Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2019/Two-factor motivation theory

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comments[edit source]

I agree with your point that ignoring individual differences is a major weakness of the theory. you could expand your examples to include things like personality and how that affects workplace motivation. - U3156463 (discusscontribs) 07:02, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Heading casing[edit source]

Crystal Clear app ktip.svg
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 04:55, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

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.

Autoroute icone.svg

Title and sub-title[edit source]

  1. Good
  2. Sub-title corrected to match original listing

User page[edit source]

  1. Excellent
  2. I've added bullet points and numbered lists

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. Good
  2. Add direct links to evidence. To do this: View the page history, select the version of the page before and after your contributions, click "compare selected revisions", and then use this website address as a direct link to evidence for listing on your user page. For more info, see Making and summarising social contributions.

Section headings[edit source]

  1. Basic, 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic.
  2. See earlier comment about Heading casing.

Key points[edit source]

  1. Key points are well developed for most but not all sections, with relevant citations.
  2. Consider introducing one or more case studies earlier.
  3. Consider embedding one quiz question per major section rather than having one longer quiz towards the end.
  4. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles.

Image[edit source]

  1. Provided, with an APA style caption
  2. Consider increasing image size from default
  3. Cite each figure at least once in the main text.

References[edit source]

  1. Good.
  2. For full APA style:
    1. Use correct capitalisation
    2. Use correct italicisation
    3. Use the new recommended format for dois -
    4. Do not include issue numbers for journals which are continuously numbered within a volume

Resources[edit source]

  1. Excellent

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:55, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

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.

Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a solid chapter that explains psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
  2. For additional feedback, see comments below and these copyedits.

Theory[edit source]

  1. The theory is reasonably well explained.
  2. The theory could be better explained by constructing some simple case studies to highlight the independent role of the two factors in worker dissatisfaction and satisfaction.
  3. Did you consult Maslow (1954)? If not, this should be a secondary citation.

Research[edit source]

  1. Relevant research is discussed in relation to theory.
  2. However, the indepth focus on several specific studies means that there was a lack of big picture review and synthesis of research literature about the two-factor theory. The individual studies did help to provide some examples.
  3. When describing important research findings, consider including the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
  4. Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.

Written expression[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is reasonably good.
    2. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
  2. Layout
    1. The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections.
  3. Learning features
    1. See also - also link to past book chapters
    2. Excellent use of interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. ## No use of embedded links to related book chapters. Embedding interwiki links links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project.
    3. Basic use of images.
    4. Basic use of tables. A better structure for Table 1 would be a 2 x 2 structure, with one factor in the columns and one factor in the rows.
    5. Basic use of feature boxes.
    6. Good use of quizzes.
    7. Basic use of case studies or examples.
  4. Grammar
    1. Use serial commas[1] - it is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists.
    2. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect.
    3. Abbreviations
      1. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses.
  5. Spelling
    1. Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour; fulfillment vs. fulfilment).
  6. Proofreading
    1. Remove double-spaces.
  7. 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. Refer to each Table and Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1).
    4. Citations are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. (Sanjeev, Surya, 2016) -> (Sanjeev & Surya, 2016)
      2. Check and learn when/how to use et al.
      3. Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets.
    5. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation.
      2. Check and correct use of italicisation.
      3. Add full-stops and spaces between author initials.
      4. See new doi format.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~13 logged, useful, social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:02, 12 November 2019 (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.


Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a basic, sufficient presentation.
  2. This presentation makes effective use of simple tools.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. The presentation is well structured (Title, Overview, Body, Conclusion).
  2. Well selected content - not too much or too little.
  3. Good to see the emphasis on applications, although perhaps more emphasis could be placed on the distinction between motivator and hygiene.
  1. The presentation is poorly structured. In particular, it lacks a Title, Overview, and Conclusion.
  2. Add and narrate a Title slide, to help the viewer understanding the focus and goal of the presentation.
  3. Add and narrate an Overview slide, to help orientate the viewer about what will be covered.
  4. A Conclusion slide is presented with a take-home message(s).

Communication[edit source]

  1. The presentation is easy to follow.
  2. The presentation makes effective use of text and image based slides with narrated audio.
  3. Well paced.
  4. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read.
  5. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. Very good production quality using simple tools.
  2. Audio and video recording quality is very good.
  3. Image sources and their copyright status are provided.
  4. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the video description but not in the meta-data.
  5. A link to the book chapter is provided, but it is a broken link.
  6. A link from the book chapter is provided.
  7. A written description of the presentation is provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:27, 16 November 2019 (UTC)