Jump to content

Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2016/Changing mood through colour

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikiversity
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Jtneill in topic Multimedia feedback

Comments

[edit source]

Hi there, While doing my chapter on emotion I found this article about differing emotions. In it they make mention to how colour can influence different displays of emotion. By the looks the author has done a bit of research about it and might be a good place to explore. Plutchik, R. (2001). The nature of emotions: Human emotions have deep evolutionary roots, a fact that may explain their complexity and provide tools for clinical practice. American Scientist. 89(4), 344-350. Good Luck, Bee Taylor (discusscontribs) 02:28, 17 October 2016 (UTC)Reply


- Hey! Just with your references, you need to change all your author's names and the title of the article/books used to lower case. They are all in UPPER CASE at the moment and this is not correct APA formatting. Hope this helps you out a bit. :) Sophia sk16 (discusscontribs) 05:45, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Possible references

[edit source]

Heading casing

[edit source]
FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for lower-cased headings. For example, use:

==Cats and dogs==

rather than

==Cats and Dogs==

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:56, 23 October 2016 (UTC)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.

Overall

[edit source]
  1. Overall, this is a basic chapter.
  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.
  1. Overview
    1. Reasonable.
    2. Somewhat explains why the topic is important.
    3. Includes some focus questions.
    4. Includes an example or case study.
    5. Could be improved by outlining the major theories/research.
  2. Body
    1. Some basic theory described and considered.
  3. Conclusion
    1. Summarises chapter.
    2. Could be improved by providing some more concrete, take-home messages.
  1. Some statements are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)
  2. Several useful research studies were described; more could be added.
  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.
  1. Written expression was problematic due to spelling and grammar errors.
    1. For academic writing in psychology, such as this book chapter, write in third person rather than first (e.g., avoid "I', "we", "our") or second (e.g., "you", "your" etc.) person perspective.
    2. Use an active rather than a passive voice.
    3. The chapter somewhat addresses the topic and book theme but lacks practical take-home messages.
  2. Structure and headings
    1. Add See also section.
    2. Add External links section.
    3. See earlier comments about heading casing
  3. Layout
    1. Some images are used, but the chapter could be improved by adding more images.
    2. An image was removed - probably for copyright violation.
    3. Figure captions could be improved by making them more explanatory.
  4. Integration with other chapters
    1. No integration with other chapters is evident.
  5. Learning features
    1. Add Interwiki links (to relevant Wikipedia articles) to make the text more interactive.
    2. Quiz questions are used effectively to encourage reader engagement.
  6. Spelling
    1. Spelling could be improved - see the [spelling?] tags.
  7. Grammar and proofreading
    1. The grammar of some sentences needs to be improved for the written expression to be of professional standard (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
    2. Check and correct the use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs. individuals').
    3. Check and correct capitalisation at the start of sentences.
  8. APA style
    1. Check and correct the APA style formatting of in-text citations.
    2. Check and correct the use of APA style for direct quotes.
    3. The reference list is not in APA style.
    4. Check and correct the use of "&" vs. "and" (Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets).

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:15, 1 December 2016 (UTC)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 promising, but problematic presentation.
  2. The Multimedia presentation does not cover the Book Chapter topic - they are somewhat different topics.
  1. Overview
    1. Great - establishes the problem and its importance in a clear and understandable way.
  2. Selection and organisation
    1. Reasonably good selection of content to address the Multimedia topic although the content should address the Book chapter topic.
    2. The content starting at 2:06 and finishing around 2:45 gets the relationship between high/low arousal and easy/difficult tasks around the wrong way (at least according to the Yerkes Dodson law).
    3. Excellent narrative structure that fits with the project self-improvement theme.
    4. Theory rich; research poor.
    5. Addresses a self-help theme.
    6. Uses meaningful examples.
    7. Citations and references?
  3. Conclusion
    1. Effective style (even if wrong).
  1. Audio
    1. Well narrated.
    2. Varied intonation added interest and engagement.
  2. Visuals
    1. Engaging animation.
    2. Spelling errors.
  1. Overall, reasonably well produced except that the presentation wasn't made permanently publicly available.
  2. Meta-data
    1. Rename the title so that it includes the subtitle (and matches the book chapter).
    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).
  3. Audio recording quality
    1. Medium low due to white noise - review microphone set-up.
  4. Image/video recording quality
    1. Good
  5. Licensing
    1. A copyright license for the presentation is not indicated (i.e., in the meta-data or the visual presentation).

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:38, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply