Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2016/Competition fighting motivation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Feedback[edit source]

Hi, interesting topic and nice start. Obviously this is a rough draft at the moment but I just wanted to let you know that some of your sentences aren't complete, so just be sure to carefully read through it and fix some of those :) otherwise this is really good! I've often wondered why some people are motivated to fight professionally or as a sport, It'll be good to read once it's finished :) Regards --U3117274 (discusscontribs) 14:09, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Possible directions for competition motivation[edit source]

  • I found some info that may help you address competition from a need for a achievement point of view.

In the Reeve textbook, the Atkinsons model and Dynamics-of-action model deal with achievement motivation, with a small section dedicated to competition as a condition that satisfies a need for achievement (p.198). Sourced from The Understanding Motivation and emotion textbook. Chapter 7: Implicit Motives (pp. 195-198). --Muzz2016 (discusscontribs) 06:46, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

This seems like an interesting topic. Adding the history of fighting is a nice touch to understand the original motives of this behaviour. Just note some minor grammatical edits need to be made to your overview :) I will watch this page it seems it will be a good read. Good Luck. U3115468 (discusscontribs) 06:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey, I just fixed a couple of spelling and grammatical errors that I came across when reading your chapter. Other than this I think it's coming along nicely.--Jbboys (discusscontribs) 08:55, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I just added the publication year to your Eklund references. --U109993 (discusscontribs) 09:04, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Feedback[edit source]

Hi Michelle,

You've picked a really interesting topic! I really like how you've given a brief historical perspective for your topic - it's very fitting! I noticed that you have quite a few statements which currently lack references, so just make sure that you check over your chapter before submission :) I'll add a few comments where I think you may need to put these references. I would also suggest having a look at your sentence structure - it can be a little abrupt at times! Perhaps you could also talk about gender differences, given the role that testosterone has to play in fighting motivation. --Qt3141 (discusscontribs) 09:07, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Just made a couple of grammatical edits. Also maybe you should consider making the "motivational processes" heading a section on its own, and have it follow directly after the "Why do people fight" section, as this would make your chapter flow a little better :) --Qt3141 (discusscontribs) 05:14, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

In your "Why do people fight" section, you have a quote from Dana White. I know UFC is incredibly popular, but maybe still use the full title (Ultimate Fighting Championship) just in case. Also, why not put it in a nice big quotes box to draw more attention to it, as it is actually a really great quote! --Qt3141 (discusscontribs) 00:41, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

You could maybe emphasise the motivational aspects of competing a bit more. You've definitely covered why people fight in general, but why do they choose to actually compete? Do they have goals that they would like to achieve? Perhaps check out acheivement goal theory wrt competition fighting. This article looks at differences of goals between competitive and non-competitive judo and akido fighters. --Qt3141 (discusscontribs) 05:15, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Feedback[edit source]

Hey Michelle I really enjoy your topic and it seems very interesting however the overall layout of the page was slightly hard to follow. In particular moving into fight or flight response. perhaps some linking introductions would help or more spaced out headings, in particular headings 3.2 on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation could be there own point seperate from fight or flight just to help with the flow of reading

Image[edit source]

Hi, I found an image of gladiators on wiki commons that I hoped you might find useful --U113403 (discusscontribs) 06:49, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Feedback[edit source]

Great topic! First off, I think it would be a good idea to add a case study and then reference back to it in the text, to tie all of the parts of your chapter together! For example, you could write about a boxer and then give an extrinsic motivator and intrinsic motivator for why they fight! I also think you should add some images to break up the text a bit! I also think you should look through your chapter and remove excess words. Some of your sentences are quite long and are repetitive. For example 'The fight or flight response has been ingrained in our DNA and has been around since the beginning of time.' This could become: The fight or flight response is ingrained in our DNA and has been since the beginning of time.'

I've noticed that you don't have in-text references at the end of some sentences. You need to reference everything that you say or you might lose marks!

I've noticed that you say 'During fighting there is an increase in cortisol, testosterone GH,[LA], glucose and RPE (Ouergi et al., 2016).' The reader is not going to know what these abbreviations are, so I suggest putting the full name and linking to a wikipedia article on the hormone for each one.

Great first draft! I'm excited to see the finished product!

Cora --Cora.boyle (discusscontribs) 07:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Hey, The information and content of your chapter is looking pretty comprehensive. My suggestions would echo, previous idea's about breaking up the content with images/quizzes/graphs etc Something to increase the level of engagement with the reader, as the block of text is a little overwhelming. Adding Wiki links to other articles, to provide background information to some of the more technical anatomical terms would also add to the readers engagement. Best of luck with finishing of your chapter! --U3090066 (discusscontribs) 18:37, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Agree - add wiki links when key terms are first used e.g., fighting. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 20:52, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Feedback[edit source]

Hi, As everyone has said, this is a really intriguing topic that will make a fantastic chapter. I was wondering if there were any biological and physiological components of the within the brain e.g activation. That could strengthen your argument about the fight or flight systems allowing for a deeper connection to psychological components. Good luck !

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 on a novel topic.
  2. The chapter could be improved by more careful proofreading to help address grammar and spelling errors.
  3. A more logical structure for the content could be something like Overview, Historical, Evolutionary, Physiological, Psychological, Conclusion.
  4. For more feedback see these copyedits and the comments below.
  5. 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. Abbreviate the historical material and link to the relevant Wikipedia articles for more information. In general, most of this content is somewhat useful, but the detail isn't intrinsic to addressing the question/topic, so can be abbreviated with links to Wikipedia articles.
  2. The relevance of extrinsic motivation in relation to competition fighting is not explained (e.g., money, achievement, prestige?)
  3. It is not clear how/why the psychological theories discussed were selected - or what other perspectives might be useful e.g., Mastery motivation could be a useful theoretical framework - Motivation and emotion/Book/2015/Mastery motivation, as could mental toughness or Motivation and emotion/Book/2016/Grit.
  4. The case study(ies) is(are) helpful.

Research[edit source]

  1. Some statements are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)
  2. The Reeve (2015) textbook is over-used as a citation; preferably consult and cite primary, peer-reviewed sources.
  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 was somewhat problematic with significant grammatical errors.
    1. The quality of written expression could be improved (e.g., see where clarification templates such as [Rewrite to improve clarity], [explain?], [say what?], and [vague] may have been added to the page).
  2. Structure and headings
    1. Avoid sections with only one sub-section. A section should have no sub-sections or at least two sub-sections.
  3. Layout
    1. Some images are used, but they could be improved by being made larger and having captions that link the image to relevant theory and/or research.
  4. Integration with other chapters
    1. Little integration with other chapters is evident - add interwiki links links to a wider range of other relevant chapters.
  5. Learning features
    1. Add Interwiki links (to relevant Wikipedia articles) to make the text more interactive.
    2. Quiz questions about the info in the book chapter could be used to encourage reader engagement.
  6. Spelling
    1. Spelling could be improved - see the [spelling?] tags.
  7. Grammar and proofreading
    1. Check and correct the use of abbreviations (such as "e.g.," and "i.e.,").
    2. The grammar of several sentences needs to be improved for the written expression to be of professional standard (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
  8. APA style
    1. Check and correct the APA style for direct quotes. Note, in particular, that direct quotes should not simply be inserted as sentences, but rather integrated into paragraphs and sentences with your own writing.
    2. 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)).
    3. The reference list is not in full APA style.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:53, 15 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 basic, but sufficient presentation.
  2. Well over 3 minute maximum time limit Frowny.svg

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. Overview
    1. Too brief - add an Overview slide which relates the question to motivation (rather than History)
    2. Use the Overview to set up the problem to be solved (the question i.e., the subtitle for the book chapter).
    3. Tell the listener what they will find out about if they watch this presentation.
  2. Selection and organisation
    1. Overly reliant on Reeve (2015) textbook as source - consult and cite original sources
    2. Reasonable coverage of theory and research, however too indepth - needs more careful selection.
    3. Well cited.
    4. References are included.
  3. Conclusion
    1. Take-home messages / key points are well summarised.

Communication[edit source]

  1. Audio
    1. Start audio on the title slide
    2. Audio is clear and well-paced.
  2. Image/Video
    1. Visuals are simple, clear and easy to read.
    2. The visuals are text-heavy - consider possible use of figures, tables, images etc.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. Overall, good, basic, effective production using Prezi.
  2. Meta-data
    1. The title accurately reflects the book chapter.
    2. Well titled.
    3. Link to chapter provided.
  3. Audio recording quality
    1. Good volume, clear
  4. Image/video recording quality
    1. Good, clear
  5. Licensing
    1. A copyright license for the presentation is shown.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:02, 21 November 2016 (UTC)