Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Motivated reasoning

Comments

Hello! Your book chapter is looking great and the scope goes in depth about all relevant information. I have found a peer reviewed article that may be of interest to you. Dawson, E., Gilovich, T., & Regan, D. T. (2002). Motivated Reasoning and Performance on the was on Selection Task. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(10), 1379-1387.

Hi there! If you are looking for some different points in your chapter it may be interesting to briefly mention and link stress as an inhibitor of goal-directed choices. Here is an article: Yu, R. (2016). Stress potentiates decision biases: A stress induced deliberation-to-intuition (SIDI) model. Neurobiology of Stress, 3, 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ynstr.2015.12.006 Stress may be another way of seeing our intuitive motivated choices. --U3174214 (discuss • contribs) 03:55, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

‌Hi! My topic is also focussing on motivation and I have a source which you might find helpful for fleshing out your chapter:

• https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/job.2051?casa_token=hYdW8wwILI8AAAAA%3AIxoAtEi_NBNsJorNJwOQMN3wSQO9pnpHAZKeYlSFZdf9CvJJQlIxokE76iBQY1-4UsPeuj9R7XiKj28

cheers - u3174052

Heading casing

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 05:15, 21 September 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 has been corrected to be consistent with the book table of contents User page Excellent - used effectively Social contribution Excellent - summarised with direct link(s) to evidence. Section headings Excellent 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 Key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations. Include more in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters. Consider including more case studies (e.g., in feature boxes). Image Good An image (figure) is presented. Caption does not use APA style. Cite each figure at least once in the main text. References Good For APA referencing style, check and correct: capitalisation italicisation Resources Excellent See also Very good External links Very good Use sentence casing

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:15, 21 September 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 very good chapter that successfully uses psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits. Theory Relevant theories are well selected, described, integrated, and explained. Some quotes are helpful, but they are possibly over-used. The best way is to express concepts in your own words. Research Relevant research is well reviewed and discussed in relation to theory. 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. Lots of examples, including links, are provided (good). Written expression Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is very good. As can sometimes the case with cognitive-type topics, the text is quite abstract in places, making it somewhat difficult to understand, particularly for an unfamiliar reader. Use 3rd person perspective rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you")[1]. Some sentences are unnecessarily wordy - strive for the simplest expression of the point being made. Avoid starting sentences with a citation unless the author is particularly pertinent. Instead, it is more interesting for the the content/key point to be communicated, with the citation included along the way or, more typically, in brackets at the end of the sentence. Direct quotes should ideally be embedded within sentences and paragraphs, rather than dumped holus-bolus. Even better, communicate the concept in your own words. Reduce use of weasel words which bulk out the text, but don't enhance meaning. Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections. Learning features Excellent use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Basic use of embedded in-text links to related book chapters. Embedding more in-text links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project. Good use of image(s), but where did the image(s) you uploaded come from? e.g., File:Fact vs belief.jpg is claimed as you own work, but I suspect that it clearly isn't?[2] Good use of table(s). Perhaps consider ways that Table 2 could be summarised/simplified. Excellent use of feature box(es). No use of quiz(zes). Quizzes could be helpful for this topic, to help tease out key take-away messages. Good use of examples. Revisiting the initial case study could be helpful, for example, to show how the two friends could put the principles discussion into action, realise their biases, and change their thinking. Something like this could help the reader to understand how to put psychological knowledge into action. Grammar Inconsistent use of serial commas[3] - this is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists. Here's a 1 min. explanatory video. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect. Proofreading More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard. APA style Figures and tables Use APA style for Table captions. See example. 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: Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets. References are not in full APA style. For example: Include active hyperlinked dois. Social contribution ~3 logged, useful, social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:27, 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 a very good 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 no explicit use of research. The presentation makes excellent use of one or more examples or case studies. A Conclusion slide is presented with a take-home message(s). Communication The presentation is interesting to watch and listen to. The presentation makes effective use of text and image based slides with narrated audio. Well paced. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read. There is probably too much text overall to read during 3 minutes whilst listening to audio. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images. Production quality The video is well produced using simple tools. The wording 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 very good. Note that probably an on-board microphone was used. Consider using an external microphone to improve quality further. Visual display quality was OK. The presentation looked to be low resolution. Review how this was exported from Prezi to YouTube - it should be possible to upload higher resolution to get cleaner-looking visuals. Image sources and their copyright status are 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 05:53, 22 November 2020 (UTC)