Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2016/Antidepressants and emotion

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comments[edit source]

Hello, i thought i might give a bit of information since this is an area i'm very interested in and have done alot of research about. Drugs that inhibit reuptake of serotonin have a tendency to 'numb' and 'blunt' emotions, both positive and negative Emotional side-effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: qualitative study

This study found that SSRI's inhibit the amygdala response It also found that Norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors increase activation in the thalamus and the cingulate cortex Acute neural effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors versus noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors on emotion processing: Implications for differential treatment efficacy

There are also different types of antidepressants, such as MAOI's, and medicines that act on certain receptors (Buspar, Mirtazapine, Vilazodone, Trazodone) Here is an article on mirtazapine Early effects of mirtazapine on emotional processing.

Generally the antidepressants have varying and sporadic effects on emotion. drugs that affect dopamine and norepinephrine have a tendency to increase emotion whereas serotonergic drugs tend to decrease it. But it varies wildly given the individual differences in people taking it.

A very very interesting antidepressant that i think would be definately worth mentioning in your book chapter is 'Tianeptine'

It enhances the reuptake of serotonin, as opposed to inhibiting it as SSRI's do, and has been found to be more effective Here are some articles on it Tianeptine and fluoxetine in major depression: a 6-week randomised double-blind study Tianeptine A Review of its Use in Depressive Disorders

Here is another references that might be interesting Arlo --Arlo Porter (discusscontribs) 12:51, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello just found an article, hope you will be interested, it talks about mental blunting after taking antidepressants, also discusses generally about what usual problems people suffer from taking antidepressants. the title is'The Oxford Questionnaire on the Emotional Side-effects of Antidepressants (OQuESA): Development, validity, reliability and sensitivity to change' (discusscontribs) 09:58, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Structure[edit source]

User:U3166203, avoid having a single sub-section within a section; either add another sub-section or merge the content into the higher level section. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:48, 23 October 2016 (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 promising chapter which could be improved by providing a more indepth consideration of relevant psychology theory and research.
  2. For more feedback see these copyedits and the comments below.
  3. Feel free to make ongoing changes to the chapter if you wish to address any of these comments or make other improvements.

Theory[edit source]

  1. Neuroscience theory is covered. Little is said about the cognitive effects of antidepressants and how this may impact on emotion.
  2. Emotion is considered quite vaguely - what is the evidence about the effects of antidepressants on different types of emotion? Which types of emotion are most pertinent to depression?
  3. It would be helpful to report about theoretical and empirical literature which distinguishes between endogenous depression and situation-induced depression, with antidepressants being most beneficial to the other former group.
  4. The conclusion states that "Antidepressants have many beneficial aspects in the regulation of emotions" - but which emotions - this is vague - ideally this chapter could be more conclusive about the emotional impacts.

Research[edit source]

  1. It would helpful to report results of meta-analytic studies of the emotional effects of antidepressants.
  2. Some statements are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)
  3. When describing important research studies, provide some indication of the nature of the method.
  4. 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 is reasonably good.
    1. Obtaining (earlier) comments on a chapter plan and/or chapter draft could have helped to improve the chapter.
    2. Some paragraphs are overly long. Paragraphs should communicate a single key idea in about three to five sentences.
    3. What are the practical, take-home messages?
    4. Some clarification templates have been added to the page.
  2. Structure and headings
    1. Each section should start with at least one introductory paragraph before branching into sub-sections.
    2. Avoid sections with only one sub-section. A section should have no sub-sections or at least two sub-sections.
  3. Layout
    1. Effective use of Tables and/or Figures.
    2. Tables and Figures should be referred to in the main text.
    3. Add bullet-points for See also and External links.
  4. Integration with other chapters
    1. The chapter provides an excellent range of relevant links to other Wikiversity pages.
  5. Learning features
    1. Add Interwiki links (to relevant Wikipedia articles) to make the text more interactive.
    2. Quiz questions could be used to encourage reader engagement.
  6. Spelling
    1. Use Australian spelling (some general examples are hypothesize -> hypothesise; behavior -> behaviour).
  7. Grammar and proofreading
    1. Check and correct the use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs. individuals').
  8. APA style
    1. Check and correct the APA style for how to report numbers (Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numbers (e.g., 10)).
    2. The reference list is not in full APA style.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:47, 17 November 2016 (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. Wow - brilliant presentation!

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. Overview
    1. Clear Overview - sets up and establishes the problem and its importance in a clear and understandable way.
  2. Selection and organisation
    1. Great coverage of theory and research.
    2. Well structured.
  3. Conclusion
    1. Take-home messages / key points are well summarised.

Communication[edit source]

  1. Audio
    1. Audio is clear and well-paced.
  2. Video
    1. Visuals are clear, simple, innovative and easy/interesting to watch and follow.
    2. The combination of images and text is effective.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. Overall, fantastic production.
  2. I'm keen to know more about how you created this presentation - what tools did you use?
  3. Meta-data
    1. Include the full book chapter title and subtitle in the meta-data and first visual.
    2. Add a link to the book chapter.
    3. Fill out the description field (e.g., brief description of presentation, link back to the book chapter, license details, and possibly include references, image attributions, and/or transcript).
  4. Audio recording quality
    1. Excellent
  5. Image/video recording quality
    1. Excellent
  6. Licensing
    1. A copyright license for the presentation is shown.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 17:07, 19 November 2016 (UTC)