Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2018/Insular cortex and emotion

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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 06:45, 20 August 2018 (UTC)


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 Canvas. 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. Title and sub-title were incorrect - I've fixed them up so that they match the book's table of contents

User page[edit]

  1. Very good

Social contribution[edit]

  1. Summary sounds promising, but no link to direct evidence of changes
  2. See suggestions for how to record social contributions

Section headings[edit]

  1. Basic, but sufficient - a simple, 2-level heading structure
  2. See comment above about heading casing
  3. Do not include sub-headings in the Overview - move these into the main body
  4. Many section headings could be improved by being more specific

Key points[edit]

  1. Basic development in some sections; no key points for several sections
  2. Overview - too specific; introduce the topic more broadly. Consider providing examples or case study to help engage the reader.
  3. Conclusion - underdeveloped - the most important section of the chapter.
  4. Not sure if you or someone else changed IC to AI here - but I would stick with IC

Image[edit]

  1. Sufficient
  2. Provide caption in APA style
  3. Caption should explain how this image connects to the chapter topic

References[edit]

  1. Sufficient
  2. Remove bullet-points
  3. Use APA style

Resources[edit]

  1. See also - good
  2. External links - Wikipedia link moved to See also. This section is for non-Wikiversity and non-Wikipedia resources

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:49, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

Hi, great topic choice! Sounds really interesting. I just noticed that the diagram of the brain, which points out the amygdala although looks cool I am not certain of its accuracy. As the amygdala is much smaller, and would be difficult to see on an image such as that. If you just google image some diagrams it should give you a much better idea on how the amygdala sits in the brain. So perhaps a different image would get your point across better? Nice job --U3160678 (discusscontribs) 05:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to advise you that your references are not currently 100% APA style.

  1. Journal article issue numbers are only to be included if: the page number of each issue begins with page one, OR if each issue does not begin with the next consecutive page number from the last issue.
  2. When including doi's the latest APA style begins with https://doi.org/ instead of the previously used 'doi:'

For example your first reference: Mutschler, I., Ball, T., Wankerl, J., & Strigo, I. (2012). Pain and emotion in the insular cortex: evidence for functional reorganization in major depression. Neuroscience Letters, 520(2), 204–209. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2012.03.095
Should be:
Mutschler, I., Ball, T., Wankerl, J., & Strigo, I. (2012). Pain and emotion in the insular cortex: evidence for functional reorganization in major depression. Neuroscience Letters, 520, 204–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2012.03.095
As suggested by J.Neill you may refer to http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2017/03/doi-display-guidelines-update-march-2017.html

Suggestions before due date[edit]

Hi there, this is an interesting chapter! I just have a few suggestions for you and I have made a few changes, I apologise if you are in the process of changing any of this. Firstly, I fixed a few spelling errors and corrected some words to Australian grammar (s instead of z for example) although I may have missed some so it would be a good idea to check this before tomorrow, in the same light, many sentences don't make sense or are incomplete so you may want to check over each paragraph (sorry if you're in the process of doing this). I also changed your figure captions to start off with APA, although I would recommend changing the content to relate to the topic you are talking about. I also made some minor APA changes to your in text referencing, such as replacing '&' with 'and' when referring to researchers in the text (not in the brackets), and also added another comma after researchers names within the brackets, for example (Motivation, Emotion & Book, 2018) should be (Emotion, Motivation, & Book, 2018). Some external links would be worth adding too. I hope these help, good luck and good work! --U3160212 (discusscontribs) 07:09, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Images[edit]

I am terrible with placing images, feel free to move them to what would seem appropriate. thanks


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 basic chapter that probably gets somewhat overly focused on neuroanatomy rather than neurofunctionality related to emotion. The chapter is also undermined by the poor quality of written expression. External assistance is recommended to help prepare written work of a professional standard.
  2. Overview - consider building on the sub-title by establishing focus questions to help guide the reader and the chapter structure.
  3. The Conclusion makes the rather astonishing claim that "The IC itself is not related to emotion..." - however, for example, the Wikipedia article on the IC mentions emotion 35 times!
  4. 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. The Conclusion, in particular, lacks sufficient focus on emotion and addressing the chapter topic (the sub-title).
  5. For additional feedback, see comments below and these copyedits.

Theory[edit]

  1. Some relevant theory is described, but it is probably overly complex for a layperson to pick up and read and get much value from.
  2. Focus needs to be squarely on IC and emotion and not IC and other functions.

Research[edit]

  1. Some relevant research is reviewed and discussed in relation to theory, with a critical perspective evident.
  2. Several statements are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags).
  3. Greater emphasis on major reviews and meta-analyses could be helpful.

Written expression[edit]

  1. Written expression is not of a professional standard.
    1. Most paragraphs are overly long (e.g., the first paragraph). Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    2. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned").
  2. Layout
    1. Avoid having sections with only one sub-section.
    2. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an introductory paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings.
  3. Learning features
    1. Adding more interwiki links for the first mention of key words would make the text more interactive.
    2. Embedding interwiki links links to other book chapters would help to integrate this chapter into the broader book project.
    3. Basic use of images.
    4. No use of tables.
    5. No use of feature boxes.
    6. No use of quizzes.
    7. No use of case studies or examples.
  4. Grammar
    1. Check and make correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's).
    2. The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
    3. Check and make correct use of commas.
    4. Use serial commas.
    5. Check and make correct use of affect vs. effect.
  5. Spelling
    1. Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the [spelling?] tags).
  6. Proofreading
    1. More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard.
    2. Remove unnecessary capitalisation.
    3. Remove unnecessary spaces.
    4. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses.
  7. APA style
    1. Use APA style for Figure captions. See example.
    2. Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text.
    3. Refer to each Table and each Figure at least once within the main text.
    4. Citations are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. A full stop is needed after "et al".
    5. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and make correct use of capitalisation.
      2. Check and make correct use of italicisation.
      3. See new doi format.
      4. Do not include issue numbers for journals which are continuously numbered within volumes.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:02, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

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.

Multimedia.png

Overall[edit]

  1. Overall, this is an inadequate presentation because it does not address the topic.
  2. The presentation is over the maximum time limit.

Structure and content[edit]

  1. Insufficient focus on the topic.

Communication[edit]

  1. Insufficient focus on the topic.

Production quality[edit]

  1. Insufficient focus on the topic.
  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. No written description of the presentation is provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:10, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Chapter resubmission comments[edit]

The main changes were:

  1. The quality of written expression, including grammar, has been improved.
  2. More interwiki links have been added, including to other relevant book chapters.
  3. A table was added.
  4. Coverage of research has been improved.
  5. A quiz was added.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:12, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Multimedia resubmission feedback[edit]

  1. The presentation has a logical structure.
  2. The meta-data is excellent.
  3. This is a basic text-slide and narrated audio style presentation.
  4. This presentation provides only a very rudimentary synthesis of theory and research about the role of the IC in emotion.
  5. The presentation doesn't begin to directly address the topic until at least half-way.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:26, 15 December 2018 (UTC)