Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Cancer screening motivation

Heading casing

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 08:10, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Age

It could be interesting to discuss if age has any impact on the participation rates of cancer screening. i.e. 20-30 year olds, below 40 and above 40--U3187486 (discuss • contribs) 11:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Gender

It might be interesting to discuss that women are more likely to participate in bowel cancer screening programs than men. ---- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:44, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Fear

Perhaps also consider the role fear in preventing people from health screening, especially for bowel cancer. ---- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:25, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Spelling

Hey there ! Just letting you know that I fixed some spelling mistakes under the emotional factors paragraph! Feel free to keep these changes or remove them :) --U3190016 (discuss • contribs) 06:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Feedback

Hey this is looking really good! I would suggest to add a few more external links within the 'Cancer' section, especially for the other therapies that you mentioned. There also seems to be very little referencing within this section. The sentence 'Which lead to the second key component of early detection, cancer screening.' is a little difficult to follow. I would suggest writing something such as "In conjunction, the second key component of early detection is cancer screening." I would also try and add some images within the text to break it up for the reader. I love the running case study, this is really engaging and i like the way this is also going to be included within the conclusion. --U3187381 (discuss • contribs) 10:25, 17 October 2020 (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 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 Very good Capitalisation of the title/sub-title has been corrected to be consistent with the book table of contents There is no need to capitalise cancer User page Excellent - used effectively Consider linking to your eportfolio page and/or any other professional online profile or resume such as LinkedIn. This is not required, but it can be useful to interlink your professional networks. Social contribution Indirect link(s) to evidence. 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. Add a brief summary of each contribution. Section headings Reduce/remove general content about cancer - if needed, just link to the Wikipedia pages about specific cancer types. The only real relevance of specific types for this chapter is whether specific types of screening are involved and therefore the specific motivational issues involved in encouraging people to participate in screening. Some general motivational/health theories are then covered. What is missing is the key content for this chapter - the application of theories to cancer screening. Concentrate efforts in building a structure and content in this area Overly complicated 3-level structure - consider simplifying to a 2-level structure. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading - use 0 or 2+ sub-headings. See earlier comment about Heading casing. 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 Overview - Consider adding: a description of the problem and what will be covered an image an example or case study Remove or adapt generic template content. Avoid providing too much background information. Briefly summarise general concepts and provide internal wiki links to other book chapters and/or Wikipedia pages for further information. Then focus most of the content of this chapter on directly answering the core question(s) posed by the chapter sub-title. Expand theory and research as it pertains to motivations for cancer screening. Basic development of key points for each section, but insufficient development of key points about motivations for cancer screening. Consider including more examples/case studies. This is where the types of cancer are relevant. Consider: What does cancer screening motivation have in common across the types of cancer, and what is unique about screening for different types of cancer? Conclusion (the most important section): what might the take-home, practical messages be? in a nutshell, what are the answer(s) to the question in the sub-title? Image An image (figure) is presented. Caption does not use APA style. could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text. Cite each figure at least once in the main text. References Cancer Council is not a peer reviewed source. Shift these links to the external links section. Instead, build the chapter on reading of the key peer-reviewed academic sources about the motivations for cancer screening. Use APA style. Resources See also Very good Minor edits have been to match the book/wiki style External links Very good 1 link removed - target an international audience; Australians only represent 0.33% of the world population

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:36, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Suggested edit

Hey, in your internal links changed, I added a link to the cancer heading, I hope that helps :) Dakka2005 (discuss • contribs) 23:11, 17 October 2020 (UTC)Dakka1998

Reference ideas

Hi User:U3191761 , I noticed your all your currently listed references are from the Cancer Council website. I've found a few journal articles which may be of interest in your chapter regarding cancer screening motivations in several different studies. All of these should be locatable through the uni library website. Hope this helps

von Wagner, C., Hirst, Y., Waller, J., Ghanouni, A., McGregor, L., Kerrison, R., Verstraete, W., Vlaev, I., Sieverding, M., & Stoffel, S. (2019). The impact of descriptive norms on motivation to participate in cancer screening – Evidence from online experiments. Patient Education and Counseling, 102(9), 1621–1628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2019.04.001

Roth, J., Carter-Harris, L., Brandzel, S., Buist, D., & Wernli, K. (2018). A qualitative study exploring patient motivations for screening for lung cancer. PloS One, 13(7), e0196758–. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0196758

Conway-Phillips, R., & Janusek, L. (2014). Influence of sense of coherence, spirituality, social support and health perception on breast cancer screening motivation and behaviors in African American women. The ABNF Journal, 25(3), 72–79.

