Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2017/Verbal aggression

YouTube video

Hey Jem, I saw your post on moodle and found something a little different that you may (or may not) want to incorporate. I found this youtube video on verbal aggression in the digital age: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-IXpILnPuw. I thought it could be interesting to add, for people to hear different perspectives on this fascinating topic and adds a little extra something to your page. It is a 5:44 minute video but is pretty interesting in that it answers a range of questions relating to aspects of your topic. Hope this is of some use to you! Also just wanted to say fantastic work on your chapter, it looks great and is super informative! Good luck! --Tahliachristofersen (discuss • contribs) 14:05, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Also, just wanted to suggest adding - https://doi.org/ before your doi's in your reference list as this provides a direct link to the article/site you are referencing and makes it a lot easier to access.--Tahliachristofersen (discuss • contribs) 15:42, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Interactive Features

Hiya Jem! I just did a read through of your chapter and it is looking great - there is a comprehensive review of literature and you have combined theory and research in a way which is coherent to the reader. I noticed that there is an area on the rubric that requires examples:

"Consider including one or more practical examples, such as case studies. Try to apply the selected theory(ies) and research to everyday life situations that readers are likely to

encounter.

I believe incorporating a case study into your chapter will be an effective way of illustrating your theoretical examples! Also there is a section in the rubric titled 'integrative features' worth 5% and this includes the utilisation of quizzes, tables, figures etc. Maybe incoperating a quiz or some tables may enable you to get the full 5%? Overall, great chapter and I am looking forward to reading the final result! Jane --U3144362 (discuss • contribs) 14:22, 21 October 2017 (UTC)u3144362 1:21 AM

Suggestion on theory of reasoned action

Hi Jem, I had a look through your chapter - really interesting topic! I suggest that in your Theory of reasoned action section you cite Azjen & Fishbein (1980) as they proposed the theory. I think the citation is: (Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall) but you might want to double check. They say that attitudes and perceived social norms will predict behaviour intention - and subsequently, actual behaviour. This could help to explain why people are verbally aggressive in the first place but also it could be applied in line with behaviour change ie changing peoples attitudes and social norms towards verbal aggression will likely reduce behavioural intent towards using verbal aggression. There is an image which highlights the theory quite well on wikicommons https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:TRA_(BLUE).jpg. Hope this helps. Sorry it's so late. Good luck with your chapter!! --WJDHR (discuss • contribs) 21:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Introduction suggestion

Hey there, this is a really great and well-researched chapter! However, I think it is a little bit heavy on information and terminology in the very beginning. Have you considered perhaps moving "The problem" before "The overview" (perhaps in a friendly, coloured text box) to provide the reader with some context and personal identification before starting to get into the heavy stuff? I think this will give people a better idea of what they're about to read, whilst also improving the odds that they'll make it through the whole thing because you've engaged them with a story and given them something easy to understand to begin with. The Reeve textbook does this at the start of every chapter with a story displaying the concepts that will be covered. Good work, and good luck in submitting tomorrow morning! --Taylormeggles (discuss • contribs) 23:27, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

doi links

Hi I saw you were after feedback. I just added the doi links to your ref list. Most are working a few are not. Im not sure if maybe its the doi's themselves so maybe have a check on the reference. Page is looking great!--U3135539 (discuss • contribs) 09:12, 22 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 is a promising, but unnecessarily convoluted chapter. For additional feedback, see these copyedits. Theory Lots of theory is covered, but often in abstract terms, even with the use of examples. And there is a lack of coherent, easily understandable integration of theory. The Overview does not explain the structure of the chapter sufficiently well. The Conclusion does not sum up the theoretical arguments. The Conclusion lacks practical, take-home messages. Verbal aggression is not clearly defined. It is also not clearly distinguished from argumentativeness. The distinction becomes clearer about half-way through the chapter. What are stochastic factors? (vague) Some of the material presented seems to be based on author opinion rather than research and/or theory - or at least, in places, there is a lack of sufficient citation - see where the template has been added. Connection between the topic and motivation theory isn't clear. For example, this chapter would probably fit better into a social psychology book than a motivation and emotion book. Some of the examples seem to be contradictory and therefore the message of the chapter is confusing - e.g., some examples seem to suggest a confrontational argumentative approach whereas another suggests allowing others to save face. There are some problematic terms that aren't clearly defined and generally aren't use in scientific psychology (e.g., "bad people"). In addition, the chapter exhibits an implied motivation to undermine others or win arguments (as opposed to, say, sharing information and viewpoints or getting along with others) which seems to lack objectivity. The answer to the quiz question "What makes argumentation similar to verbal aggressiveness?" seems to contradict the description the chapter provides of the difference between these two constructs? Research There is a lack of detailed review of relevant research. 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 Linkage/flow between sections is poor. Some sentences are overly long. Sections with sub-sections need at least an introductory paragraph. As a general rule, use no more than the top three citations per point. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses. Learning features Good use is made of interwiki links and images. No External links were provided. Spelling, grammar and proofreading Semi-colons are over-used. In many cases, they should be replaced by full-stops. Use Australian spelling e.g., hypothesize -> hypothesise APA style APA style for citations and references is good. 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, the presentation style is excellent, but the content is highly problematic in terms of satisfying the unit's learning outcomes of integrating psychology theory and research to address practical problems. Structure and content Comments about the book chapter also apply here. Add and narrate an Overview slide, to help orientate the viewer about what will be covered. What psychological theories and research is this presentation based on (citations?) - or is your original thinking? The presentation could be strengthened by adding a Conclusion slide with practical, take-home messages. Communication The presentation is well narrated and supported by text and images. 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. Audio and video recording quality was excellent. Add acknowledgement of image sources and software used to create presentation.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:03, 28 November 2017 (UTC)