Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Nudge theory and sedentary behaviour

Initial suggestions

@U3145851: Thanks for tackling this topic.

Some initial suggestions:

• Check out other related chapters and see how you can build on, link to, and integrate with that work:
  • Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Motivation
  • Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Physical exercise
• What psychological theories can help to understand? What is the main research in this area?

Let me know if I can do anything else as you go along.

Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:01, 7 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, there was an original typo (my error) in the main list, so I've fixed that up in both places Remove author name – authorship is as per the page's editing history Headings Basic, 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development by expanding the structure Headings should be tailored to the topic i.e., NT & SB Consider closer alignment between sub-title, focus questions, and headings Use of questions as top-level headings is promising Overview Engaging opening scenario - consider putting inside a feature box; but how does this relate to the topic of sedentary behaviour? Promising - includes scenario, image, evocative description of the problem/topic with at least basic links to relevant psychological theory/research Focus questions are promising, but should focus on sedentary behaviour Be careful - it looks like this chapter is shaped towards NT - but it needs to focus on NT and SB Key points Promising development of key points for each section, with relevant citations However, it focuses on NT instead of NT and SB Avoid providing too much background information (e.g., about nudge motivation_). Instead, briefly summarise general concepts and provide internal wiki links to relevant book chapters and/or Wikipedia pages for further information. Then focus most of the content of this on directly answering the core question(s) posed by the chapter sub-title. Promising balance of theory and research Conclusion (the most important section): Hasn't been developed Figure Excellent – A relevant figure is presented and it is appropriately captioned The figure caption(s) provide(s) a clear, appropriately detailed description that is meaningfully connected with the main text Cite each figure at least once in the main text Consider decreasing image size to make it less dominant in relation to the text Learning feature Promising use of 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 nudge theory sedentary behaviour examples/case studies, quiz question(s), table(s) etc. References Images shouldn't be references (they are automatically hyperlinked to meta-data) Very good For APA referencing style, check and correct: page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Resources See also Good Use bullet-points (see Tutorial 02) Use sentence casing Include source in brackets after link External links Good Use bullet-points (see Tutorial 02) Use sentence casing Include source in brackets after link User page # Created – sufficient 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 Excellent – at least three different types of contributions with direct link(s) to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion for quiz

Hi there,

Great job on the chapter so far, just wanted to offer a suggestion about your quiz. From the book chapter guidelines it suggests that quizzes are more focused on application rather than trivia.

Feel free to ignore it, but maybe that would look something like this:

Justin did not realise that Valentine's Day is tomorrow, and rushes to the store to pick up some chocolates for his girlfriend Leah. However, once he gets there he realises he doesn't know what chocolates Leah likes, as they’ve only recently started dating. He sees a label stating they’re Australia’s best chocolate makers, and chooses that box. What is the most likely phenomenon or theory which explains Justin’s choice? (correct answer - bounded rationality)

Anyway, hopefully that’s helpful. Good luck with the rest of your chapter edits! U3213084 (discuss • contribs) 12:27, 4 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 an excellent chapter. It successfully uses psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Well developed Engages reader interest by introducing a case study and/or scenario with an image in a feature box Scenario should be more targeted towards nudge theory and sedentary behaviour Clearly explains the problem or phenomenon Clear focus question(s) Theory An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained The chapter doesn't wander off into discussion of irrelevant theory Build more strongly on other related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters) Insightful depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Effective use of tables and/or lists are to help clearly convey key theoretical information Excellent use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Excellent review of relevant research Excellent critical thinking about relevant research is evident Claims are referenced Integration Excellent integration between theory and research Conclusion Excellent summary and conclusion Key points are well summarised Clear take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is excellent Internationalise: Write for an international, rather than domestic, audience. Australians make up only 0.32% of the world human population. Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") perspective[1] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes Avoid starting sentences with a citation unless the author is particularly pertinent. Instead, it is more interesting for the the content/key point to be communicated, with the citation included along the way or, more typically, in parentheses at the end of the sentence. Grammar The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags) Use serial commas[2] – they are part of APA style and are generally recommended by grammaticists. See explanatory video (1 min) APA style Use double (not single) quotation marks "to introduce a word or phrase used as an ironic comment, as slang, or as an invented or coined expression" (APA 7th ed., 2020, p. 159) Direct quotes need page numbers – even better, write in your own words Tables Use APA style for captions. See example Refer to each Table using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation) References are well organised and formatted Learning features Very good use of learning features 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. Good use of image(s) Good use of table(s) Very good use of feature box(es) Good use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) Excellent use of case studies or examples Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Use bullet points per Tutorial 02 Include sources in parentheses Move external links to the external link section Basic use of external links in the "External links" section Use bullet points per Tutorial 02 Use sentence casing Include sources in parentheses Social contribution ~5 logged, useful, minor to major social contributions with direct links to evidence Use a numbered list per Tutorial 02

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:00, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Some comments, concerns and suggestions

@U3145851: I had skimmed the Wikipedia article on nudge theory some time ago and just now came across this resource. The examples are certainly not bad ones, but any method of modifying human behavior will be abused at some point, particularly methods that are less obvious or for which it's harder to prove intent. The article should include at least one example of this. I can think of at least a few likely examples. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 05:13, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

