Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Implicit motives

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Heading advice[edit source]

I suggested that the No.2 heading "Implicit Motives vs Explicit Motives" can changed into types of motivations. Then create the sub-heading: implicit motivation and explicit motivation.
--U3178984 (discusscontribs) 03:23, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey there, just letting you know that I edited a part of your paragraph! Feel free to keep the edit or remove it if you don't like it :) --U3190016 (discusscontribs) 05:21, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Heading casing[edit source]

Crystal Clear app ktip.svg
FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for sentence casing. For example, the wikitext should be:

== Cats and mice ==

rather than

== Cats and Mice ==

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:43, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.

Autoroute icone.svg

Title and sub-title[edit source]

  1. Very good
  2. Capitalisation of title adjusted to match list of all chapters

User page[edit source]

  1. Excellent
  2. Consider linking to your eportfolio

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. Summarised with indirect link(s) to evidence.
  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 structure
  2. I think the plan could be improved by narrowing more specifically to focus on implicit motivates e.g., forget about explicit motives and other theories etc. - Provide a general introduction to implicit motives but then concentrate and expand the material about McClelland's nAch nAf and NPow. The connection with basic psychological needs theory probably also makes sense. But that gives the chapter 2 theories which is plenty for this topic - better off using a smaller of theories well than trying to cover too much.
  3. See earlier comment about Heading casing.

Key points[edit source]

  1. Reasonable development in most sections.
  2. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters.
  3. Conclusion (the most important section) hasn't been developed.

Image[edit source]

  1. Excellent

References[edit source]

  1. Good.
  2. Excellent.
  3. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. capitalisation
    2. doi formatting

Resources[edit source]

  1. Good
  2. Include source in brackets after link

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:43, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[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, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a promising chapter that does a reasonably good job of explaining psychological theory.
  2. However, the chapter lacks sufficient focus on research and lacks sufficient proofreading to bring the quality of written expression to a professional standard.
  3. This chapter is well under the maximum word count.
  4. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits.

Theory[edit source]

  1. Relevant theories are well selected and reasonably well explained.
  2. More case studies or examples would be helpful.

Research[edit source]

  1. Overall, this chapter makes insufficient use of research.
  2. Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags).
  3. 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.
  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 below professional standard.
    2. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead, use section linking.
    3. Use 3rd person perspective rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you")[1].
    4. Some of the bullet-points should have been in full paragraph format.
    5. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences.
    6. What are the practical, take-home, self-help messages?
  2. Layout
    1. The chapter is reasonably well structured, with major sections using sub-sections.
    2. Avoid having sections with only one sub-section.
  3. Learning features
    1. Minimal 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Basic use of image(s).
    4. No use of table(s).
    5. Basic use of feature box(es).
    6. Good use of quiz(zes).
    7. No use of case studies.
  4. Grammar
    1. Use serial commas[2] - it is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists.
    2. The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
    3. Abbreviations
      1. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses.
  5. Proofreading
    1. More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard.
  6. APA style
    1. [ In general, do not capitalize the names of diseases, disorders, therapies, treatments, theories, concepts, hypotheses, principles,
    2. Citations use correct APA style.
    3. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~10 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to verify and assess

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:31, 6 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a basic presentation.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. An appropriate amount of content is presented - not too much or too little.
  2. The selection of content, however, should be more focused on implicit motive theory and research (e.g., Achievement, Power/Affiliation, and Affiliation), and illustrating how these apply in the real world.
  3. The presentation is well structured.
  4. What are the practical take-home message(s) that we can use to help improve our everyday lives based on the best available psychological theory and research about this topic?

Communication[edit source]

  1. The presentation is easy to follow.
  2. The presentation makes basic use of a small number of text and image based slides with narrated audio.
  3. 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.
  4. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. Communicate the chapter title and sub-title in both the video title and on the opening slide - this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  2. Audio recording quality was basic - probably an on-board microphone was used because keyboard clicks were audible. Consider using an external microphone.
  3. Visual display quality was basic.
  4. A copyright license for the presentation is provided.
  5. A link to the book chapter is provided.
  6. A link from the book chapter is provided.
  7. A written description of the presentation is provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:25, 20 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]