Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2018/Childhood neglect and emotion

Heading style

Remove bold from headings - use default heading style. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:08, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, James this was something I hadn't noticed. TaylorMal (discuss • contribs)

Hey Taylor, just wanted to let you know you've still got bolded headings for Relationships (Social, Romantic, Dependency vs independency). Didn't want to remove it just in case you left it to remind you of something so hoping you see this... Dot--Foley.d (discuss • contribs) 11:09, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the pick up on this, all my subheadings seem to be bolded and I am unable to change it. I have posted on the discussion forum in hope to get help. TaylorMal (discuss • contribs) 06:41, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Social Contribution

Hi taylor. i have not been able to stop looking at this book it is really well written and interesting. i really like your case study of the boy who was raised by a dog. are you able to insert a picture here? i understand how tricky to it is to add pictures due to the copy right issue! i feel it will make the case study really powerful. Congrats on such an interesting chapter.

Joog 17 (discuss • contribs) 9:43, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

I think this is a wonderful suggestions and I would love to do this, but I am right on word count and I need to have a caption to put in a picture. Thank you so much though TaylorMal (discuss • contribs) 06:43, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Social Contribution

This is a very well thought out book chapter, it is well organised and very interesting and informative.It is clear that you are on the right track and will produce a high quality book chapter. I noticed you were planning to add a link about mandatory reporting in Australia. I found a link that might be helpful for you to add. NSW Family and Community Services has an informative webpage that outlines the signs of childhood neglect and abuse and how it can be reported https://www.facs.nsw.gov.au/families/Protecting-kids/reporting-child-at-risk/harm-and-neglect. --Bridie Mcinerney (discuss • contribs) 05:27, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

This is a very intriguing topic you have chosen, and I admire that you have a particular interest towards this field in Psychology. It is apparent from the many headings and sub headings that this will be a very informative book chapter, so I'm sure whoever reads this will learn a lot about the topic. I like your idea of including experiments under the Theory heading, so a suggestion could be providing a link to a video on Youtube demonstrating these experiments, for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apzXGEbZht0 . Just so the reader has a visual of this and thus helps in understanding the content (as I know this topic is quite dense). Well done! --Abbsu3163507 (discuss • contribs) 07:36, 29 August 2018 (UTC)Abbsu3163507

Thank you so much for your advice. I have now added an external link for the video. TaylorMal (discuss • contribs)

This is a particularly interesting topic you've chosen and I'm sure you've found plenty of research on it already. I noticed you've got a subheading for Childhood PTSD which I think is a really important aspect of this topic. I found a couple of articles which I think might be quite helpful for this: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11821720_Childhood_trauma_and_risk_for_PTSD_Relationship_to_intergenerational_effects_of_trauma_parental_PTSD_and_cortisol_excretion https://childtrauma.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/PTSD_Caregivers.pdf Hope you find these helpful! Good luck with your chapter! --U3142860 (discuss • contribs) 07:54, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

I can't thank you enough, these are very helpful articles. TaylorMal (discuss • contribs)

good topic choice! Would be beneficial to put more information under each topic/ subheading to ensure you've found substantial evidence to support what you want to elaborate on. You've also left "insert title here" on your title section so just remember to remove that. Good luck! --U3158773 (discuss • contribs) 01:50, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Oh, great catch. I'll be sure to remove that. I hope I have now elaborated enough. TaylorMal (discuss • contribs)

Hey Taylor, looks good. A few suggestions (although you may be getting to these points later anyway) - Reading through the overview, I was wanting to be able to click on some links for the 'problems caused by neglect' - i.e. potential links for irregular neurodevelopment, childhood PTSD, etc, to go into more depth on them as standalone topics. - I thought it'd be interesting and a good visual illustration to have brain scans showing differences in activation between children who have experienced neglect and those who haven't for the section on Neurological Basis in Abuse. - Also I thought some short examples could help clarify the comment in your Attachment Styles section about excessively dependent or independent strategies of coping.

Thank you for the comment I have taken this underadvisement ---TaylorMal (discuss • contribs)

Hope there's something helpful in there. I was also really interested in the section on ADHD and neglect - if I'm reading it correctly, it's indicating ADHD can develop from neglect? If so I'm interested to read more about this when you've got a bit further. Cheers, Dot--Foley.d (discuss • contribs) 01:03, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for these suggestions, Dot. The page has undergone a lot of changes since this feedback but all your comments were taken into account. TaylorMal (discuss • contribs) 06:33, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Taylor. First of all, well done. I look forward to reading your finished chapter. The comments above addressed what I was going to touch on, so I will just include one minor suggestion. You have a heading labelled 'consequences' but it only has one sentence in it. I think cleaning up that section by perhaps making your other headings 'emotional regulation' and 'relationships' as sub-headings under the heading 'consequences' would be beneficial. Again, great job. --BB7897 (discuss • contribs) 22:44, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much, I'm going to try and add some more content into this areas. TaylorMal (discuss • contribs) 23:23, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Taylor, book chapter looks great, I went through the whole book chapter including references and correct errors, including grammatical and spelling. The reference below seems to have a word missing after Report of I thought you might want to fix that. Great job. Petersen, A. C., Joseph, J., & Feit, M. (2013). New directions in child abuse and neglect research. Report of. Retrieved from Institute of Medicine of the National Academies: https://doi.org/10.17226/18331--GabiK (discuss • contribs) 21:26, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so so much, this is so helfpul. I'm having a lot of problem with that reference, I'll make sure I fix it up. TaylorMal (discuss • contribs) 22:55, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

{{{1}}}

Topic development 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 the chapter plan. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Topic development marks are available via UCLearn. 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 Correct title and sub-title have been added (to match the book table of contents) User page Excellent Social contribution Good See suggestions for how to record social contributions Section headings Promising 2-level heading structure; may benefit from additional top-level headings - e.g., Types of childhood neglect Overview - write for an international audience Consider including one or more case studies early on to help bring the topic to life May be overly focused on attachment styles (can link to Wikipedia and attachment type and emotion for more info about this topic) and other theories - focus as much as possible on directly on answering the question and too much on peripheral topics - may need to be disciplined about dropped some content - better to do a smaller, relevant amount well, than a lot of tangential material not so well. To this end (i.e., answering the question), the section on consequences is the most important. Key points Reasonably well developed - but some comments about the section headings also apply here - i.e., make sure every point is connecting back to answering the question and be prepared to drop content if it isn't clearly addressing the sub-title question. Currently it seems to lack cohesion and comes across as a set of somewhat disconnected topics rather than a coherent answer to the question. Image Well done Can be improved by expanding the image captions to make the connection to the body text and chapter question more obvious References Well developed Did you consult Maslow (1943)? If not, don't cite it. Check APA style in terms of journal issue numbers, capitalisation, and presentation of dois (http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2017/03/doi-display-guidelines-update-march-2017.html) Resources See also - Remove generic links (e.g., motivation and emotion) and keep topic-specific links; use lower case (per the page names) External links - include more details about the target resource in brackets after the link - see Wikipedia or other chapters for examples

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 13:18, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Types of neglect

The types of neglect table is well prepared and presented, but is probably not intrinsic to the chapter topic and it unnecessarily dominates the Overview. It could perhaps be moved to w:Child neglect#Types, with a briefer summary in the current chapter and a link to that Wikipedia section for more detail. The chapter topic, "What are the emotional consequences of childhood neglect?" doesn't ask specifically about what types of neglect there are, or whether there are different types of emotion consequences for different types of neglect etc. So, whilst types of neglect are worth brief mention, I suggest focusing on what is common in terms of the emotional consequences for childhood neglect in general. Where there is evidence of different emotional consequences arising from different types of neglect, or where there is a lack of literature about emotional consequences of specific types of neglect, then this is worth pointing out. Hope this helps. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:13, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Darwin (1872)

Did you consult the 1872 edition by Darwin? If not, use a more appropriate citation for what you actually did consult. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:06, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Citations involving two authors

APA style - citations involving two authors should not include a comma before the "and" - e.g,. "(Skinner, & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2016)" should be "(Skinner & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2016)". -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:07, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Theory

Paraphrasing an email question from @TaylorMal:: The 'Emotion Consequences' was designed to fulfil the theory criteria of the marking rubric, however, it does not specifically mention emotion/motivation theories or model. The chapter goes on to discuss Maternal Deprivation and Attachment theory, but do these count as key emotional theories or models? My main question is does it still fulfil the criteria to a high standard?

