Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Long-term side effects of antidepressants on motivation and emotion

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comment[edit source]

Hey there

This is such an interesting topic that is super important in this day and age where many people are prescribed antidepressants and may be unaware of the long term effects this can have. As a suggestion I would love to see more interactive content, including photos, quizzes or case studies. I know technology can be pretty tricky sometimes though so this may have been why these weren't included

Keep up the good work (The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) )

Social Contribution[edit source]

Hey there! Just wanted to let you know that I really enjoyed reading your chapter! As someone on antidepressants it was really interesting to read about the different types and the effects of them. Very relatable. Just a suggestion, I'd love to see a quiz at the end of your book chapter so I can practice my knowledge! Have a lovely day :) --U3175502 (discusscontribs) 07:56, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Heading casing[edit source]

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 02:37, 21 September 2020 (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. OK
  2. Title was missing - now added to be consistent with the book table of contents
  3. Capitalisation of the sub-title has been corrected to be consistent with the book table of contents

User page[edit source]

  1. Excellent - used effectively
  2. 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[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. Excellent
  2. The Overview and Conclusion should not have sub-headings.
  3. Use default heading formatting (e.g., avoid bold, italics, underline etc.).
  4. Under-developed, 2-level heading structure - develop further (e.g,. especially for ADs and emotion)
  5. Aim for 3 to 6 top-level headings between the Overview and Conclusion, with up to a similar number of sub-headings for large sections.
  6. See earlier comment about Heading casing.

Key points[edit source]

  1. Use bullet points (see Tutorial 1 - Using Wikiversity)
  2. Overview - Consider adding:
    1. an image
    2. an example or case study
  3. Expand focus on theory and research.
  4. Use APA style for citations.
  5. Basic development of key points for each section, with relevant citations.
  6. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters.
  7. Consider including more examples/case studies.
  8. Conclusion (the most important section):
    1. hasn't been developed
    2. what might the take-home, practical messages be?
    3. in a nutshell, what are the answer(s) to the question in the sub-title?

Image[edit source]

  1. None

References[edit source]

  1. OK
  2. Remove bullet-points
  3. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. capitalisation
    2. dois are missing
  4. None

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Very good
  2. External links
    1. Rename links so that they are more user friendly
    2. Include source in brackets after link

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:37, 21 September 2020 (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, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a basic, but sufficient chapter.
  2. This chapter is well under the maximum word count.
  3. 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.
  4. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits.

Theory[edit source]

  1. Basic but sufficient coverage of relevant theory is provided.
  2. There is too much general theoretical material (e.g., about depression, what antidepressants are, and different types of antidepressants). This information has been largely ignored for marking purposes. 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).

Research[edit source]

  1. Overall, this chapter provides a basic overview of relevant research.
  2. 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.
  3. Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.
  4. Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags).

Written expression[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is basic.
    2. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences.
  1. Layout
    1. See earlier comments about heading casing.
  2. Learning features
  3. External links - rename as per Tutorial 1 - Using Wikiversity
    1. 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.
    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. 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.
    4. Promising use of image(s). Images aren't labelled sequentially. At least some appear to have violated copyright restrictions (e.g., Figure 1).
    5. No use of table(s).
    6. Basic of feature box(es).
    7. No use of quiz(zes).
  4. Grammar
    1. The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
    2. Check and make correct use of commas.
    3. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs individuals').
    4. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect.
    5. Check and correct use of semi-colons (;) and colons (:).
    6. Abbreviations
      1. Check and correct grammatical formatting for abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.).
      2. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses.
      3. Use abbreviations sparingly. Do not use abbreviations for minor terms that aren't used very much in the chapter.
  5. Spelling
    1. Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the [spelling?] tags).
    2. Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour).
  6. Proofreading
    1. More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard (e.g., the title uses long-term but rest of article uses long term - the former is grammatically correct).
    2. Remove unnecessary capitalisation (e.g., Antidepressants).
  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. Use double (not single) quotation marks "to introduce a word or phrase used as an ironic comment, as slang, or as an invented or coined expression; use quotation marks only for the first occurrence of the word or phrase, not for subsequent occurrences" (APA 7th ed., 2020, p. 159).
    3. Figures and tables
      1. Use APA style for Figure captions. See example.
      2. 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. Move non-peer-reviewed sources to the external links section.
      2. Comma needed after author, before year, when citations are presented in parentheses.
      3. If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year. For example, either:
        1. in-text, Smith et al. (2020), or
        2. in parentheses (Smith et al., 2020)
    5. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of italicisation.
      2. Include hyperlinked dois.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~2 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:45, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[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. This presentation provides basic coverage of the topic.
  2. The presentation makes basic use of theory.
  3. The presentation makes basic use of research.
  4. The presentation could be improved by making more use of examples or case studies.
  5. 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 makes basic use of 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 video uses basic production.
  2. 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.
  3. Audio recording quality was OK.
  4. Visual display quality was basic.
  5. Image sources and their copyright status are/not provided. Either acknowledge the image sources and their licenses in the video description or remove the presentation.
  6. This presentation has probably violated the copyrights of image owners as images appear to have been used without permission and/or acknowledgement.
  7. A copyright license for the presentation is not provided.
  8. A link to the book chapter is provided.
  9. A link from the book chapter is provided.
  10. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 13:13, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]