Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2014/Fight, flight, freeze system and emotion

Heading casing

FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for lower-cased headings. For example, use: ==Cats and dogs== rather than ==Cats and Dogs== -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:13, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Quick Suggestions

Hi

Sorry, I wish I had time to do a better review for you but my eyes are hanging out of my head. Just a couple of things I noticed:

I would be hesitant to use the abbreviation in the title - I wouldn't introduce it till the Overview. If you introduce it there then you probably need to consistently use the abbreviation.

You will need to correct your headings to Wiki standard (as per James' comment above).

You should probably outline FFS and then expand on why we have it (maybe switch these paragraphs around).

You need to put some hyperlinks in, eg FFS, emotion etc

The only other thing I recommend is being cautious of spending too much of your word limit on defining FFS and emotion and not focusing enough on theories and your focus question.

Chelsi CFD (discuss • contribs) 12:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

References

Hello,

I have added italics in the appropriate sections of your references --U3083960 (discuss • contribs) 13:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via 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 A well produced piece of work. Structure and content The structure of this presentation is very clear, and the flow is logical. However, the selected content requires improvement. Research is included throughout, but not specifically referred to. Theories are not directly discussed. Including some kind of conclusion would be useful. Communication Communication is generally well done. The voice-over is well paced. Some more expresso could be used. The slides are neatly presented. Some slides contain too much information. Remember to choose only important information, and avoid using too many full sentences; dot points are more efficient. Images and figures could also have been included to re-enforce the information being delivered verbally and through the text. Production quality Basic production tools are used very effectively. Both audio and visual quality are good. In terms of production, the presentation has a professional feel. Copyright license information is provided. A link back to the chapter is provided.

ShaunaB (discuss • contribs) 09:00, 18 November 2014 (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 Overall, this is a solid, well-written chapter. For more feedback, see these copyedits and comments below. Theory Theory is well covered. Reeve (2009) is over-used as a citation; draw primarily on primary, peer-reviewed sources Research Research could be covered in more detail. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship. Written expression Written expression The Overview is thorough; it could even be abbreviated. Perhaps add a case study or example. Avoid one paragraph sections. A section should have at least two paragraphs. Some of the bullet-points should be rewritten into full paragraph format. Layout Tables and/or Figures were not used. Some coloured boxes were removed to aid readability; keep the style simple (e.g., as per Wikipedia articles) Learning features Integrate links to other chapters on related topics (e.g., fear, anger, oxytocin) Quiz questions are used effectively to encourage reader engagement. Grammar and proofreading The grammar of some sentences need to be improved (e.g., see the tags) Check and correct the use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs. individuals') Use abbreviations such as "e.g." inside brackets and "for example" outside brackets APA style Put in-text citations in alphabetical order. et al -> et al. Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets. The reference list is not in full APA style.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:14, 2 December 2014 (UTC)