Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Orthorexia and emotion

Initial suggestions

@U3222012: 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/Eating
  • Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Psychopathology
• 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 22:53, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

@U3229936: Thanks for picking up this topic. I've added a title placeholder and the categories mentioned above. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:43, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Heading casing

Hi U3229936. 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 00:44, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Nice topic

Orthorexia was a super interesting topic I looked into during a Nutrition Class. I specifically looked into the affects of Social media, could be something you explore as well. Annabelle Taylor (discuss • contribs) 09:14, 13 August 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/or sub-title were not correctly worded and/or formatted. This has been corrected. 2. Headings See earlier comment about Heading casing Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development A heading about eating disorders isn't necessary. Instead, briefly describe/compare/contrast orthorexia and then provide embedded links to related book chapters and/or Wikipedia articles for more info about EDs more generally and/or other specific EDs Reasonably good alignment between focus questions and heading structure, but consider closer alignment Avoid having sections with only 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings Quizzes don't need headings; concentrate quiz questions on the take-home messages in response to the sub-title/focus questions 3. Overview Excellent - Scenario, image, evocative description of the problem/topic, relevant psychological theory/research, and focus questions A scenario or case study is presented in a feature box at the start of this section Add an image to the scenario or case study 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) Strive for close alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings Present focus questions in a feature box at the end of this section 4. Key points Promising development of key points for each section, with relevant citations 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. For sections which include sub-sections, include the key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings Strive for an integrated balance of theory and research, with practical examples Where "individuals" is used, consider instead referring to "people" Generally well-written, but I recommend using the Studiosity service and/or a service like Grammarly to help improve the quality of written expression because there are grammatical errors. Conclusion (the most important section): Underway 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 A relevant figure is presented and captioned Caption 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 using APA style 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) Promising use of quiz question(s) Promising use of table(s) 7. References Very good Are there any systematic reviews about this topic? For APA referencing style, check and correct: italicisation doi formatting make doi hyperlinks active (i.e., clickable) use dois where available instead of other links page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) 8. Resources See also Not developed External links Not developed 9. User page Add description about self 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. Add link to book chapter 10. Social contribution None summarised on user page with direct link(s) to evidence – this was covered in Tutorial 03. Looking ahead to the book chapter submission, see how to earn marks for social contributions.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:45, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Interesting page :)

Hi, reading your chapter so far it looks like it flows really nicely and is very interesting. I think it’s kind of connected to my chapter topic on the gut-brain axis and emotion. I’ve come across an article you might find interesting that explains how starting a specific diet for “digestive issues” due to gut imbalances, can lead to orthorexia. If you’re interested, heres the link for the study https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/nmo.14427   U3239091 (discuss • contribs) 23:13, 26 September 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 very good chapter. It makes very good use of psychological theory and research to address a real-world phenomenon or problem. Very 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) Over the maximum word count. The content beyond 4,000 words has been ignored for marking purposes. 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 with a relevant image Clearly explains the psychological problem or phenomenon Clear focus questions Theory An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Refer to current version of the DSM Builds somewhat on Wikipedia articles; to improve the chapter, build more strongly on other Wikipedia articles related book chapters by including more embedded links for key terms Insightful depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Basic use of tables, figures, and/or lists to help convey key theoretical information Key citations are well used 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 Excellent review of relevant research Basic 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 Excellent integration between theory and research Conclusion Not counted for marking purposes due to being over the maximum word count Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is OK but there are several aspects which are below professional standard Some sentences could be explained more clearly (e.g., see the and tags) Some sentences are overly long. Strive for the simplest expression. Consider splitting longer sentences into two shorter sentences. Shorter words and sentences are more readable. Try conducting a readability analysis such as via https://www.webfx.com/tools/read-able/. This chapter gets a score of 34.5. Aim for 50+. 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. 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 directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead: it is, most often, not needed at all, or use section linking "People" is often a better term than "individuals" Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections 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 Check and correct use of possessive apostrophes (e.g., cats vs cat's vs cats') Check and correct use of that vs. who Check and correct use of semicolons (;) and colons (:) (semicolons are overused) Spelling Some words are misspelt (e.g., see the tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Proofreading More proofreading is needed APA style Use sentence casing for the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc. Use double (not single) quotation marks "to introduce a word or phrase used ... as slang, or as an invented or coined expression" (APA 7th ed., 2020, p. 159) Figures Well captioned Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1) Tables Table captions use APA style or wiki style Each Table is referred to at least once within the main text using APA style Citations use good APA style (7th ed.). To improve: 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) Use ampersand (&) inside parentheses and "and" outside parentheses References use reasonably good APA style: Check and correct use of capitalisation[2] Check and correct use of italicisation Remove publisher location Learning features Good use of learning features Basic 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. 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. Reasonably good use of image(s) Basic use of table(s) Reasonably good use of feature box(es) Very good use of case studies or examples Excellent use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Also include links to related Wikipedia articles Use alphabetical order Not counted for marking purposes due to being over the maximum word count Basic use of external links in the "External links" section Use sentence casing Use alphabetical order Include sources in parentheses after the link Not counted for marking purposes due to being over the maximum word count Social contribution ~3 logged, useful, mostly minor social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:06, 27 October 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 basic presentation The presentation is over the maximum time limit — content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking and feedback purposes Overview The opening slide conveys the purpose of the presentation The presentation has a basic introduction to engage audience interest A context for the presentation is established Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section The presentation addresses the topic The presentation makes very good use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes basic use of relevant psychological research The presentation makes very good use of citations to support claims The presentation makes basic use of one or more examples The presentation provides basic 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) The Conclusion only partly fitted within the time limit Audio The audio is hard to follow due to poor recording quality The presentation makes basic use of narrated audio Audio communication is reasonably well-paced Good intonation The narration is reasonably well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was poor Recording volume and clarity was variable Review microphone set-up to achieve higher recording quality Probably an on-board microphone was used (e.g., keyboard and/or mouse clicks were audible). Consider using an external microphone. 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 The amount of text presented per slide makes it reasonably easy to read and listen at the same time The visual communication is supplemented in a reasonably good way by relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is reasonably well produced using simple tools The visual content is well matched to the target 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 consistent. A very brief written description of the presentation is provided. Expand. 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 06:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)