Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Emotion preferences

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 is correctly worded and formatted 2. Headings Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development by expanding the structure Good alignment between focus questions and heading structure Consider adopting closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings Adopt closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings Aim for 3 to 6 top-level headings between the Overview and Conclusion, with up to a similar number of sub-headings for large sections The Overview and Conclusion should not have sub-headings Use default heading formatting (i.e., avoid bold, italics, underline, changing the size etc.) Avoid having sections with only 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings Definition(s) tend to be pedestrian headings. Incorporate definitional material into the Overview and/or subsequent sections with embedded inter-wiki link(s) to further information. Case study doesn't need a separate heading; instead embed case study within relevant sections Quiz doesn't need a separate heading; instead embed quiz questions within relevant sections 3. Overview Excellent - Scenario, image, evocative description of the problem/topic, relevant psychological theory/research, and focus questions Focus questions are reasonably well aligned with sub-title and top-level headings Maybe add what are emotion preferences? FQ three is a big vague Copyedit/proofread FQ four 4. Key points Promising development of key points for each section, with relevant citations Direct quotes need page numbers (APA style) – even better, write in your own words APA style uses double rather than single quotation marks Conclusion (the most important section): Hasn't been developed 5. Figure Excellent - A relevant figure is presented, captioned, and cited 6. Learning feature One 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 example(s)/case study(ies) Consider including more examples/case studies, quiz question(s), table(s) etc. 7. References Excellent 8. Resources See also Excellent External links Excellent 9. User page Very good 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 10. Social contribution Two out of three different types of contributions made with direct link(s) to evidence Also try making a direct edit to improve a current or past book chapter

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:48, 17 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 reasonably good presentation Overview The opening conveys the purpose of the presentation in a good way Engaging introduction to hook audience interest A context for the presentation is clearly established through an example Consider asking focus questions to help focus and discipline the presentation Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section The presentation addresses/somewhat addresses/does not adequately address the topic An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation makes very good use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes reasonably good use of relevant psychological research The presentation makes reasonably good use of citations to support claims The presentation makes basic use of one or more examples The presentation provides good practical advice The presentation provides easy to understand information Conclusion The conclusion provides a good summary of the most relevant psychological theory and research about this topic The conclusion provides basic take-home message(s) Audio The audio is easy to follow The presentation makes reasonably good use of narrated audio Audio communication is well-paced Reasonably good intonation The narration is well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was reasonably good Recording volume was low Review microphone set-up to achieve higher recording quality The narrated content is well matched to the target topic Video Overall, visual display quality is good The presentation makes good use of text and image based slides The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read Consider using a sans-serif typeface to make the text easier to read The amount of text presented on one or more slides could be reduced to make it easier to read and listen at the same time The visual communication is supplemented in a good way by relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is well produced using simple tools The visual content is 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 Provide a written description of the presentation to help potential viewers A link to the book chapter is not provided A link from the book chapter is provided Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are not clearly indicated A copyright license for the presentation is not clearly indicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:54, 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 very good use of psychological theory and basic use of research to address a real-world phenomenon or problem. Reasonably good use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims In some places, better use could be made of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Well developed Engaging case study or scenario in a feature box with a relevant image Clearly explains the psychological problem or phenomenon Remove sub-headings (fixed) Could be abbreviated. Move detail into subsequent sections. The focus questions are excellent (clear and relevant) Theory A very good range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Builds on two previous chapters and/or Wikipedia article Build more strongly on related chapters and/or Wikipedia articles (e.g., by embedding interwiki links for key terms) Very good depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Basic use of tables, figures, and/or lists to help clearly convey key theoretical information In some places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Excellent 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? In some places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) 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 Some claims lack sufficient citation (e.g., see the tags) Integration Basic integration between theory and research The chapter places more emphasis on theory than on research; strive for an integrated balance Insufficient integration with chapters Conclusion Very good summary and conclusion Key points are well summarised Address the focus questions Add practical, take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is good Avoid one sentence paragraphs. Communicate one idea per paragraph using three to five sentences. 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 Embed direct quotes within sentences and paragraphs, rather than presenting them holus-bolus Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "as previously mentioned") because it's usually unnecessary. If needed, use section linking. Layout Avoid having sub-headings in the Overview (fixed) Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings Grammar The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see tags) by using a grammar checking tool, accessing UC services like Studiosity, and/or seeking peer feedback on draft work APA style Use double (not single) quotation marks "to introduce a word or phrase used ... as slang, or as an invented or coined expression" (APA Style 7th ed., 2020, p. 159) Direct quotes need page numbers – even better, communicate about concepts in your own words Use serial commas[2][3] Use sentence casing for the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc. Direct quotes are overused – it is better to communicate about concepts in your own words Figures Reasonably well captioned Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., "(see Figure 1)") Increase some image sizes to make them easier to read Citations use excellent APA Style (7th ed.), but should be used more frequently to help justify claims References use good APA style: Check and correct use of capitalisation[4] Learning features Excellent use of learning features One use 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. One 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 figure(s) No use of table(s) Reasonably good/ use of feature box(es) Excellent use of scenarios, case studies, or examples Excellent use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) Excellent use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Use alphabetical order Excellent use of external links in the "External links" section Use alphabetical order Social contribution ~11 logged, useful, mostly moderate contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:34, 27 November 2024 (UTC)