Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2018/Behavioural automaticity

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Article, summary and suggested heading[edit]


I found this recently published article on behavioural automaticity: The objective of the study was to test whether self-control might facilitate the formation of adaptive habits (behavioural automaticity) and therefore enhance health behaviour through an indirect effect. Participants completed questionnaires assessing trait self-control and behavioural automaticity as predictors (1st session) and actual physical activity behaviour (after one week) as the dependant variable (2nd session). The results demonstrated that the predictive power of self-control was stronger for participants with high behavioural automaticity compared with participants with no behavioural automaticity. Moreover, automaticity mediated the relationship between self-control and behaviour.

I hope this helps as a start for your book chapter! Since the book chapter has a notion of improving wellbeing - you might want to consider a heading such as 'Positive Aspects of Behavioural Automaticity' and include the above article within that.

--Ju3141393 (discusscontribs) 07:39, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Recent DOI's APA style[edit]

Based on, it is better to change the way of referencing the DOI's references.

  1. The volume should be erased and the number of volumes should be in italic.
  2. Instead of doi:, should be used.
  3. The name of the pubisher also should be in italic.


From reading this article it is clear that you have done a lot of research and have a lot of information on this topic. However, some of your paragraphs are a bit long. This makes it slightly hard to read and take in information. This is a website that gives suggestions on paragraph lengths: Although, this isn't an academic piece of work it may give you some ideas. If you are struggling to identify where you should end a paragraph and start a new one. The university has an essay writing guide that gives more detail on the structure of a paragraph. I also think that having a few more images and interactive features would make the page more interesting. Overall, you have done so well. I look forward to reading this finished product. TaylorMal (discusscontribs) 23:41, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Un-capitalised headings, fixed see also and external links[edit]


Just letting you know I did some minor edits on your page including un-capitalising the headings and sub-headings (you only need the first letter of the first word to be capitalised for wikiversity), I got rid of the http:// links and added the link into the explanation of what is is.

So for example you had: - (Book chapter 2018)

I made it like this (below), with the link just in the words, so if you go in and see you can just click on those words and it will take you to the page.

Behavioural automaticity (Book chapter 2018)

I did the same thing with the external links that you have.

Also, as others have suggested you need to make sure your referencing follows APA 6th edition guidelines:

I hope you like the changes I have made!

--Ju3141393 (discusscontribs) 23:51, 20 October 2018 (UTC)


Hi, I have there is no referencing for your image. referencing should be: Figure 1. _____

U3160397 (discusscontribs) 21:46pm, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I suggest you should use some subheading in your chapter as it will make a flow to the chapter and create ease for the reader. Best of luck --(UTC)--Reet josan (discusscontribs) 03:30, 21 October 2018 (UTC)'Reet josan

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


  1. Overall, this is a basic, but sufficient chapter.
  2. For additional feedback, see comments below and these copyedits.


  1. Basic theory is sufficiently described.
  2. There is a lot of verbose, generic description of theory, but a lack of insightful, indepth analysis.
  3. There is little integration with descriptions of research.


  1. Basic, general coverage of research.
  2. There is a lack of detailed, insightful synthesis of relevant research.

Written expression[edit]

  1. Written expression
    1. This is a somewhat difficult read -- long sentences and long paragraphs, with awkward grammar -- which doesn't really satisfy the goal of providing an accessible summary aimed at a layperson.
    2. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    3. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned").
    4. Some sentences are overly long; consider splitting them into shorter, separate sentences.
    5. Avoid starting sentences with a citation unless the author is particularly pertinent. Instead, it is more interesting for the the content/key point to be communicated, with the citation included along the way or, more typically, in brackets at the end of the sentence.
    6. Much simpler language can be used throughout (e.g., Instead of: "The information represented here shows us that behavioural automaticity, presents us with both pros and cons.", try "Behavioural automaticity presents both pros and cons.").
    7. The chapter would benefit from a more developed Overview and Conclusion, with clearer focus question(s) (Overview) and take-home self-help message for each focus question (Conclusion).
    8. Some sentences are unnecessarily wordy - strive for the simplest expression of the point being made.
    9. Some statements could be explained more clearly - see the [Rewrite to improve clarity] tags
    10. Obtaining (earlier) comments on a chapter plan and/or chapter draft could have helped to improve the chapter.
  2. Learning features
    1. Three quiz questions are included; but the correct answers were not indicated (they have now been added).
    2. Adding interwiki links for the first mention of key words would make the text more interactive.
    3. Very basic use of images.
    4. No use of tables.
    5. No use of case studies.
  3. Spelling, grammar, and proofreading.
    1. Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the [spelling?] tags).
    2. The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
    3. Check and correct use of commas.
    4. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's).
    5. Use serial commas.
    6. Check and correct use of that vs. who.
    7. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect.
    8. More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard.
  4. APA style
    1. Direct quotes need page numbers.
    2. Use APA style for Figure captions.
    3. Citations
      1. Do not include author initials.
      2. Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets.

Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's Canvas 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.



  1. Overall, this is an excellent presentation that makes effective use of simple tools.
  2. The simplicity and engagingness of this presentation are in stark contrast to thick, difficult to read nature of the book chapter.

Structure and content[edit]

  1. The key concept is well explained with examples.
  2. There is little explanation of theory
  3. There is no explanation of research.
  4. The presentation is well structured (Title, Overview, Body, Conclusion).


  1. The presentation is easy to follow, and interesting to listen to.
  2. The main strength of the presentation is that it is particularly well narrated.
  3. The presentation uses very simple, plain text-based slides.
  4. Make the text larger, so that it is easier to read.
  5. Consider also using images, diagrams etc.

Production quality[edit]

  1. The presentation is well under the maximum time limit.
  2. Include 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 recording quality is very good.
  4. Video recording quality is OK, but somewhat amateur with the screencastify tools being shown - consider re-recording.
  5. A copyright license for the presentation is provided.
  6. A link to the book chapter is provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:17, 13 November 2018 (UTC)