Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2014/Self-esteem and emotion

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comments[edit source]

Hey, I've just read through your chapter, and what you have so far is really interesting and easy to read and understand. However just a minor issue I picked up is there is a discrepancy between your in-text citation and the citation in the reference list for Averill (1998) in the what is emotion section. Otherwise good job so far and I'm looking forward to reading more information. --U3080853 (discusscontribs) 00:08, 19 October 2014 (UTC) u3080853


Hi there, I noticed you didn't have your quiz completed yet and thought I would share what I used to make a quiz on my page (Self-injury and motivation) in case you wanted to use it.

Test your knowledge[edit source]

1 INSERT QUESTION

INSERT WRONG ANSWER
INSERT WRONG ANSWER
INSERT CORRECT ANSWER
INSERT WRONG ANSWER

2 INSERT QUESTION

INSERT WRONG ANSWER
INSERT WRONG ANSWER
INSERT CORRECT ANSWER
INSERT WRONG ANSWER


|}

Hope this helps! KerrieW (discusscontribs) 09:16, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions[edit source]

Hi Aliesha

I know you probably haven't finished, so disregard anything you're already on top of, but here are a few suggestions:

You could link some of your words like 'self-esteem' and 'emotion' (or even Carl Rogers) to other chapters or wikipedia (I think this is in the guidelines).

I think if you're going to say 'numerous psych fields' you might need to follow it up with a number of different perspectives. Could you change it to just 'different psych fields' and maybe find another area's definition?

I think you could (or couldn't - no biggie) use a subheading for the types of self-esteem. Also, The last two lines about low self-esteem appear to define it - how would it read if you moved them higher up?


If you have the space for extra words you could elaborate on how high self esteem becomes vulnerable to changes in these tendencies.

For 3 plus authors (up to 6) you only have to use all the names in the first instance, then you can abbreviate to et al. (ie, in Wood, Heimpel etc & Tergwot etc). Also, you tend to use 'Fur, (2005) - you don't need the comma after the name and before the bracket).

These two sentences appear a little repetitive. Maybe you could combine them differently, eg Erol and Orth (2011) suggested that after adolescence income can have a significant effect as it influences self-esteem and can mold one's perceptions based on their social values.

With the paragraph starting 'during the time of moving' your second sentence appears to contradict your first. Maybe you could start your first with 'it was previously thought'.

If you are going to utilise the table I would delete all the unnecessary words (ie, 'is that of', 'Relates to', and 'Is a'.

You have a line ADD, how they Differ (I'm sure you're aware of it, but just in case). This is in bold, and isn't finished.

You have quite a bit on defining self-esteem (that includes emotional aspects), I wonder if you'd be better to move the definition of emotion to above self-esteem - that way it would blend a little better (In the lecture James warned about using too much space to define concepts and not focusing on how they interact- I think if you move emotion first it will look more like they are integrated).

If you have room - it would be interesting to see examples of Fur's study of when high self esteem results in lower levels of happiness etc.


Generally, there are a couple of things to check - if you're using 'ones' I'd make sure you are consistent in using the apostrophe at the end (ones'). You could just do a find ones and check each one (I corrected some). Also, try and read the page out loud. I think you could delete some commas and possibly break some more sentences down.

I know I've made a lot of suggestions, but your chapter reads really well. You've covered lots of stuff and have made it easy to absorb.

Chelsi CFD (discusscontribs) 07:13, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Feedback[edit source]

Your chapter is looking good so far, I fixed up a problem with the table title so it is now in APA format. I also fixed up some minor punctuation problems, such as missing spaces between sentences etc. I think in your table you may need a heading such as dimension of self-esteem then definition just to be clearer about what is included in the table. For studies that have more than three authors you only need to write all their names the first time and then use et al for all subsequent citations. Perhaps expand on the results of the Furr study. Other than that it seems to be coming along nicely Ash --U3080853 (discusscontribs) 04:02, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

book chapter[edit source]

Hi, Just dropping by to say that your book chapter is looking really good. I like the lay out of it i think you have just the right amount of colour and i like how you have started with a quote. Good work. Soneill90 (discusscontribs) 03:29, 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.

Multimedia.png

Overall[edit source]

Overall, this is a good, clear presentation. Well done.

Structure and content[edit source]

The structure is clear, and the flow between ideas appears to be logical. Basic definitions are well articulated in order to form a foundation for the topic. Theory is well integrated throughout. Research is also included, with important pieces of literature being well selected. The inclusion of illustrative examples could be an area for improvement.

Communication[edit source]

The voice-over is well paced with sufficient expression. Avoid reading out the slide headings; it interrupts the flow of the presentation. Text on slides is clear. It may be useful to include images and figures to re-enforce the information being delivered verbally.

Production quality[edit source]

Basic production tools are used. The audio quality is generally good, although there is some background 'fuzz' and peaking. Quality is visuals is good. The presentation lacks some professional feel, which could be achieved by addressing some of the feedback addressed above. A link back to the chapter is provided. Copyright license information is provided.

ShaunaB - Talk


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.

Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a somewhat helpful chapter about self-esteem and emotion. The considerable critique of self-esteem is not represented. For more feedback, see my copyedits and comments below.

Theory[edit source]

  1. There was too much general material about self-esteem (provide a summary and link to other Wikiversity or Wikipedia material for general self-esteem material).
  2. The chapter could be improved by putting more emphasis on explaining the relationship between self-esteem and emotion.
  3. There is no clear conceptual consideration of directionality i.e., self-esteem -> emotion vs. emotion -> self-esteem vs. self-esteem <-> emotion

Research[edit source]

  1. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
  2. Some statements were unreferenced - see the [factual?] tags

Written expression[edit source]

  1. The chapter uses reasonable written expression, but this needs improvement to be of professional standard.
    1. A basic Overview is provided; this could be expanded
    2. Check correct perspective e.g., "our" and "your" used in same sentence
    3. The quality of written expression could be improved e.g., where clarification templates have been added to the page.
    4. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    5. The words "see" and "seen" are overutilised - rewrite.
    6. The Conclusion could be improved by providing some take-home messages.
  2. Layout
    1. Some Figures are presented; how they relate to self-esteem and emotion could be made more explicit.
  3. Learning features
    1. The text could become more interactive by including interwiki links.
    2. Rosenberg's self-esteem scale is presented (was permission obtained?) - probably a link to an online, auto-scored version of the survey would be better
  4. Spelling, grammar and proofreading
    1. The chapter could benefit considerably from professional proofreading.
    2. Check use of ownership apostrophes e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs. individuals
    3. Check/correct spaces between sentences
    4. The grammar for some sentences could be improved - see the [grammar?] tags
    5. Spelling could be improved - see the [spelling?] tags
  5. APA style
  6. et al -> et al.
  7. Studies should be discussed in the past tense.
    1. Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets.
    2. The reference list is not in full APA style e.g., check capitalisation.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:22, 27 November 2014 (UTC)