There's also the issue of common decency and respect to consider. One can certainly appreciate public health and cleanliness, and so these examples by themselves comprise a very sympathetic presentation of the idea. The article essentially presumes that people are fat, irrational and dirty, and suggests that mass psychological manipulation is therefore pro-social, the photo of a dingy urinal completing the picture as a rallying point for these pretensions. Or such is my impression, anyway. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 05:32, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I've got an example. Some time ago I was at a large train station. Much of the building's exterior had a concrete berm around the base which comprised its wall, with windows above. It was about four feet thick and three feet tall. The top was bare concrete and you could lay on it and sit on it, but it was angled at roughly 15-20 degrees. It does not need such a steep angle to shed water, and it was protected from rain by the edge of the building's roof anyway. I believe it's an example of hostile architecture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture. Yet there were no spikes or other overt features, not even the odd contours of a camden bench: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camden_bench. One could lie down for ten or twenty minutes, after that it got uncomfortable. The one or two apparent homeless were sitting on the ground below it. While a generous observer might call it a coincidence of design, train stations very commonly feature hostile architecture. This is arguably not an abuse of nudge theory nor is it an example of something entirely "pro-social". I think the article should include at least a couple examples in this vein. It's interesting that most of the examples on wikipedia's article are rather more conspicuous, added after the fact rather than built into the architecture. For better or worse, "nudge theory" is manipulative and the resource should not indoctrinate readers with the idea that nudge theory is only ever applied for the benefit of all. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 11:55, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

A few other notes: The resource could perhaps be renamed to just "Nudge theory", as that seems much more the focus of the article than sedentary behavior per se. Thinking upon it more, a few of the issues I talk about in Policy and Standards for Critical Discourse could arguably be instances of "nudging", though one can't be certain of intent. Feel free to comment on this essay if you care to do so, I always appreciate feedback. In cases where the motive is not the public good but perhaps a smaller set of interests, it would actually be better if people were openly forced rather than manipulated into collectively making a decision that is not "pro-social". In the former case, at least the public would understand who is imposing upon them and why. In the latter they believe they themselves are responsible for what has been imposed upon them. This seems like a common pattern in propaganda and public relations, and many of my essays touch upon it. I also think the term "nudge" itself is a bit euphemistic and implies a rather more personal sort of gesture than what it means in this context, which is frankly much closer to "speciously manipulate en masse". If nothing else, I really think this resource should include something like the Camden bench as an example. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 14:07, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Jtneill: You seem to be in charge of the project, so I suppose I should take it up with you. Please see above. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 00:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@AP295: Thanks for your interest. This resource has been primarily authored by an undergraduate student. I am the unit convener, reviewer, marker etc. As nudge theory in very broad, this resource is focused on using nudge theory to reduce sedentary behaviour. However, feel free to improve such as in ways you suggest, as long as the material is based on cited peer-reviewed psychological theory and/or research. Let me know if I can do anything else. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:42, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Jtneill: I'd like your opinion on whether hostile architecture is an example of nudge theory, particularly the examples I gave above about the subtly-inclined berm and the camden bench. The wikipedia article only includes a few rather brutal examples and aside from the camden bench I assume they're all retrofitted. The berm I described above is almost certainly an example, but not so overt. I suggested changing the title to just "Nudge theory" because the resource already covers more than just its application in discouraging sedentary behavior, and most other chapters titles in the book are similarly general. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 02:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@AP295: It sounds to me like hostile architecture is definitely an example of nudge theory more broadly, but probably not specifically to the application of nudge theory to promoting healthy physical movement which is the focus of the current chapter. I've add a broader nudge theory topic for the 2024 chapters Motivation and emotion/Book/2024 and you could feel free to contribute some content there or discuss further. Does that help? Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Jtneill: Yes, thank you, but then I don't quite understand how this book will be organized. Will all the chapters from each year be complied into a single book? If the book is a project for your students or advisees then I don't want to do the work preemptively and spoil the assignment, but if it's going to remain on wikiversity as a published resource then I do have more feedback and critical comments about other chapters. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 04:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@AP295: All past chapters are available for ongoing improvement: Motivation and emotion/Book, so feel free. Once a "satisfactory" chapter is developed by a student, the topic is not repeated in following years. If a chapter is unsatisfactory, it gets repeated until a satisfactory chapter is developed. However, satisfactory does not mean that chapters are perfect and most can still benefit from additional feedback and/or direct improvements. We don't get many general contributors, but they are welcome and encouraged, depending on interest and expertise. Note that all of this is conducted through the lens of psychological science, as it is part of an undergraduate psychology course. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, my background is computer science but I have a strong interest in rhetoric and propaganda. Or rather, I think that any work or discourse is more valuable and sets a better example if it's dialectical and objective. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 05:29, 1 November 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 a good to very good presentation Overview An opening slide with the title and sub-title is displayed and narrated — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation The introduction is designed 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 Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. This will help to focus and discipline the presentation. Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section The presentation addresses the topic An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation makes good use of relevant psychological theory Reduce the amount of general content (e.g., definition of sedentary behaviour) The presentation makes no explicit use of relevant psychological research Include citations to support claims The presentation makes good use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice Provide easy to understand information Conclusion A Conclusion is presented Include take-home message(s) in response to focus questions on a slide Audio The audio is easy to follow The presentation makes very good use of narrated audio Audio communication is well paced Good intonation The narration is well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was OK. Review microphone set-up to achieve higher recording quality. There are some minor audio glitches. The narrated content is reasonably well matched to the target topic (see content) but lacks synthesis of key research Video Overall, visual display quality is good The presentation makes basic but effective use of text and image based slides Remove audio icon The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read The visual communication is supplemented by images and/or diagrams The presentation is well produced using simple tools The visual content is reasonably well matched to the target topic (see content) but lacks synthesis of key research Meta-data The chapter title and sub-title (or an abbreviation to fit within the 100 character limit) are used in the name of the presentation — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation A written description of the presentation is not provided. Providing an informative description can help viewers decide whether they want to watch or not. Links to and from the book chapter are provided The presentation is incorrectly categorised as being for kids. This creates limitations, such as being unable to add the presentation to a playlist. More info. Licensing Image sources are communicated in a general way. A copyright license for the presentation is provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)