Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Terror management theory

From Wikiversity
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Jtneill in topic Multimedia feedback
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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 05:37, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Topic development feedback

[edit source]

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. Title and sub-title have been corrected to be consistent with the book table of contents

User page

[edit source]
  1. Created
  2. Used effectively
  3. About me
    1. Description about self provided
    2. Consider linking to your eportfolio
  4. Link provided to book chapter

Social contribution

[edit source]
  1. Add headings to comments on talk/discussion pages.
  2. 2 of the contributions seem to cancel each other out?
  3. Summarised with direct link(s) to evidence.

Section headings

[edit source]
  1. Promising 2-level heading structure.
  2. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading - use 0 or 2+ sub-headings.
  3. Avoid having sub-headings in the Overview and Conclusion
  4. See earlier comment about Heading casing.
  5. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an overview paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings.
  6. Use TMT abbreviation to shorten headings

Key points

[edit source]
  1. Good development in most sections.
  2. Somewhat unclear what the overall narrative is - the sections seem to be a bit disjointed.
  3. Check and correct spelling and grammar errors.
  4. Overview - Consider:
    1. Zooming out and present the big picture (what's the problem?) and shifting the detail into subsequent sections.
    2. Adding focus questions.
    3. Adding an image.
    4. Adding a case study.
  5. Remove or adapt generic template content.
  6. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters.
  1. An image (figure) is presented.
  2. Caption
    1. does not use APA style.
    2. could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text.
  3. Cite each figure at least once in the main text.
  4. Consider increasing image size.


[edit source]
  1. OK.
  2. For full APA style, use:
    1. alphabetical order
    2. correct capitalisation
    3. correct italicisation
    4. the new recommended format for dois


[edit source]
  1. Include source in brackets after link
  2. See also
    1. Use for internal links
  3. External links
    1. User for external links

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:37, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

APA referencing, abbreviations and quotes.

[edit source]

Hello your chapter is looking good! Just a few things I picked up on:

1. Firstly just remember its APA 7th edition, meaning that when you have three or more authors you need to use "et al.,".

2. Just be careful as throughout the webpage you change from using TMT to terror mgt theory. Try to keep this consistent where possible. Also be careful as you capitalise the word terror throughout the webpage where not needed.

3. For quotes remember you need to have both the author and the page number and use double quotations marks for direct quotes.

Cant wait to see the end result, its looking great, keep it up!

--U3190210 (discusscontribs) 01:48, 7 October 2020 (UTC)Reply


[edit source]

@Oscar3176498: Note that this chapter is currently over-capitalised (e.g., it should be "anxiety buffering system" rather than "Anxiety Buffering System"). More info:, Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Referencing and figure formatting ideas

[edit source]

Hi User:Oscar3176498, As another user previously noted APA 7 uses et al. for in-text citations of three or more authors. This includes when using them in sentence form. For example, your in-text citation in the "Applying terror management theory to performance: Can reminding individuals of their mortality Increase strength output?" overview paragraph should read as "The 2005 study by Peters et. al purpose was to..." Same again for the "Terror management theory health model : COVID-19" overview. This could read as "Pyszczynski et al. (2020) discussed the role of TMT..."

Finally, I think adding a caption to the figures would be a good addition. Eg. Figure 1. Memento mori serving as a reminder of death. Each figure should also be referred to within text.

Hope this helps :) Some very interesting content in your chapter.

--U3186080 (discusscontribs) 12:23, 17 October 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.


[edit source]
  1. Overall, this is a promising chapter that provides rich and interesting psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
  2. The chapter quality is undermined by the poor quality of written expression, particularly problematic spelling, grammar, and proofreading.
  3. The chapter could be improved by providing greater emphasis on synthesising a wider range of research (e.g,. making greater use of meta-analyses).
  4. This chapter is over the maximum word count.
  5. The Overview is promising, but could be improved by focusing less on history and more on the actual psychological phenomenon/problem. Consider expanding the focus questions to provide clearer goals for the chapter.
  6. Note that Figure 1 was removed due to lack of sufficient copyright information/copyright violation. Renumber figures.
  7. What are the practical, take-home messages to help improve people's everyday lives?
  8. For additional feedback, see following comments and these copyedits.
  1. Relevant theory is well described and explained.
  2. Use of more practical examples (e.g., case studies) could help to communicate these ideas more effectively to a wider audience.
  3. The theoretical component could be improved by also summarising critical perspectives about TMT.
  1. Overall, this chapter provides a promising overview of some relevant research.
  2. There is heavy reliance on a small range of sources but a lack of emphasis on critical perspectives and review of key research such as Burke et al. (2010) and other reviews/meta-analyses.
  3. Rather than providing overly detailed summaries of individual studies, seek to provide a critical synthesis of the best available research about the topic. Some illustrative individual research studies may serve as useful case studies.
  4. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
  5. Either remove Table 1 or provide more explanation.
  1. The quality of written expression is well below professional standard. Coaching assistance is recommended (e.g., UC Study Help).
    1. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences.
    2. Use gender-neutral language (e.g., mankind -> humankind).
    3. Direct quotes should be embedded within sentences and paragraphs, rather than dumped holus-bolus. Even better, communicate the concept in your own words.
    4. 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.
    5. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead, use section linking.
    6. Use 3rd person perspective rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you")[1].
  2. Layout
    1. Shorten the longer headings.
    2. See earlier comments about heading casing.
    3. Remove numbers from headings - they are added by default when headings are applied.
    4. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an introductory paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings.
  3. Learning features
    1. For numbered lists, use Wikiversity formatting per Tutorial 1.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Basic use of image(s).
    5. Good Basic/No use of table(s).
    6. Basic use of feature box(es).
    7. Basic use of quiz(zes). To improve, ask questions about meaningful/take-home messages rather than trivialities (e.g,. $ amounts).
    8. No use of case studies.
    9. Use bullet-points and numbered lists, per Tutorial 1.
  4. Grammar is problematic
    1. The grammar for many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
    2. Use serial commas[2] - it is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists.
    3. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs individuals').[3].
    4. Abbreviations
      1. Use abbreviations sparingly. Do not use abbreviations for minor terms that aren't used very much in the chapter.
  5. Spelling is problematic
    1. Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the [spelling?] tags).
    2. Check and correct spelling of Pyszczynski
    3. Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour; fulfillment vs. fulfilment).
  6. Proofreading
    1. More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard.
    2. Remove unnecessary capitalisation (e.g., Anthropologist -> anthropologist).
  7. APA style
      1. Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text.
    1. Citations are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year (e.g., Smith et al., 2020). This suggestion was also made by others.
      2. Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets.
    2. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation.
      2. Check and correct use of italicisation.
      3. Include hyperlinked dois.
  1. For previous chapters, suggest making direct changes or commenting on the talk page
  2. ~10 logged, distinct, relevant, useful, social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:52, 5 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.


[edit source]
  1. Overall, this is a good presentation.
  1. Comments about the book chapter also largely apply to this section.
  2. An appropriate amount of content is presented - not too much or too little.
  3. The presentation is well structured.
  4. Consider adding and narrating an Overview slide (e.g., with focus questions), to help orientate the viewer about what will be covered.
  5. The presentation makes good use of theory.
  6. The presentation makes basic use of research.
  7. The presentation makes promising use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice.
  8. A Conclusion slide is presented with a take-home message(s).
  1. The presentation makes basic use of text based slides with narrated audio.
  2. Well paced.
  3. Excellent intonation to enhance listener interest and engagement.
  4. The audio communication is hesitant in some places - could benefit from further practice.
  5. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read.
  6. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images.
  1. The video is produced using simple tools.
  2. Hide the audio icon. Hide the screencastify presentation bar.
  3. 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.
  4. Audio recording quality was OK but there is room for improvement (e.g., avoid background noise such as keyboard clicks and paper rustling). Probably an on-board microphone was used. Consider using an external microphone.
  5. Visual display quality was good.
  6. Image sources are acknowledged. To improve, provide specific links to sources.
  7. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the video description but not in the meta-data.
  8. A link to the book chapter is provided but it goes to a specific section rather than the top of the chapter.
  9. A link from the book chapter is provided.
  10. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:41, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply