Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2015/High-risk business motivation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comments[edit source]

Hi just letting you know I fixed a bunch of spelling and grammatical errors and some really random in text referencing. Not sure I got everything, but you should check all your references to McClelland which you spelled differently in various places. Also, your links to other pages should be the first reference to the word in the paragraph, not in the title as you have done. I am sorry I don't have time to fix that for you. U943390 (discusscontribs) 21:24, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello just letting you know that your reference list is not in full APA 6 style. Whole sections (like names) are capitalised at the moment and should not be. Great chapter though!!! Ccgmjb (discusscontribs) 10:55, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Interesting topic!! I would suggest you looking into CEOs and other prominent business employees who have made high risk business decisions that paid off, and how this affected their later decision making processes (were they more likely to engage in high risk decisions or avoid them?). You could also see how people calculate risk, and individual differences for what is an acceptance risk level. Good luck!! --U3081677 (discusscontribs) 10:14, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey! Cool topic. A lot of research has gone into it. I like how you've tied it into the motivation side of things really well. Don't forget to change how you've referenced the images. They have to have figure numbers under them with a little description, rather than the link to them. You've got a variety of external links which is really good, maybe include a few in the actual text, rather than in the headings as it's a bit distracting to see it done so many times and blends in a bit better when it's linked in the text. This title is pretty long too - How can this information be used to help to people live more effective motivational and emotional lives? and the info doesn't really flow, as you just speak about one bit of information and then move onto the next study without a comment about it. In regards to the title, it could be shortened to something like "Living more effective motivational and emotional lives" and then you could say in the first line how the information above can be used to help people live better lives. That's just a suggestion though. Keep up the good work! --Bt1718 (discusscontribs) 7:16, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, found this page as a good source to get started on my own chapter with some related content. Just noticed a source was missing from the reference list that i would have found interesting for my topic (Greenberg, 2013). Thanks for laying some groundwork for framing further topics. --CMIV (discuss • 2:27, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

hi your chapter looks wicked good but i noticed your citation in the extrintic motivation part is alittle messed up. What you have is (Guay, F., Vallerand, R. J., & Blanchard, C. 2000 & Chantal, Y., Vallerand, R. J., & Vallieres, E. F. (1995). it should be

(Guay, F., Vallerand, R. J., & Blanchard, C.,2000 & Chantal, Y., Vallerand, R. J., & Vallieres, E. F.,1995).
) Uu3148421 (discusscontribs) 10:29, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Looks good! there is a lot of info about this topic - I would include a graphic in there and maybe make the ones you have a little bigger. Good luck :) U3040525 (discusscontribs) 11:29, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks everyone!

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 03:19, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey! Your book chapter is very thorough and well-researched. I have just made some minor adjustments to your references section so that it complies with the APA referencing formatting style. Other than that, your book chapter looks great! Good luck!--U3096825 (discusscontribs) 11:07, 25 October 2015 (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.

Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a solid chapter which covers a lot of theoretical territory, but could be improved by reducing the scope and focusing in more depth on theories with research that pertains directly to risk-taking in business.
  2. For more feedback see these copyedits and the comments below.

Theory[edit source]

  1. A lot of theoretical territory is covered, but the chapter could be more effective by being more selective.
  2. Some material in the Overview is repeated in the main body.
  3. Examples were helpful.

Research[edit source]

  1. Research coverage was not as strong as theory coverage.
  2. 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. Written expression was generally very good.
  2. Abbreviate; the chapter is well over the word count at over 5000 words.
  3. Layout
    1. There are perhaps too many top-level headings - consider incorporating as sub-headings.
    2. Some images are used, but the chapter could be improved by adding more images.
    3. Add bullet points to External links.
  4. Learning features
    1. The chapter makes minimal use of interwiki links.
    2. Quiz questions are used to encourage reader engagement.
  5. Spelling
    1. 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. The APA style for the reference list is very good; remove issue numbers for seriated journals.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:02, 23 November 2015 (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 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 well prepared and executed presentation.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. Effective application of theory to a novel topic.
  2. Theory is well explained and utilised with examples.
  3. What about research?

Communication[edit source]

  1. "The picture on the left" - zoom in on it.
  2. Excellent intonation - adds interest.
  3. The varied combination of images and text is effective.
  4. Zoom in on the take-home messages.
  5. Audio is clear and well-paced.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. Overall, well produced.
  2. Excellent title.
  3. Provide a clickable hyperlink to the book chapter.
  4. Clear licensing.
  5. Include image attributions.
  6. Expand description field to include a brief summary of the presentation.

is minimal but sufficient.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:44, 26 November 2015 (UTC)