The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's UCLearn 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.
Comments about the book chapter also largely apply to this section.
An appropriate amount of content is presented - not too much or too little.
The presentation is well structured.
Consider adding and narrating an Overview slide (e.g., with focus questions), to help orientate the viewer about what will be covered.
The selection of content could be improved by concentrating more directly on the relationship between boredom and technology addiction and less on these as separate constructs.
There is an overreliance on non-peer-reviewed sources.
The presentation makes basic use of theory.
The presentation makes little to no use of research.
The presentation could be improved by making more use of examples or case studies.
The presentation could be strengthened by adding a Conclusion slide with practical, take-home messages.
The video is basically produced using simple tools.
The wording and/or formatting/grammar of the title/sub-title is inconsistent between the name of the video, the opening slide, and/or the book chapter.
Audio recording quality was excellent.
Visual display quality was simple but effective.
Image copyright status is not provided. Either acknowledge the image sources and their licenses in the video description or remove the presentation.
This presentation has probably violated the copyrights of image owners as images appear to have been used without permission and/or acknowledgement.
A copyright license for the presentation is not provided.
A link to the book chapter is not provided.
A link from the book chapter is provided.
A written description of the presentation is not provided.
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, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.
Overall, this is a promising, but insufficient chapter, mainly due to:
excessive use of direct quotes from other sources. A sufficient chapter would involve more independently written content and much less or, preferably, no directly quoted material. Direct quotes demonstrate nothing about the author's knowledge or ability to express ideas in their own ways. Direct quotes were ignored for marking purposes.
insufficient referencing (e.g., see [factual?] tags).
poor quality written expression (e.g., see [grammar?] tags).
Some material appears to have been plagiarised. For example:
"Third, due to the scarcity of previous studies, we hypothesised that the demographic, parental, and ADHD characteristics moderate the association between boredom proneness and Internet addiction and activities in adolescents with ADHD."
"When DA is released into the synapse, it stimulates a number a DA receptors (D1-D5) which results in increased feelings of well-being and stress reduction."
Professional assistance with learning how to write independently is strongly recommended.
The chapter provides a promising, but insufficient focus on research mainly due to the lack of independent expression.
Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags).
Table 1 presents unnecessary/superfluous detail.
When describing important research findings, consider indicating the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.
Overall, the quality of written expression is below professional standard. UC Study Skills assistance is recommended to help improve writing skills.
Direct quotes should be embedded within sentences and paragraphs, rather than dumped holus-bolus. Even better, communicate the concept in your own words.
Use 3rd person perspective rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you")[1] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes.
Layout
Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections.
Basic use of embedded in-text 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. See example.
No use of embedded in-text links to related book chapters. Embedding in-text links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project.
Links to non-peer-reviewed sources should be moved to the external links section.
Basic use of image(s).
Basic use of table(s).
Basic use of feature box(es).
Basic use of quiz(zes).
No use of external links.
Grammar
The grammar for many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags). Grammar-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance.
Abbreviations
Check and correct grammatical formatting for abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.).
Proofreading
Replace double spaces with single spaces.
Remove unnecessary capitalisation (e.g., Internet -> internet).
APA style
Direct quotes need page numbers.
Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numerals (e.g., 10).
Figures and tables
Refer to each Table and Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1).
Citations are not in full APA style. For example:
If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year. For example, either:
in-text, Smith et al. (2020), or
in parentheses (Smith et al., 2020)
Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets.
References are not in full APA style. For example:
