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

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Emotional appraisal and blushing[edit source]

Hi - I think our topics have a bit in common - how biofeedback impacts emotional appraisal. Perhaps some of Arnold and Lazarus' theories may be handy in exploring this topic? It'd be great if we could trade a few ideas about the biofeedback side of things. --U3100675 (discusscontribs) 09:01, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[]

Thanks for your suggestion - I have left a comment on your [discuss page] --Audrey O'Mara (discusscontribs) 02:53, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[]

Comments[edit source]

Hi I have found a useful article online through the university library EBSCOhost website which will be helpful for your book chapter. It is titled: "Blushing and the Exposed Self: Darwin Revisited. I think it will be an excellent starting point for you because it discusses how originally blushing did not receive much attention in psychological research as it was assumed it represented only embarrassment. However, since this time it has been further explored and found to be associated with other expressions of emotion. It also explores the blush as a signal and includes some excellent examples of blushing between two individuals despite differences in their personal characteristics. These examples may be useful if you are considering including case studies within your chapter. It also discusses some theories of blushing and implications of these. Here is a link to the webpage if you are interested: I hope you find it helpful! Good luck! --LeoDean1993 (discusscontribs) 04:46, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[]

Thank you for your suggestion, I will incorporate this information. --Audrey O'Mara (discusscontribs) 23:41, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[]

This chapter was used for demo purposes[edit source]

This chapter was used for demo purposes as part of the Tutorial 4 virtual tutorial recording.

Hence, I added some images, tables, and a quiz - feel free to use, modify, or delete as you see fit.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:20, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[]

Wiki links[edit source]

Some links have been added as external links - convert these to internal (wiki) links. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:40, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[]

--Audrey O'Mara (discusscontribs) 01:59, 21 October 2016 (UTC) Thank you James, I'm still trying to figure it out with the help page![]

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 23:29, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[]

Thanks James, I have now corrected this. --Audrey O'Mara (discusscontribs) 00:21, 22 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. This is a very readable, interesting chapter that fits well with the book theme.
  2. The main area for improvement is closer referencing of claims.
  3. For more feedback see these copyedits and the comments below.
  4. 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. The opening case study is great - sets the scene.
  2. Excellent Overview.
  3. Was the Darwin (1872) source directly consulted? If not, don't cite it (or use a secondary citation).
  4. After starting off promisingly, the Theory section seems to drift off-course without obvious linking/transition to social anxiety and then to Lazarus' unnamed theory which isn't described in relation to blushing. This part could benefit from more drafting.
  5. It would probably be helpful to conceptually distinguish between social anxiety disorder and social phobia (and if/how they are related to blushing).
  6. The Conclusion could be expanded to include a better summary with take-home messages.

Research[edit source]

  1. Many statements were unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)
  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 is generally very good.
    1. Some clarification templates have been added to the page.
  2. Layout
    1. Some restructuring was done to try to improve the flow - several of the subheadings were added as wiki headings.
    2. Add bullet-points for See also and External links.
    3. Tables and/or Figures are used effectively.
  3. Learning features
    1. Some links to Wikipedia and/or Wikiversity articles were added - these only need to be added on first mention of a keyword; use plain text for the keyword subsequently. More links to Wikipedia for other key terms should be added.
    2. Quiz questions are used effectively to encourage reader engagement - great set of questions.
  4. Spelling and grammar is generally excellent.
  5. APA style
    1. Check/correct APA for direct quotes.
    2. The APA style for the reference list is very good; remove issue numbers for paginated journals.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:58, 12 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. Overall, this is a solid presentation.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. Overview
    1. Tell the listener what they will find out about if they watch this presentation.
    2. Consider including examples.
  2. Selection and organisation
    1. Good coverage of theory and solutions; fits with book theme.
    2. Limited coverage of research (e.g., what is the single most important study?)
    3. Citations and references are included.
  3. Conclusion
    1. A Conclusion slide summarising the take-home messages / key points could be helpful.

Communication[edit source]

  1. Audio
    1. Audio is clear and well-paced, with excellent intonation.
  2. Image/Video
    1. Red font on dark background is hard to read.
    2. The combination of images and text is effective.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. Overall, basic but effective production.
  2. Meta-data
    1. Well titled.
    2. Link to chapter provided in presentation, but also include in the Description field.
    3. Minimal but sufficient use of the Description field.
  3. Audio recording quality
    1. Add audio to the opening/title slide
    2. Sufficient
  4. Image/video recording quality
    1. Effective use of simple tools.
  5. Licensing
    1. A copyright license for the presentation is not indicated (i.e., in the meta-data or the visual presentation).
    2. The copyright licenses and sources of the images are indicated.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 13:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[]