Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2017/Overjustification effect

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Format tips[edit]

Hi Edward :) A quick tip that might be helpful: if you want to 'quick start' your chapter check the instructions in the purple box on the Book chapter - Author guidelines page. This adds template material and creates an initial structure, which is what I've done so far to get started on my chapter. Hope this helps! U3012363 (discusscontribs) 02:29, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Suggestions[edit]

Hi Edward, looks like you have a solid outline! When you get to fleshing out the attribution theory part, you might want to include Bem's self-perception theory as another way to understand the overjustification effect - it suggests we construct a concept of who we are by making self-attributions i.e. we infer our own attitudes from our own behaviour. E.g. if we go running rather than sleeping in, we infer that we must like running. If you are doing social psych - this is out of the textbook (p111-112). In case you're not - it also mentions a couple of other references that might be useful:
Lepper, M. R., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1973). Undermining children's intrinsic interest with extrinsic reward: A test of the" overjustification" hypothesis. Journal of Personality and social Psychology, 28, 129.
Condry, J. (1977). Enemies of exploration: Self-initiated versus other-initiated learning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 459. --u3122707 (discusscontribs) 03:46, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Heading casing[edit]

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 21:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)


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.

Autoroute icone.svg

Title, sub-title, TOC[edit]

  1. Very good
  2. Casing adjusted

User page[edit]

  1. Created
  2. Used effectively

Social contribution[edit]

  1. 1 contribution logged, with good description, but general link (requires the user to look for the contribution)
  2. The best links go to direct evidence of the contributions made. View the page history, select the version of the page before and after your contributions, click compare, and then use this website address as a direct link to evidence for listing on your user page. For more info, see the book chapter author guidelines.

Section headings[edit]

  1. See earlier comment about casing
  2. Simple, generic, 2-level heading structure - could be further developed with more specific headings corresponding to the topic
  3. Overview section has been added (standard for all chapters), External links moved to the end (standard for all chapters)
  4. A section should contain either 0 or 2+ sub-sections - avoid having sections which contain 1 sub-section.

Key points[edit]

  1. Overall, good coverage of key points
  2. Appropriate focus on SDT and attribution theory
  3. Key earlier research mentioned. Some major reviews/meta-analyses of the overjustification effect cited these and other sources like this are likely to be the most important sources.
  4. Consider including more examples/case studies to help engage readers

Image[edit]

  1. Image added and effectively labelled

References[edit]

  1. Good.
  2. For full APA style, correct the capitalisation, italics, 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[edit]

  1. See also
    1. Excellent
  2. External links
    1. None provided i.e., links outside of the Wikiversity/Wikipedia ecosystem

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Multimedia references feedback[edit]

Hey. Having the multimedia references on the page instead of in the video was such a good idea. I wish it had occurred to me! Nice one. --U3118754 (discusscontribs) 01:10, 15 November 2017 (UTC)


Chapter review and feedback[edit]

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]

  1. Overall, this is a well-focused, easy to follow chapter that successfully integrates theory and research, with examples, to address the topic.
  2. For additional feedback, see these copyedits.

Theory[edit]

  1. Relevant theories were well described and explained, with examples.
  2. Importantly, the chapter is very focused on the assigned topic, without superflous material.

Research[edit]

  1. Good coverage of relevant research. However, more recent research, particularly meta-analytic studies, could have been covered in more detail.
  2. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.

Written expression[edit]

  1. Written expression
    1. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses.
    2. Some sentences are overly long.
  2. Layout
    1. See earlier comments about heading casing.
    2. Avoid sections with only one sub-section.
  3. Learning features
    1. Interwiki links are well used.
    2. Basic use of images.
    3. No use of tables.
    4. Basic use of quizzes.
    5. Good use of case studies, although the case study could have been followed with a positive solution.
  4. APA style
    1. References are not in full APA style e.g.,
      1. Check and correct capitalisation.
      2. Check and correct italicisation.
      3. See new doi format.
      4. 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.

Multimedia.png

Overall[edit]

  1. Overall, this is an excellent presenation.

Structure and content[edit]

  1. Well selected and structured content, although there is an overemphasis on explaining the theoretical models.
  2. The presentation could be strengthened by adding a Conclusion slide with practical, take-home messages.

Communication[edit]

  1. The presentation is easy to follow, and interesting to watch and listen to.

Production quality[edit]

  1. The presentation is over the maximum time limit - therefore, the Conclusion was ignored for marking purposes.
  2. 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.
  3. Audio and video recording quality was excellent.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:40, 4 December 2017 (UTC)