Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Episodic future thinking and delay discounting

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Initial suggestions[edit source]

@LightDragonflies: Thanks for tackling this topic. Some initial suggestions:

Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Heading casing[edit source]

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 06:45, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply


Topic development feedback[edit source]

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[edit source]

  1. The title is correctly worded and formatted
  2. The sub-title is correctly worded and formatted
  3. Remove user name – authorship is as per the list of topics and the page's editing history

Headings[edit source]

  1. See earlier comment about Heading casing
  2. Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development (e.g., by expanding the structure for the critical section about the relationship)
  3. Health interventions section not required - but these could be excellent areas for case studies/applied examples
  4. Promising alignment between focus questions and heading structure

Overview[edit source]

  1. Add a scenario or case study into a feature box (with an image) at the start of this section to help catch reader interest
  2. A brief, evocative description of the problem/topic is provided
  3. Present focus questions in a feature box at the end of this section

Key points[edit source]

  1. Promising development of key points for each section, with relevant citations
  2. Avoid providing too much background information. 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.
  3. Strive for an integrated balance of theory and research, with practical examples
  4. Conclusion (the most important section):
    1. Hasn't been developed

Figure[edit source]

  1. A relevant figure is presented
  2. Caption could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text
  3. Cite each figure at least once in the main text

Learning feature[edit source]

  1. Excellent use of in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters
  2. Consider including more examples/case studies, quiz question(s), table(s) etc.

References[edit source]

  1. Four out of six references provided
  2. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. capitalisation
    2. make doi hyperlinks active (i.e., clickable)
    3. page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-)

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Very good
    2. Use bullet-points (see Tutorial 02)
  2. External links
    1. Not developed

User page[edit source]

  1. Created – minimal, but sufficient
  2. Very brief description about self provided – consider expanding
  3. 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.
  4. Link provided to book chapter

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. 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 06:45, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Social Contributions[edit source]

Hi, you have taken a really interesting approach to this topic, I especially like how you have separated the sections into each addiction. Are there any systematic reviews about this topic that might be relevant? Additionally, I would consider adding interactive quizzes for each addition. --U3224582 (discusscontribs) 05:32, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Book 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. Chapter marks will be available via UCLearn along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is an excellent chapter. It successfully uses psychological theory and research to address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
  2. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits

Overview[edit source]

  1. Well developed
  2. Engages reader interest by introducing a case study and/or scenario with an image in a feature box
  3. Clearly explains the problem or phenomenon
  4. Clear focus questions
  5. Ideally, provide open-ended, rather than closed-ended focus questions

Theory[edit source]

  1. An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained
  2. Build more strongly on other related chapters and/or Wikipedia articles(e.g., by embedding links to other chapters)
  3. Insightful depth is provided about relevant theory(ies)
  4. No use of tables, figures, and/or lists are to help convey key theoretical information
  5. Key citations are well used
  6. Excellent use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts

Research[edit source]

  1. Excellent/ review of relevant research
  2. Excellent critical thinking about relevant research is evident

Integration[edit source]

  1. Excellent integration between theory and research

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. Reasonably good summary and conclusion
  2. Remind the reader about the importance of the problem or phenomenon of interest
  3. Key points are summarised
  4. Add practical, take-home message(s)

Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is excellent
    2. 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.
    3. Some paragraphs are overly long. Communicate one key idea per paragraph in three to five sentences.
  2. Layout
    1. The chapter is well structured
    2. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-section
    3. Include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see [Provide more detail] tags)
    4. See earlier comments about heading casing
  3. Grammar and proofreading are excellent
  4. Proofreading
    1. More proofreading is needed (e.g., fix punctuation and typographical errors) to bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard
    2. Remove unnecessary capitalisation
  5. APA style
    1. Use sentence casing for the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc.
    2. Figures
      1. Figures are well captioned
      2. Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text
    3. Citations are not in full APA style (7th ed.). For example:
      1. If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year. For example, either:
        1. in-text, Smith et al. (2020), or
        2. in parentheses (Smith et al., 2020)
      2. Use ampersand (&) inside parentheses and "and" outside parentheses
    4. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation[1]
      2. Use alphabetical order

Learning features[edit source]

  1. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/Insufficient use of learning features
  2. Very good 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.
  3. 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.
  4. Good use of image(s)
  5. No use of table(s)
  6. Basic use of feature box(es)
  7. Excellent use of case studies or examples
  8. No use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s)
  9. Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section
    1. Use bullet points per Tutorial 02
    2. Include more links
  10. Basic use of external links in the "External links" section
    1. Use bullet points per Tutorial 02
    2. Include more links

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~4 logged, useful, moderate social contributions with direct links to evidence
  2. Remove clarification tags once you fix the problem

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:51, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

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[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a good to very good presentation
  2. The presentation is over the maximum time limit — content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking and feedback purposes

Overview[edit source]

  1. An opening slide with the title and sub-title is briefly displayed
  2. Also narrate the title and sub-title — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  3. This presentation has an opening scenario to hook audience interest
  4. A context for the presentation is clearly established through an example
  5. Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. This will help to focus and discipline the presentation.

Content[edit source]

  1. Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section
  2. The presentation addresses the topic
  3. The presentation makes very good use of relevant psychological theory
  4. The presentation lacks explicit use of relevant psychological research
  5. Include citations to support claims
  6. The presentation makes excellent use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice
  7. The presentation provides easy to understand information

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. A general conclusion slide is presented with a verbal summary
  2. The Conclusion only partly fitted within the time limit

Audio[edit source]

  1. The audio is easy to follow
  2. The presentation makes good use of narrated audio
  3. Consider slowing down and leaving longer pauses between sentences. This can help the viewer to cognitively digest the information that has just been presented before moving on to the next point
  4. Reasonably good intonation
  5. The narration is well practiced and/or performed
  6. Audio recording quality was good
  7. Review microphone set-up to achieve higher recording quality (there was some audio static/mini-glitches)
  8. The narrated content is well matched to the target topic (see content) but lacked synthesis of the best psychological research about this topic

Video[edit source]

  1. Overall, visual display quality is good
  2. The presentation makes good use of text and image based slides
  3. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read
  4. The amount of text presented per slide makes it easy to read and listen at the same time
  5. The presentation could be strengthened by adding some more text (e.g., about take-home messages)
  6. The visual communication is supplemented in a basic way by images and/or diagrams
  7. Also consider using diagrams
  8. The presentation is well produced using simple tools
  9. The visual content is well matched to the target topic (see content) but could be strengthened by making more explicit use of the best psychological research about this topic

Meta-data[edit source]

  1. 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
  2. A written description of the presentation is provided
  3. Links to and from the book chapter are provided
  4. An inactive hyperlink to the book chapter is provided because the YouTube user account does not yet have access to advanced features

Licensing[edit source]

  1. Image sources are communicated
  2. Also indicate the copyright license for the images
  3. A copyright license for the presentation is not provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:20, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply