Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2017/Intimate partner violence motivation

Journal Article Suggestion

Hey, really looking forward to learning more about IPV motivation through your chapter. I did a bit of research as I was going to choose this topic before I got sidetracked, this review was particularly helpful Motivation for Men and Women's IPV Perpetration --u3122707 (discuss • contribs) 04:35, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! I will definitely have a look at this! --U3133258 (discuss • contribs) 07:37, 28 August 2017 (UTC) u3133258 5:58pm

Hi user 3133258, I am also looking forward to reading your book chapter, I did a quick search on IPV and found an analysis of this alongside self-determination theory, as talked about in lectures, I feel like this will be good at linking theoretical concepts to your book chapter; "Petit, W. E., Knee, C. R., & Rodriguez, L. M. (2017). Self-determination theory and intimate partner violence: An APIM model of need fulfillment and IPV. Motivation Science, 3(2), 119-132. doi:10.1037/mot0000054" - It was also published in 2017! so it's good from a modern perspective, hope this helps! --U3144362 (discuss • contribs) 04:22, 30 August 2017 (UTC) u3144362 2:22PM

Hi Alya, great start on the chapter it's coming along very well! It might be a good idea to include some ABS statistics on domestic violence to indicate it's prevalence in Australia, I did a quick search and located this which may be helpful http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4510.0 Kind regards, Morgan --MorganSlater (discuss • contribs) 23:41, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Theoretical frameworks

Hi again u3133258 Just having another read of your chapter and wondering if it would be simpler to narrow it to physical IPV perpetration? The motives are somewhat different for each type and there's plenty about physical to fill your chapter! Something to consider anyway.

Also, I noticed in your feedback it mentioned thinking about an integrative model. There are a couple of multi-factor theories - one is Dutton's (1995) nested ecological framework theory, which looks at the interaction of risk factors at 4 social levels. Here's a meta-analysis on its usefulness:
Stith, S. M., Smith, D. B., Penn, C. E., Ward, D. B., & Tritt, D. (2004). Intimate partner physical abuse perpetration and victimization risk factors: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10, 65-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2003.09.001

Another more recent one that is attracting research is Finkel's I3 (I-cubed) theory - it's a general meta-theory of behaviour that's been successfully applied to IPV perpetration. It led to the development of perfect storm theory (love this name!) which suggests that the likelihood and intensity of a behaviour are highest when instigation and impellance are strong and inhibition is weak (they are the three factors of the I3 model). Check out this review:
Birkley, E. L., & Eckhardt, C. I. (2015). Anger, hostility, internalizing negative emotions, and intimate partner violence perpetration: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 37, 40-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2015.01.002

You might fund these two reviews helpful for critical summaries of the more traditional appproaches:
Ali, P. A., & Naylor, P. B. (2013). Intimate partner violence: A narrative review of the feminist, social and ecological explanations for its causation. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18, 611-619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2013.07.009
Ali, P. A., & Naylor, P. B. (2013). Intimate partner violence: A narrative review of the biological and psychological explanations for its causation. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18, 373-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2013.01.003

All the best --u3122707 (discuss • contribs) 10:34, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

   Hi! Thanks for your feedback! I've decided to focus mostly on physical as well as sexual types of violence. I'll definitely have a look at these articles once I'm up to the treatment. Thanks for providing some starter references! --U3133258 (discuss • contribs) 08:37, 19 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 00:56, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks James for that clarification! --U3133258 (discuss • contribs) 11:24, 3 September 2017 (UTC) 9:24PM

