Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2015/Emotion duration

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comment[edit source]

Hey! your topic looks really interesting! Maybe you could include something about whether there are cross-cultural differences in the duration of emotions. Maybe shorten the headings a little. Some links (if you haven't already found them :) ) Good luck! Look forward to reading your chapter! U3097090 (discusscontribs) 10:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feedback[edit source]

Hiǃ Very interesting topic I must sayǃ Few suggestionsː I think it would improve the overall flow of your paper and the aesthetics if you use shorter and fewer headings. Also I would say it is very important to mention why it is so important to have this information? If one does know how long a particular emotion lasts and why, what could one do with that information? I think it would be wise to incorporate why such studies were necessary. I know you have mentioned "continuation" of joy, "prevention" of anger and sadness, however maybe present it as therapeutic implications or practical applications just so it appeals to the reader more and marker can clearly see that you have addressed the marking criteriaǃ Good luckǃǃ I think you'll find this article helpfulː Here is another one that talks about negative emotions, their intensity and duration. Brans, K., & Verduyn, P. (2014). Intensity and Duration of Negative Emotions: Comparing the Role of Appraisals and Regulation Strategies. Plos ONE, 9(3), 1-13. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0092410 --U3059210 (discusscontribs) 17:39, 22 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey! Your topic looks really interesting so far and will be good to see how it progresses! Just a hint (if you're not already planning to do it), just shorten the headings a bit, instead of saying overcoming/prevention, maybe just stick to saying prevention and explain how people overcome the emotion. I found a cool article about the management of anger after a brain injury and how quickly it can change from before the injury. Here's the reference if you're interested, good luck! Medd, J., & Tate, R. L. (2000). Evaluation of an anger management therapy programme following acquired brain injury: A preliminary study. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 10(2), 185-201. Bt1718 (discusscontribs) 3:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


Your current outline looks really good and there is a clear breakdown of what you're going to write about. As a suggestion I think it would be helpful to the reader to see comparison tables/graphs/figures of the emotions to see how they differ to each other and maybe also compare them to shorter length emotions. Overall this seems like an interesting topic that I'll keep an eye on and hopefully help you out as you progress! U3096981 (discusscontribs) 09:01, 22 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there! I also had a look at your page. Looks good so far. The only thing I was thinking so far is that I'm fairly sure James mentioned something about being careful on how many sub headings we use? Also keeping in mind the word count that we have... Otherwise I have "starred" your page and will aim to contribute more as your page progresses. All the best Linda --U3096823 (discusscontribs) 10:35, 22 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello there. It looks like a very extensive contents list. As you write you may consolidate some of the headings. As an outline they are good although, you may want to eventually limit titles to simpler one or small amounts of words rather than questions. As they appear in your word count twice. All the best with your research. --David James Stevenson (discusscontribs) 01:29, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there,

I think what you've got so far is great! As the others have mentioned - consolidating the headings would be a good idea. I am very interested in learning more about this and I'm keen to see the first draft! Not sure how far you've gotten with your research but I came across this fairly recent article about the relevance of event importance and rumination. I often find myself ruminating on emotional events so it's something I would find interesting to read about --U3046579 (discusscontribs) 03:36, 12 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Heading casing[edit source]

Crystal Clear app ktip.svg
FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for lower-cased headings. For example, use:

==Cats and dogs==

rather than

==Cats and Dogs==

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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 solid chapter which could be improved by providing a more comprehensive initial review of research on emotion duration before focusing on the three longer lasting emotions. More attention to proofreading is also recommended.
  2. For more feedback see these copyedits and the comments below.

Theory[edit source]

  1. Theory is well covered generally and then within each of the three emotions.
  2. The examples per emotion are very helpful.

Research[edit source]

  1. Research is reasonably well covered.
  2. Explain the Verduyn and Lavrijsen (2015) study in more detail. Summarising this and related studies are fundamental to an effective chapter on this topic.
  3. The Reeve textbook is over-used as a citation; preferably consult and cite primary, peer-reviewed sources.
  4. Some statements were unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)
  5. When describing important research studies, provide some indication of the nature of the sample and possibly cultural context.
  6. When discussing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.

Written expression[edit source]

  1. The quality of written expression could be improved (e.g., see where clarification templates have been added to the page).
  2. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., above, below, as previously mentioned).
  3. Layout
    1. Add bullet-points for See also and External links.
    2. The Figures are useful
  4. Learning features
    1. Add Interwiki links (e.g., to relevant Wikipedia articles and other Wikiversity book chapters) to make the text more interactive.
    2. Quiz questions are used effectively to encourage reader engagement.
  5. Spelling
    1. Spelling could be improved - see the [spelling?] tags.
    2. Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize -> hypothesise).
  6. Grammar and proofreading
    1. Check and correct the use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs. individuals').
    2. The grammar of some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
  7. APA style
    1. Add APA style captions to tables and figures.
    2. The reference list is not in full APA style.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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 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 solid presentation.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. Well structured.
  2. Theory was well covered.
  3. Research could be better covered (e.g., what is the evidence that these are the longest lasting emotions?)
  4. The Conclusion slide/audio was very helpful.
  5. What are the take-home messages for improving our emotional lives?

Communication[edit source]

  1. Audio is well-paced.
  2. Visuals are generally clear and easy to read.
  3. Some text is too small/much to easily digest - abbreviate.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. Audio recording quality is low and there is some background noise - review microphone set-up.
  2. Rename the title so that it includes the subtitle (and matches the book chapter).
  3. Rename the title so that it is more descriptive and meaningful.
  4. The copyright licenses for the images used is not indicated - there may have been copyright violation unless you own the copyright to the images used or these were public domain images.
  5. A copyright license for the presentation is not indicated (i.e., in the description or in the presentation slides).
  6. No link is provided back to the book chapter.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:08, 3 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]