generally recommended by grammaticists. See explanatory video (1 min) Abbreviations Explain abbreviations (spell out) (e.g., SMART) when they are first introduced Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour) Proofreading More proofreading is needed (e.g., fix punctuation and typographical errors) to bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard APA style Use sentence casing for the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc. Figures Figures are reasonably well captioned### Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1) Refer to each Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation) Citations are not in full APA style (7th ed.). For example: Do not include author first name or initials List multiple citations in alphabetical order by first author surname Use ampersand (&) inside parentheses and "and" outside parentheses References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and correct use of capitalisation[2] Separate page numbers using an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Include hyperlinked dois Publication location is no longer part of APA style Learning features Basic use of 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. See example. Basic 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. Good use of image(s) Basic use of table(s) - remove bold, left-align, add APA style caption etc. Basic use of feature box(es) Basic use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) Insufficient use of case studies or examples Good use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Basic use of external links in the "External links" section Use sentence casing Include sources in parentheses Social contribution ~3 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:03, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Multimedia presentation 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 Overview "Good afternoon" - what if someone is watching in the morning? An opening slide with the sub-title is displayed and narrated. Also display and narrate the title — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation and to be consistent with the book chapter. Include the question mark (grammar). Create an engaging introduction to hook audience interest Establish a context for the presentation (e.g., by using an example or explaining why it is important), to help the viewer understand Focus questions and/or an outline of topics are presented Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section The presentation somewhat addresses the topic An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation makes basic use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes no use of relevant psychological research Ideally, make more explicit use of research Where is the 4C model from? Include citations to support claims Kobe Bryant example has same issue with relevance as mentioned in the book chapter feedback The presentation could be improved by making more use of more relevant examples or case studies Conclusion A Conclusion slide is presented with basic take-home message(s) Audio The audio is hard to follow because so much content is presented so quickly The presentation makes basic use of narrated audio Slow down and leave longer pauses between sentences. This will help viewers to cognitively digest the spoken information as it is being presented, before moving on to the next point. Use greater intonation to enhance listener interest and engagement Audio recording quality was OK. There are some static blips. Review microphone set-up to achieve higher recording quality. The narrated content is reasonably well matched to the target topic (see content) but lacked synthesis of the best psychological research about this topic Video Overall, visual display quality is basic The presentation makes basic use of text-based slides Remove overcapitalisation The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read The amount of text presented per slide makes it easy to read and listen at the same time The visual communication could be improved by including some relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is basically produced using simple tools The visual content is reasonably well matched to the target topic (see content) but lacked synthesis of the best psychological research about this topic Meta-data The video title does not match the chapter title and sub-title — this would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation and be more consistent Provide an informative description to help viewers decide whether they want to watch A link to the book chapter is not provided A link from the book chapter is provided Licensing A copyright license for the presentation is not provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:09, 9 November 2023 (UTC)