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 Title casing and wording does not match that listed in Motivation_and_emotion/Book/2017 User page Created Used effectively Social contribution Good descriptions Links 1 and 2 appear to be the same? Better links to more direct evidence can be created by viewing page history, comparing the version before and after your contributions, and then using this website address as the link (see guidelines) Use numbered list Section headings Looks good Be wary of allocating too much focus on general areas such as 2 and 3 - these can be summarised relatively briefly with links to more info, allowing for a greater focus on the core questions for the chapter, which are the latter sections Consider introducing a case study or example(s) earlier, to engage and involve reader interest Conclusion - perhaps consider what are the most useful theoretical perspectives - perhaps there is some integrative model for IPV prevention that is being accepted/used today? Key points At least one basic idea or question is presented per section What is the key research evidence in this area? (citations) Consider perhaps describing the current best practice IPV prevention programs/models? Perhaps the Overview could return to an earlier case study with examples of how interventions/prevention could be successful? Image One image used and appropriately captioned. Somewhat difficult topic on which to present images which could be traumatic, so it might be necessary to be somewhat metaphorical/creative. Also consider diagrams. Also consider increasing default image size. References For full APA style, review capitalisation, italication, use the new recommended format for dois - http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2014/07/how-to-use-the-new-doi-format-in-apa-style.html, and do not include issue numbers for journals which are continuously numbered within a volume Resources Good Also add bullet points Add source in brackets after link For see also, make sure to link to relevant past book chapters

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:57, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Some of your sentences are a little long which make them hard to read and to focus on the actual content of the sentence. For example, the first sentence in the overview when you are explaining IPV is really long, so you should think about breaking it up into two sentences. The information on demographics is really good, but I think you should think about talking about the other demographics you mentioned if you have the word limit as i think they would be interesting. The rest of what you want to talk about seems important to your topic and you seem to know what you need to do. I would just add that you could maybe talk about the treatment options for the victims and maybe even the perpetrators as I think that is important and could possibly link into prevention strategies. I hope this helps. --U3115549 (discuss • contribs) 03:23, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Areas for Improvement

Hi! I find your chosen topic for the book chapter to be very interesting, as well as potentially useful for a range of people and a great jumpstarter for further study :) After reading through your chapter I have come up with a few ideas that may help you improve and grow your chapter (obviously it is before the due date so I don't know what you have in store haha!)

The first suggestion I would like to make is the implementation of case studies throughout your chapter. You've used one when discussing the differences of gender and I found that really helpful and eye catching! I think it would be even more helpful when you talk about the differences of types of violence (physical or sexual), as sometimes they can overlap or be perceived as being very similar.

Another suggestion I will make is maybe putting a disclaimer early on in the chapter, to warn for potentially emotionally charged content. I really like how in your "see also" section you have included links to domestic abuse hotlines and information pages, it shows how well you have thought about the impact of your topic.

Hope this helps!!

PsychoStudent

Hello! Just wanted to say great coverage of theories throughout your book chapter, you integrated all parts of your question well. Unfortunately i cannot provide much constructive criticism due to the delayed feedback. However for your multimedia i would suggest focusing on one theory as much as possible and doing that in depth. u3141330 (User: U3141330} 22:20 3rd September 2017G(discuss)contribs)

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 is an excellent chapter. It is well balanced, with a strong emphasis on theory with accompanying research, and it makes good use of the wiki environment. For additional feedback, see these copyedits. Theory Theories were well described and explained. Research Research is well described and explained. Greater emphasis on major reviews and meta-analyses would be helpful. Written expression Written expression The Overview and Conclusion are well developed. Learning features interwiki links are well used. Spelling, grammar and proofreading is good. Check and correct use of that vs. who The grammar for some sentences could be improved - see the tags APA style is very good. Use a comma before ampersand and "and" when there are three or more authors Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numbers #(e.g., 10) Italicise journal numbers 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 solid, effective presentation. Structure and content Well selected and structured content - not too much or too little. Citations are included, with references. Add and narrate a Title slide, to help the viewer understanding the focus and goal of the presentation. Add and narrate an Overview slide, to help orientate the viewer about what will be covered. The presentation could be strengthened by adding a Conclusion slide with practical, take-home messages. Communication The presentation makes effective use of text and images using Powtoon. Production quality Use the full chapter title and sub-title on the opening slide and in the name of the video because this helps to match the book chapter and to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. Check and correct capitalisation of title. Audio recording quality was quiet - review microphone set up. What is the copyright license? Creative Commons or Standard Youtube - both are indicated. Add acknowledgement of image sources and software used to create presentation.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:09, 28 November 2017 (UTC)