I agree that there's not much in the way of explicit theory in the "Emotion consequences" section. However, the whole chapter will be taken into consideration in terms of the extent to which is covers the best/most relevant psychological theory which applies to addressing the topic (i.e., the sub-title). The other sections mentioned above do contribute theory. Different theories are useful; synthesis is even better. Perhaps also consider that the question is fundamentally more of a question about research i.e., "What are the emotional consequences of childhood neglect?" which also invites theoretical explanation about why/how there may be such consequences. Overall, from a quick skim on the current draft, it appears that the chapter may be stronger in its use of theory than in providing a summary/synthesis of research - what is the best research literature on this topic and how has it been used? e.g., perhaps consider searching for and using top research syntheses such as https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001349. There is also a strong recent literature about "Adverse Childhood Experiences" (ACEs) that doesn't seem to be mentioned or used. Sincerely, James. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:24, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Heading structure

Avoid having sections with one section - either have zero sub-sections or two or more sub-sections. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:37, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

See also

Include links to related book chapter topics. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:37, 13 October 2018 (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 12:37, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Conclusion

The conclusion is currently general/vague; consider replacing with a more explicit summary of the take-home answer to the sub-title question, based on the best available psychological theory and research. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:42, 13 October 2018 (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 solid, promising that makes good use of psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world problem. The chapter could benefit from further development of the Overview and Conclusion - it should be possible to only read these sections and get a good sense of why the topic is important and what is known/recommended. Overview - consider building on the sub-title by establishing focus questions to help guide the reader and the chapter structure. Conclusion - could be improved by summarising what psychological theory and research says in relation to the focus questions established in the Overview. Also, what are the take-away messages? For additional feedback, see earlier comments, comments below, and these copyedits. Theory Relevant theories are well selected, described, and explained. To improve, discussion of theory could be better organised around some focus questions. It is a little hard to navigate/work out what theories are being covered and why. Good use of examples. Research Relevant research is well reviewed and discussed in relation to theory. Written expression Written expression Consider being more selective and disciplined by establishing focus questions and only covered content directly related to addressing those focus questions and the marking criteria (e.g., as opposed to writing about personal passions). Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences. Learning features For external links like Bowlby, use these in the external links section. Within the main text, the only links should be to other Wikiversity or Wikipedia articles (e.g., Bowlby). For external links, include the target/source in brackets. Otherwise, Interwiki links are well used. Basic use of images. No tables. Good use of quizzes. Good use of case studies or examples. APA style Refer to each Table and each Figure at least once within the main text. Citations For citations with two authors, no comma is needed (e.g., (Duniec, & Raz, 2011) -> (Duniec & Raz, 2011)). References are in good APA style but check e.g., Check and correct capitalisation. Check and correct italicisation.

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.

Overall Overall, this is an excellent presentation that makes effective use of Powtoon animation. Structure and content Well selected and structured content - not too much or too little. The presentation is well structured (Title, Overview, Body, Conclusion). 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. A Conclusion slide is presented with a take-home message(s). The presentation could be strengthened by adding a Conclusion slide with practical, take-home messages. Communication The presentation is fun, easy to follow, and interesting to watch and listen to. Reasonably well paced, although it does feel a little rushed - consider rationalising what is the most important content to present. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read in the time provided. Production quality The full chapter title and sub-title are used in the video title - this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. The full chapter title and sub-title are used on the opening slide - this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. Video recording quality was excellent. Audio recording quality was very good. A copyright license for the presentation is provided. A link to and from the book chapter is provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:50, 18 November 2018 (UTC)