Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Mindful eating

From Wikiversity
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Jtneill in topic Multimedia feedback
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Feedback[edit source]

Social contribution[edit source]

Hi, I find this overlaps in some ways to my chapter topic on "intuitive eating". I have already made a link in my chapter to yours, it may be useful to do the same in your topic so that readers can explore more on the topic if they wish to. In my research on intuitive eating i have noticed some researchers and papers use the term intuitive eating and mindful eating interchangeably, while others give broader definitions of the two and explains their similarities and differences. On the intuitive eating website created by the founders of intuitive eating they discuss what they believe to be the definition of both mindful eating and intuitive eating, as well as how they believe the terms can be used. Here is a link here: https://www.intuitiveeating.org/the-difference-between-intuitive-eating-and-mindful-eating/ . I also found this study interesting for use on my topic and I think you may found it useful as well. It is a study that discusses how both intuitive eating and mindful eating may be a useful intervention to use in those who suffer from disordered eating. The link is here: https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.canberra.edu.au/docview/2408450210?rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo and the article is called 'Contributions of mindful eating, intuitive eating, and restraint to BMI, disordered eating, and meal consumption in college students'. This study also discusses the use of mindful eating and intuitive eating in regards to weight management and adopting a non-diet approach to eating. The link is here: https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.canberra.edu.au/docview/1965536234?rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo and the article is called 'A structured literature review on the role of mindfulness, mindful eating and intuitive eating in changing eating behaviours: effectiveness and associated potential mechanisms'. I hope you find these resources as useful as I did and I look forward to reading your chapter in the future. --BirdU3171984 (discusscontribs) 21:46, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Comment[edit source]

Hey! I found this article on Mindfulness in Anorexia Nervosa if you wanted to put something in about this type of eating disorder https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.canberra.edu.au/doi/full/10.1177/1078390317711250. Hope it might help! - U3186994(discusscontribs) 09:34, 30 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Resources[edit source]

Hi! Looks like you have made a great start. However, the marking criteria stated that to get high marks you need in text references, and for that you need some facts and figures. I see you have a full reference list, however I don't see any evidence of these resources in the body section of your chapter. U3189449 (discusscontribs) 09:34, 30 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Comments[edit source]

Hey there, awesome topic, I think it would be super interesting if you included a section about the risks associated with mindful eating - development of obsession, orthorexia, etc. Good luck and look forward to seeing your progress :)


Heading casing[edit source]

FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for sentence casing. For example, the wikitext should be:

== Cats and mice ==

rather than

== Cats and Mice ==

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:41, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Reply


Topic development feedback[edit source]

The topic development 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 the 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, whereas the comments may also be based on all material available at time of providing this feedback.

Title and sub-title[edit source]

  1. Capitalisation of the title/sub-title has been corrected to be consistent with the book table of contents

User page[edit source]

  1. Very good
  2. Avoid overcapitalisation (can be seen as lacking professionalism)

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. Summarised with direct link(s) to evidence.
  2. Layout is difficult to read - as long as the link works, there is no need to display the full URL.

Section headings[edit source]

  1. Simple 2-level heading structure which directly addresses the topic.
  2. See earlier comment about Heading casing.
  3. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an overview paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings.

Key points[edit source]

  1. Plan sounds reasonable, however it is not clear whether the most relevant theory and research on the topic has been identified and how it will be incorporated.
  2. Avoid overcapitalisation (APA style) - more info
  3. Overview - Consider adding:
    1. an image.
    2. an example or case study.
  4. Basic development of key points for each section, with relevant citations.
  5. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters.
  6. Consider including more examples/case studies.
  7. Conclusion (the most important section) hasn't been developed.

Image[edit source]

  1. An image (figure) is presented.
  2. Caption
    1. does not use APA style.
    2. explains how the image connects to key points being made in the main text.
  3. Cite each figure at least once in the main text.