--U3186080 (discuss • contribs) 13:41, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Chapter review and feedback

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 Overall, this is a basic, but sufficient chapter. This chapter is well under the maximum word count. Overview could benefit from focus questions and/or a case study to help engage reader interest. This chapter makes insufficient use of primary, peer-reviewed sources as citations. Non-peer reviewed sources are over-used. Move non-peer reviewed links into the external links section. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits. Theory Initially, there is too much general theoretical material (e.g., about cancer). Instead, summarise and link to further information (such as other book chapters or Wikipedia articles), to allow this chapter to focus on the specific topic (i.e., the sub-title question). Basic but sufficient coverage of relevant theory is provided. Research Overall, this chapter provides a basic overview of relevant research. Many claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags). When describing important research findings, consider including a bit more detail about the methodology and 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. Check and correct the gender. For example, females are more likely to participate in bowel cancer screening in Australia[1]. Greater use of global, rather than country-specific, research would be ideal. Written expression Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is basic. The chapter would benefit from a more developed Overview and Conclusion, with clearer focus question(s) (Overview) and take-home self-help message for each focus question (Conclusion). Several paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences. Some sentences are overly long; consider splitting them into shorter, separate sentences. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead, use section linking. Layout Use default heading styles (bold removed). See earlier comments about heading casing. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an introductory paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings. Learning features Promising use of a case study. However, more specificity would be ideal. To the best of my knowledge, there is no such thing as "cancer screening" in a general sense. Instead, there is specific forms of screening, such as for bowel cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer etc. What is the next step? Ideally, provide a third section to the study which illustrates the implementation of the recommended influences to improve the likelihood for Sally, or someone similar, to engage in cancer screening opportunities. In other words, illustrate the recommended solutions based on psychological theory and research - this would help to demonstrate indepth understanding. No use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding 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. Ideally, use in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters. Other links can be moved to the external links section. Basic use of image(s). No use of table(s). Basic use of feature box(es). No use of quiz(zes). Grammar The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags). Check and make correct use of commas. Use serial commas[2] - it is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists. Here's a 1 min. explanatory video. Check and correct use of semi-colons (;) and colons (:). Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs individuals').[3]. Abbreviations Check and correct grammatical formatting for abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.). Spelling Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour). Proofreading More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard. Replace double spaces with single spaces. Include a space after a fullstop. Remove unnecessary capitalisation. APA style Figures and tables Use APA style for Figure captions. See example. Refer to each Table and Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation). Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text. Citations are not in full APA style. For example: Do not include author first names or initials. Include year as well as author surname with each citation. 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) Multiple citations in parentheses should be listed in alphabetical order by first author surname and separate by a semi-colon. References are not in full APA style. For example: Include volume and issue numbers. Include hyperlinked dois. Social contribution ~7 logged, useful, social contributions, most with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:07, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Multimedia feedback

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.

Overall Overall, this is an excellent presentation. Structure and content 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 presentation makes excellent use of theory. The presentation makes good use of research. The presentation could be improved by making more use of examples or case studies. A Conclusion slide is presented with a take-home message(s). Communication The presentation is easy to follow and interesting to watch and listen to. The presentation makes effective use of text and image based slides with narrated audio. 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. Excellent intonation to enhance listener interest and engagement. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images. Production quality The video is well produced. 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 OK, but I think the microphone was probably too close, leading to some buffeting/distortion. Visual display quality was very good. Image sources and their copyright status are provided. A copyright license for the presentation is provided. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the video description but not in the meta-data. A link to the book chapter is provided. A link from the book chapter is provided. A written description of the presentation is provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:40, 22 November 2020 (UTC)