Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2015/Personality and achievement motivation

Comment

Hi, Just had a look at your chapter. I would suggest

• a more indepth overview at the start of the academic achievement section
• "Even over this period of time this factor is still a strong predictor. Smrtnik-Vitulić and Zupančič (2011) discuss that the factor of openness is commonly found to correlate with academic achievement. However, intelligence can come across as this factor within openness and therefore is not a valid predictor of how personality affects this behaviour." ---- This sentence should be reworded as it is difficult to understand.
• You could also add another heading under academic achievement which discusses gender differences. Since you discuss this subject specifically it should be differentiated from the rest of the paragraph.

Hope that helps :) Connorkaye (discuss • contribs) 03:33, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Just some more advice.

In terms of flow in your chapter, you have a very logical style. its seems like its basically: here is a fact -> here is the study that backs it up. this is really good as far as reporting research but what might improve the readability is more of a casual flow. so maybe including anecdotes or example stories about people with different personality traits and their motivation? you sort of do this in the introduction with walt disney/cathy freeman you could do a quiz that describe two people personalities and asks who is most likely to achieve. Or for example a lot of successful people like to tell stories about their childhood or things that influenced them. Including something like that at appropriate intervals through the chapter could enhance readability. Hope that helps :) Connorkaye (discuss • contribs) 00:47, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, There’s lots or really interesting material in your chapter and the reading list is very impressive. You mention three main areas of achievement (in general, in sports and in academia). Is your aim to focus mainly on academic achievement? Were you planning to do much on sports? I was wondering why sports has the same level of importance in the heading but hardly any coverage compared to academic achievement? Should sports maybe just feature as part of your general discussion? Also, the section on achievement in general is very short. You obviously have enough material to work with in relation to academic achievement. You might want to change the overall structure slightly to reflect that.

• The other area you might want focus on is editing your work. My main suggestions are:

1. Have a close look at the structure of some of your sentences just to make sure they are complete. For example, it is worth having a closer look at some sentences (like the second one in this quote from your chapter): “There are three Personality characteristics that can effect an individual’s achievement motivation. The first of which is the five-factor model of personality traits put forward by Costa and McCrae (1992).” “Neuroticism is regarding impulse control, anxiety, moodiness, and the degree of emotional stability.”
2. Also, have a close look for typos. For example, a few times you refer to ‘extroversion’ instead of ‘extraversion’.U3092375 (discuss • contribs) 06:31, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi there

I’ve made some minor edits to your page by way of spelling, grammar and syntax. One of these edits was capitalising ‘Big Five/5’, as I believe it is a commonly-used name and is a proper noun. I second the suggestion to have another look at some of your sentences for flow. One such suggestion is this one: “Desire for control is also seen to predict individual’s motivation for achievement for challenging tasks in general (Burger, 1985). A study by Burger (1985) …”. I would suggest amending to something like “Desire for control has also been shown to predict individual’s motivation for achievement for challenging tasks in general, as demonstrated by Burger, (1985). In this study…”. I hope this is helpful. Good work and good luck :) Hayley U3017556 (discuss • contribs) 10:02, 21 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.

Overall Overall, this is a fantastic chapter which makes effective use of the wiki environment and provides an integrated, indepth, but very readable synthesis of psychological theory and research on the topic. For more feedback see these copyedits and the comments below. Theory Theory is very well covered and integrated with the review of research. The examples helped to illustrate theory. Research Relevant research is very well reviewed. When describing important research studies, provide some indication of the nature of the sample and possibly cultural context. When discussing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship. Written expression Written expression is excellent. Layout Avoid sections with only one sub-section. A section should have no sub-sections or at least two sub-sections. Learning features The chapter makes excellent use of interwiki links. Quiz questions are used effectively to encourage reader engagement. Spelling, grammar, and proofreading are excellent. APA style The APA style for the reference list is very good.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:26, 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 Overall, this is a solid, effective, well prepared presentation. Structure and content Well structured. Theory and research were well covered. Include citations about evidence for claims. Communication Audio is clear and well-paced. Visuals are clear and easy to read. Production quality Overall, well produced using simple tools. Keyboard clicks are audible - check microphone set-up - minor issue. Complete the description field (e.g., brief description of presentation, link back to the book chapter, license details). Include image attributions. The copyright licenses and sources 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. A copyright license for the presentation is not indicated (i.e., in the description or in the presentation slides). No link is provided back to the book chapter.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:31, 26 November 2015 (UTC)