Jump to content

Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2019/Emotion suppression

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikiversity
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Jtneill in topic Multimedia feedback

Suggestions

[edit source]

Hey, Freud definitely had some intersting things to say about suppressing emotions! here is an aritcle of his, and the info on repression starts from the page marked '192' https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1413001.pdf U3151994 (discusscontribs) 06:14, 20 October 2018 (UTC)--U3151994Reply

If you would like to talk about the philosophy of emotions--such as Freud( as per suggested), you may want to consider Tolstoy or Nietzsche. Nietzsche particularly describes about emotions and self-destruction. if you have extra time to read: https://epubs.scu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1457&context=sass_pubs Or you can watch Netflix https://www.netflix.com/au/title/80186252 , it would help you introduce your conclusion. U3165244


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

[edit source]
  1. Added; I've reformatted

User page

[edit source]
  1. OK
  2. Consider adding a link to the book chapter you are working

Social contribution

[edit source]
  1. None summarised on user page

Section headings

[edit source]
  1. Avoid having sections with only one subsection - either have no subsections or two or more subsections
  2. Simple, 2-level structure proposed that is relevant to the topic

Key points

[edit source]
  1. Very limited development, with many empty sections include the most important sections (Overview and Conclusion)
  2. Difficult to comment constructively on a plan with so little detail
  1. None embedded

References

[edit source]
  1. Good
  2. Use APA style
  3. For latest APA style recommended format for dois see http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2017/03/doi-display-guidelines-update-march-2017.html

Resources

[edit source]
  1. See also - also link to relevant Wikipedia articles
  2. External links - not provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:02, 1 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Heading casing

[edit source]
FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for lower-cased headings (or sentence casing). For example, use:

==Cats and dogs==

rather than

==Cats and Dogs==

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Topic development feedback

[edit source]

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 and sub-title

[edit source]
  1. Excellent

User page

[edit source]
  1. Created, with description about self and link to book chapter
  2. Used effectively

Social contribution

[edit source]
  1. 3 useful contributions with indirect links to evidence (if possible, link to the exact posting). Also try making and summarising a Wikiversity contribution to another book chapter.

Section headings

[edit source]
  1. Well developed 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic.
  2. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an overview paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings.

Key points

[edit source]
  1. Consider expanding the Overview e.g., to include focus questions and maybe an example/case study
  2. Note for the section, "What are emotions?" keep it relatively brief, with links to more detail, to allow the chapter to concentrate on addressing the question in the sub-title.
  3. Theories - also consider including psychodynamic theory
  4. Key points are reasonably well developed for each section, with relevant citations.
  5. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles.
  6. Consider including more examples/case studies.
  7. Consider embedding one quiz question per major section rather than having one longer quiz towards the end.
  1. Well done

References

[edit source]
  1. Good.
  2. For full APA style:
    1. Use correct capitalisation
    2. Use correct italicisation
    3. Do not include issue numbers for journals which are continuously numbered within a volume

Resources

[edit source]
  1. See also
    1. Use internal rather than external linking for Wikipedia links
    2. Also link to past relevant chapters
  2. External links
    1. Rename links so that they are more user friendly

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)Reply


Chapter review and feedback

[edit source]

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 UCLearn Canvas, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall

[edit source]
  1. Overall, this is an excellent chapter that successfully uses psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
  2. For additional feedback, see comments below and these copyedits.
  1. Relevant theories are well selected, described, and explained.
  1. Relevant research is well reviewed and discussed in relation to theory.
  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is very good.
    2. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
  2. Layout
    1. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an introductory paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings.
    2. See earlier comments about heading casing.
  3. Learning features
    1. Basic use of interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding more interwiki links for the first mention of key words and technical concepts would make the text more interactive.
    2. Basic use of embedded links to related book chapters. Embedding more interwiki links links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project.
    3. Very good use of images.
    4. No use of tables.
    5. Good use of feature boxes.
    6. Basic use of quizzes.
    7. Very good use of case studies or examples.
  4. Grammar
    1. The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
    2. Check and make correct use of commas.
    3. Use serial commas[1] - it is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists.
    4. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect.
    5. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs individuals').[2].
  5. Proofreading
    1. More proofreading is needed to fix consistency (e.g., self regulation vs. self-regulation) and typos (spelling).
  6. APA style
    1. Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numerals (e.g., 10).
    2. Direct quotes need page numbers.
    3. Figures and tables
      1. Use APA style to refer to each Table and each Figure (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation).
    4. Citations are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. A serial comma is needed before "&" or "and" for citations involving three or more authors.
    5. References are almost in full APA style.
  1. ~7 logged, useful, social contributions with (somewhat) direct links to evidence. Appreciated that this showed engagement with the unit processes and just-in-time, practical assistance to peers - thank-you.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:49, 14 November 2019 (UTC)Reply


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

[edit source]
  1. Overall, this is an excellent presentation that makes effective use of simple tools.
  1. Well selected and structured content - not too much or too little.
  2. The presentation is well structured (Title, Overview, Body, Conclusion).
  1. The presentation is fun, easy to follow, and interesting to watch and listen to.
  2. Well paced. Excellent pauses between sentences. This helps the viewer to cognitively digest the information that has just been presented before moving on to the next point.
  3. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read in the time provided.
  4. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images.
  1. 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.
  2. Audio and video recording quality was excellent.
  3. A copyright license for the presentation is provided.
  4. A link to and from the book chapter is provided.
  5. A link to the book chapter is not provided.
  6. A written description of the presentation is provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:23, 15 November 2019 (UTC)Reply