Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Consumer neuroscience

Articles that might be helpful

Hey @Claudiaread! I found this systematic review on the factors limiting the application of consumer neuroscience that I thought might be helpful for your chapter. See here: https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2131. D. E. Finlay (discuss • contribs) 04:35, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey @D. E. Finlay thats really helpful, I'll check it out, thank you. Claudiaread (discuss • contribs) 00:41, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Heading casing

Hi Claudiaread. 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 09:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know :) Claudiaread (discuss • contribs) 03:30, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Topic development feedback

The topic development submission has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is below, plus see the general feedback page. Please also check the page history for 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. Marks are available via UCLearn. Marks are based on the latest version before the due date.

1. Title The title and sub-title are correctly worded and formatted User name removed – authorship is as per the list of topics and the page's editing history 2. Headings See earlier comment about Heading casing Promising 2-level heading structure Remove links from headings Consider adopting closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings 3. Overview A scenario or case study is presented in a feature box at the start of this section. Add an image to the scenario to help attract reader interest. A brief, evocative description of the problem/topic is provided Use 3rd person perspective (except 1st/2nd person can work for feature boxes/scenarios) Reasonably good alignment between focus questions and heading structure, but consider closer alignment Open-ended focus questions are usually better than closed-ended (e.g., yes/no) questions 4. Key points Basic development of key points for each section, with some relevant citations For sections which include sub-sections, include the key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings Avoid providing too much background information. Aim to briefly summarise general concepts and provide internal links to relevant book chapters and/or Wikipedia pages for further information. Then focus most of the content on directly answering the core question(s) posed by the chapter sub-title. Strive for an integrated balance of the best psychological theory and research about this topic, with practical examples I recommend using the Studiosity service and/or a service like Grammarly to help improve the quality of written expression such as checking grammatical and spelling errors Conclusion (the most important section): Hasn't been developed What might the take-home, practical messages be? (What are the answer(s) to the question(s) in the sub-title and/or focus questions?) 5. Figure Excellent - A relevant figure is presented, captioned, and cited Caption could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text Figure(s) are cited at least once in the main text 6. 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 Promising use of one ore more scenarios/examples/case studies Promising use of quiz question(s) Also consider using one or more tables to summarise key information 7. References Good At least one relevant systematic reviews and/or meta-analysis is included Check and correct APA referencing style: Year missing from the first reference capitalisation make doi hyperlinks active (i.e., clickable) use dois where available instead of other links 8. Resources See also OK One of two link types provided Also link to relevant Wikipedia pages I've reformatted the first link; use this style for all Use alphabetical order External links Not developed 9. User page Good Brief description about self – 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. A link to the book chapter is provided 10. Social contribution Good – two out of three types of contributions made with with direct link(s) to evidence. The other type of contribution is making comments on other chapters (past or current) Well done on creating and uploading your own image Descriptions of contributions could be more precise/accurate/detailed

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:39, 24 August 2024 (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 very good presentation The main area for potential improvement is to cover more research and to provide more examples Overview The opening clearly conveys the purpose of the presentation Very engaging introduction to hook audience interest A context for the presentation is established 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 reasonably good use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes insufficient/no use of relevant psychological research The presentation makes basic use of citations to support claims The presentation makes basic use of examples The presentation could be improved by providing practical advice The presentation provides easy to understand information Conclusion The conclusion provides a basic summary of the most relevant psychological theory and research about this topic The conclusion provides basic take-home message(s) Consider adding a conclusion slide with key points Audio The audio is easy to follow and interesting to listen to The presentation makes effective use of narrated audio Audio communication is well-paced Very good intonation The narration is well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was reasonably good Recording volume was low. Review microphone set-up. The narrated content is reasonably well matched to the target topic Video Overall, visual display quality is very good The presentation makes creative use of video and hand-drawn text and images 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 is supplemented in an excellent way by relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is very well produced The visual content is reasonably well matched to the target topic Meta-data The correct 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 The correct title is used, but the sub-title (or a shortened version of it) is not used, as the name of the presentation. This would help to convey the purpose of the presentation and be consistent. The chapter sub-title but not the chapter title is used in the name of the presentation. This would help to convey the purpose of the presentation and be consistent. 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 consistent. An excellent written description of the presentation is provided An inactive hyperlink to the book chapter is provided (maybe because the YouTube user account doesn't have advanced features) A link from the book chapter is 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 A copyright license for the presentation is clearly indicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:09, 10 November 2024 (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 reasonably good chapter. It makes good use of psychological theory and basic use research to address a real-world phenomenon or problem. Very good use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims Under the maximum word count, so there is room to expand For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Well developed Engages reader via a case study or scenario in a feature box; also include a relevant image Explains the psychological problem or phenomenon reasonably well The focus questions are clear and relevant Theory An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained The theories/brain structures/measurement techniques tend to be described in general terms; this material could be strengthened by considering their relation to consumer behaviour in more detail Builds on two previous chapters and/or Wikipedia article Very good depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Very good use of tables, figures, and/or lists to help clearly convey key theoretical information Key citations are well used Reasonably good use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Basic review of relevant research More detail about key studies would be ideal Any systematic reviews or meta-analyses in this area? Insufficient critical thinking about relevant research is evident Critical thinking about research could be further evidenced by: describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies considering the strength of relationships acknowledging limitations pointing out critiques/counterarguments suggesting specific directions for future research Integration Basic integration between theory and research Insufficient integration with chapters Conclusion Basic summary and conclusion Address the focus questions Add practical, take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is good Bullet points are overused. Develop more of the bullet point statements into full sentences and paragraphs. 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 Exclamation marks are overused Layout Use sentence casing Use the default heading style (e.g., remove additional italics, bold, and/or change in font size) Remove abbreviations from headings Remove figure citations from headings Include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see tags) Grammar The grammar for some/many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags) Consider using a grammar checking tool Another option is to use a services provided by UC, such as Studiosity Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance Abbreviations Remove abbreviations from headings Spelling Some words are misspelt (e.g., see the tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. More proofreading is needed (e.g., remove template material) to bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard APA style Use serial commas[2]. Video (1 min) Figures Well captioned Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text. Refer to each Figure using APA style (e.g., "(see Figure 1)"; do not use bold, italics, check and correct capitalisation). Citations use excellent APA style (7th ed.) References use good APA style: Check and correct use of capitalisation[3] Check and correct use of italicisation Learning features Reasonably good use of learning features Two uses of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding more interwiki links for the first mention of key words and technical concepts would make the text even more interactive. See example. 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. Very good use of figure(s) No use of table(s) Reasonably good use of feature box(es) Basic use of scenarios, case studies, or examples No use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Broken link (fixed) Use alphabetical order Include sources in parentheses after the link No use of external links in the "External links" section Social contribution ~2 logged contributions with direct links to evidence ~1 logged contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess. See tutorials for guidance about how to get direct links to evidence.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:36, 23 November 2024 (UTC)