Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2013/Religiosity and emotion

Suggested references

Hey have a look at these, found them interesting myself:

Fuller, R. (2006). Wonder and the religious sensibility: A study in religion and emotion. The Journal of religion, 86(3), 364-384.

Alcorta, C. S., & Sosis, R. (2005). Ritual, emotion, and sacred symbols. Human Nature, 16(4), 323-359.

Watts, F. N. (1996). Psychological and religious perspectives on emotion. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 6(2), 71-87.

Best of luck --Liam 8 (discuss • contribs) 10:50, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Comment

Here is some basic background reading on an interesting relationship between the controversial psychological concept of emotional intelligence and religiosity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence#Studies_examining_religiosity_and_emotional_intelligence U3054911 (discuss • contribs) 05:57, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Religiosity or religousity?

Hi, You seem to flit between these two terms a bit. I noticed your topic assignment was "religousity", but google says "religiosity". Whichever spelling you follow, I would suggest coming to a consensus of terms. Cheers

I have sources which support both spellings, sadly which puts me at odds a bit. but thank you i shell stick with one if i have time to change them all. or notive one out of place.U3069912 (discuss • contribs) 12:02, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

GerardeC (discuss • contribs) 11:52, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

I would also suggest playing with subheadings a bit and breaking up the paragraphs. At the moment it reads very much like a wall of text. If you break it up with sub-headings, people will be able to navigate to the nuts and bolts of the page more easily, as well. GerardeC (discuss • contribs) 11:54, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

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. 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 Moodle, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall What a fascinating topic! Well done for providing a well balanced chapter. Theory Theory was incorporated, but could have been explored further. Well done for practically applying the concepts. To improve further, include some evidence of critical evaluation. Research Some really interesting research has been presented in this chapter - great job. A particular highlight is the way that you balanced the chapter to cover a range of perspectives. Once again, critical analysis of the literature would benefit the chapter. Written expression The chapter follows a clear structure and written expression is clear. APA was generally well done. To improve further, include some interactive features and work on making the presentation of the chapter more interesting.ShaunaB (discuss • contribs)

Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via login to the unit's Moodle site. Written feedback is provided below, plus there is a 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. If you wish to dispute the marks, see the suggested marking dispute process.

Overall This is a nice summary of the chapter content - well done! Structure and content Theory and research are explored well. The flow between ideas of clear and logical. Key concepts have been well chosen. Communication Verbal communication is clear and confident. More expression could have been used to make the presentation more engaging. The slides accompanied the voice well, but could have included more images throughout. Production quality Picture and sound quality are good. Apart from some minor punctuation errors in slides, the presentation comes across as quite professional. ShaunaB (discuss • contribs)