References[edit source]

  1. OK.
  2. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. capitalisation
    2. italicisation
    3. doi formatting

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Missing
  2. External links
    1. See these examples for how to format

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:41, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Addition of a quiz[edit source]

Hi, just thought I'd suggest that including a quiz in your ‘what is mindful eating’ section may be useful in engaging readers. Here is a Wikiversity link for a quiz template.--U3190415 (discusscontribs) 23:23, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Social contribution[edit source]

Hi! I'm writing about body image flexibility, which is related to mindfulness and eating/eating disorders. I thought this article might be helpful for your emotional eating section- it doesn't address mindful eating, but it has some good information and links about the negatives of emotional eating and how mindfulness can help. Also, I know that there are a lot of mindful eating and mindfulness apps available, so it might be useful to link a couple. That's what I did in my chapter to give it more practical self-improvement focus. U3170940 (discusscontribs) 03:39, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Social Contribution[edit source]

Hi, well done on your book chapter, there is so much relevant information on your topic! its very interesting. One thing I will comment on is the "How does mindful eating effect emotions?" heading and information. If you were to seperate this information with some spacing (like every so sentences you press return so the next paragraph come under the first one) it will look a little more appealing to read. I'm just commenting this because looking at a big chunk of information might be a little bit scary. --U3190523 (discusscontribs) 07:22, 16 October 2020 (UTC)Reply


Chapter review and feedback[edit source]

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. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Chapter marks will be available later via UCLearn, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a reasonably good chapter. Theory is well explained. Some promising use of research. The quality of written expression is problematic. Some examples are used. No clear take-home messages.
  2. For additional feedback, see the following comments and [YouTube video from TEDxTalk these copyedits].

Theory[edit source]

  1. The main strength of this chapter is the explanation of theory.
  2. More examples could be helpful, especially, say, a case study which shows someone moving from problematic to mindful eating, and how they made this change, and the consequences of such a change.
  3. Over reliance on non-peer-reviewed sources.

Research[edit source]

  1. Overall, this chapter provides a reasonable overview of some relevant research.
  2. When describing important research findings, consider indicating the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
  3. Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.

Written expression[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is promising, but falls below professional standard.
    2. "People" is often a better term than "individuals"; similarly "participants" is preferred to "subjects".
    3. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    4. Move external links to the external links section. Replace in-text links with interwiki links to related Wikiversity or Wikipedia pages. Make greater use of peer-reviewed citations.
    5. 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 brackets at the end of the sentence.
  2. Layout
    1. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an introductory paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings.
    2. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading - use 0 or 2+ sub-headings.
  3. Learning features
    1. See also - use bullet-points, per Tutorial 1.
    2. External - move Wikipedia links to the see also section
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Very good use of image(s).
    6. Basic use of table(s).
    7. Very good use of feature box(es).
    8. Good use of quiz(zes).
  4. Grammar
    1. The grammar for many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
    2. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect.
    3. Use serial commas[1] - it is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists. Here's a 1 min. explanatory video.
    4. Abbreviations
      1. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses.
  5. APA style
    1. Figures and tables
      1. Use APA style for Figure captions. See example.
      2. Use APA style for Table captions. See example.
      3. The image for Figure 5 was deleted - most likely due to insufficient information about its copyright status.
      4. Refer to each Table and Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, use a capital for Figure etc.).
    2. Citations use correct APA style.
    3. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation.
      2. Move non-peer-reviewed sources into the external links section.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~10 logged, mostly last minute, social contributions with direct links to evidence. Some contributions were minor/trivial.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:02, 11 November 2020 (UTC)Reply


Multimedia 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[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a reasonably good presentation.
  2. The presentation is under the maximum time limit.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. An appropriate amount of content is presented - not too much or too little.
  2. Narrate an initial title/sub-title slide, to help the viewer understanding the focus and goal of the presentation. This slide could be left up for longer, given the presentation is considerably shorter than the maximum amount of time.
  3. Consider adding and narrating an Overview slide (e.g., with focus questions), to help orientate the viewer about what will be covered.
  4. The presentation makes good use of theory.
  5. The presentation makes basic use of research.
  6. The presentation could be improved by making more use of examples or case studies.
  7. A Conclusion slide is presented with a take-home message(s).

Communication[edit source]

  1. The presentation makes good use of text and image based slides with narrated audio and webcam inset.
  2. Well paced.
  3. Consider using greater intonation to enhance listener interest and engagement.
  4. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read.
  5. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. The video is well produced using simple tools.
  2. Remove navigation icons.
  3. The chapter title and sub-title are used in both the name of presentation and on the opening slide - this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. Check capitalisation.
  4. Audio recording quality was good.
  5. Visual display quality was very good.
  6. Image sources and their copyright status are provided.
  7. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the video description but not in the meta-data.
  8. A link to the book chapter is provided.
  9. A link to the book chapter is provided but it goes to a specific section rather than the top of the chapter.
  10. A link from the book chapter is provided.
  11. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:19, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply