Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2017/Delayed reinforcement and motivation

Comments

Hi, just a few ideas for the final formatting and editing of your chapter.

For formatting:

• With the titles it might be good to have multiple subtitles under each main title, as in a couple of these it appears there is only one subtitle.
• Perhaps by making some slightly broader titles you could fit multiple things under each banner as different aspects of the concept (without having to change your substantive material)

Also. two edits that I noticed are:

• The subtitle 'Demographics' has been misspelt as 'Demograghics'
• Figures 3 and 4 appear to have been labelled in the wrong order

I hope this helps! --Liam C (discuss • contribs) 23:47, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Liam that's very helpfull advise, also thanks for the heads up about the spelling mistake :D--Dom M.S (discuss • contribs) 00:59, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Heading casing

FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for lower-cased headings. For example, use: ==Cats and dogs== rather than ==Cats and Dogs== -- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:50, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, that's very good to know --Dom M.S (discuss • contribs) 12:10, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Referencing

Hey Dom! Just a tip regarding some of your referencing so its consistent - the new APA style formatting for DOI should look something like this: https://doi.org/10.1037/arc0000014 as opposed to the older style which appeared as: doi:10.1037/arc0000014 Here's a link explaining it more: http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2017/03/doi-display-guidelines-update-march-2017.html Hope that helps! --U3119363 (discuss • contribs) 05:49, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Overjustification Effect

Hey Dom! I recently completed a behaviour modification plan for another unit of mine, and I found evidence of an overjustification effect which is present in reinforcement contingency plans. This effect is really applicable to your topic as it is situated on intrinsic motivation for an external reward. I also found that this is mediated by the length of reinforcement (i.e. delayed or immediacy of reinforcement). So, as you can see really applicable to your topic. Here are a few sources that could aid in your development of your chapter relative to the overjustification effect;

• Peters, K. P., & Vollmer, T. R. (2014). Evaluations of the overjustification effect. Journal of Behavioral Education, 23(2), 201-220. doi:10.1007/s10864-013-9193-1
• Bright, C. N., & Penrod, B. (2009). An evaluation of the overjustification effect across multiple contingency arrangements. Behavioral Interventions, 24(3), 185-194. doi:10.1002/bin.284
• TANG, S., & HALL, V. (1995). the overjustification effect - a metaanalysis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9(5), 365-404.

Hope this helps with your topic! Can't wait to read more --U3144362 (discuss • contribs) 02:36, 11 October 2017 (UTC) u3144362 1:36PM 11 October 2017

Topic development review and feedback

The topic development 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. Topic development marks will be available later via Moodle. Keep an eye on Announcements. Note that marks are based on what was available before the due date, whereas the comments may also be based on all material available at time of providing this feedback.

Title, sub-title, TOC User page Created Used effectively Social contribution Section headings Overall, looks good A section should contain either 0 or 2+ sub-sections - avoid having sections which contain 1 sub-section. Consider integrating discussion of theory, research, and examples (as opposed to having separate sections for theory and research) Consider including more examples Key points Provided for some, but not all sections at time of submission Image One provided Consider expanding caption to relate to more meaningfully to the corresponding section References Very good Do not include issue numbers for journals which are continuously numbered within a volume Resources See also One appropriate wiki link added External links Rename the links

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:02, 14 October 2017 (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 chapter has good content, but is poorly written in terms of spelling, grammar, and APA style. This chapter is over the maximum word count. The heading structure is overly complicated. For additional feedback, see these copyedits. Theory Theory is well understood and explained, although the content could be more condensed and integrated. Perhaps more examples could be used. Research Basic but sufficient coverage of research involving the relation between the target constructs is provided. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship. Greater emphasis on major reviews and meta-analyses would be helpful. Some statements were unreferenced - see the tags Written expression Written expression Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses. Avoid directional referencing e.g., "As previously mentioned" Layout The heading structure (see the Table of Contents) is overly complicated - look to simplify. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an introductory paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings. Learning features Interwiki links are well used. Basic use of images. No use of tables. Very good use of quizzes. No use of case studies. Spelling, grammar, and proofreading Spelling can be improved - e.g., see the tags. The grammar for some sentences could be improved - e.g., see the tags. More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes e.g., individuals -> individual's Check and correct use of commas. APA style Use APA style for Figure captions Citations In-text citations should be in alphabetical order References are not in full APA style e.g., Check and correct italicisation Do not include issue numbers for journals which are continuously numbered within volumes.

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 basic, but sufficient presentation. Structure and content Consider speaking initially to the Title slide - what is the topic - what is practical problem? Consider adding an Overview slide after the Title slide. Consider including images/diagrams etc. Consider adding a Conclusion slide Communication The slides use relatively small font, but also have plenty of white space - consider adjusting the slides to use larger font to use more of the screen real estate. The audio narration was clear and reasonably easy to follow. Production quality Use the chapter title and sub-title on the Title slide and in the title of the video on Youtube. Audio recording quality was low - maybe review microphone set-up.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:57, 26 November 2017 (UTC)