Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2019/Executive functioning and emotion regulation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comments[edit source]

Hi,

I found this resource that you may find valuable.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02699931.2011.557291 (Executive functions and the down-regulation and up-regulation of emotion)

Regards, --Joshgrain (discusscontribs) 05:46, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Awesome how you explained what emotional regulation effects, but what it is - found a good definition in "Emotion regulation and emotional development - Ross A. Thompson" - "Emotional regulation refers to the extrinsic and intrinsic processes responsible for monitoring, evaluating, and modifying emotional reactions."

--Joshgrain (discusscontribs) 09:58, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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
  2. Authorship details removed - authorship is as per the page's editing history

User page[edit source]

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

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. 2 summarised with links to evidence

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. Reasonable plan overall.
  2. Overview - Consider adding focus questions
  3. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles.
  4. Consider including more examples/case studies.
  5. Consider embedding one quiz question per major section rather than having one longer quiz towards the end.

Image[edit source]

  1. Provided, with an APA style caption
  2. Consider enhancing figure caption to help connect the image more strongly to key points being made in the text

References[edit source]

  1. Good.
  2. For full APA style:
    1. Use correct capitalisation

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Excellent sources
    2. See changed formatting
  2. External links
    1. This probably should be a reference
    2. What other external sources are relevant?

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:43, 27 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 a promising chapter, with excellent theory, very good research, some useful interactive learning aspects, and mediocre to problematic quality of written expression.
  2. Overview lacks easy understandability for a lay audience. Consider adding one or more examples or a case study and building on the sub-title by presenting focus questions to help guide the reader and the chapter structure.
  3. For additional feedback, see comments below and these copyedits.

Theory[edit source]

  1. Relevant theories are well selected, described, and explained.
  2. However, the explanation is often bogged down by excessive citation, poor grammar, and lengthy paragraphs.

Research[edit source]

  1. Relevant research is well reviewed and discussed in relation to theory.
  2. However, the chapter could benefit from providing a synthesised, integrated review of research rather than proceeding study by study.

Written expression[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. The quality of written expression is mediocre. There is a lot of unnecessary or unclear use of words and phrases. I've tagged some of these to suggest where rewriting efforts could focus.
    2. 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.
    3. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    4. Use abbreviations sparingly. Do not use abbreviations for minor terms that aren't used very much in the chapter (e.g., the second quiz question uses too many abbreviations).
  2. Layout
    1. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an introductory paragraph
    2. The chapter structure relies a long section with sub-sections. Perhaps organise so as to split this long section into some other top-level sections.
  3. Learning features
    1. Very good use of tables - Table 1 provides an excellent summary.
    2. No embedded use of interwiki links and links to related book chapters (only in See also).
    3. Basic use of images.
    4. Feature boxes are used, but the content isn't particularly enlightening for a lay reader.
    5. Basic use of quizzes.
    6. No use of case studies.
  4. Grammar
    1. The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
    2. The grammar is not of professional standard mainly due to incorrect use of commas (over use). Check and make correct use of commas.
  5. Proofreading
    1. Remove unnecessary capitalisation.
  6. APA style
    1. Refer to each Table and each Figure using APA style (no italics) at least once within the main text.
    2. Citations are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Citations are used excessively. Look to integrate and synthesise from several studies rather than laboriously report on citation by citation.
    3. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation.
      2. See new doi format.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~11 logged, useful, substantial, social contributions with direct links to evidence, mostly in the day before chapters due; thank-you

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:18, 6 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 basic presentation.
  2. This presentation makes use of powtoon animation.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. Content is theory-strong, not so much research, and relatively light on practical, take-home messages.
  2. Check and correct spelling (~00:40).
  3. Suggest dropping the used of abbreviations - it just adds cognitive load (short-term memory) for the listener.
  4. The presentation could be strengthened by adding a Conclusion slide with practical, take-home messages.

Communication[edit source]

  1. The presentation makes basic use of powtoon animation and text based slides with narrated audio.
  2. Consider using greater intonation to enhance listener interest and engagement.
  3. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read.
  4. The visual communication is supplemented by images.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. The chapter title and sub-title are used on the opening slide - this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  2. The chapter title but not the sub-title are used in the video title - the latter would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  3. Audio recording probably used an on-board microphone because keyboard clicks can be heard - consider using an external microphone. Volume level also varies during the presentation.
  4. Video recording quality was good.
  5. Image sources are acknowledged in general.
  6. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the video description but not in the meta-data.
  7. A link to the book chapter is provided.
  8. A link from the book chapter is provided.
  9. A basic written description of the presentation is provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:18, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]