Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Unconscious motivation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comment[edit source]

Hi, My chapter topic is similar to yours in that I am looking at the role of emotion in unconscious bias. I came across a reference that may be useful and relevant to your topic. Goldyne’s (2007) article discusses emotion and unconscious motivation, particularly how emotions (such as anger) can rise to emotionally driven unconscious motivations which conflict with the personal motivation to be objective. This can lead to potential implicit bias. For your chapter I thought might be interesting to discuss how unconscious motivations and emotions can influence expert’s subjectivity, and the internal factors (stemming from personality or past) and external factors (stemming from the current situation) that influence motivation. Here is the reference (and link) for the full article if you are interested Goldyne, A. J. (2007). Minimizing the influence of unconscious bias in evaluations: A practical guide. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 35(1), 60-66. doi: doi=

--U3149815 (discusscontribs) 04:33, 29 August 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.

Autoroute icone.svg

Title and sub-title[edit source]

  1. Excellent

User page[edit source]

  1. Excellent
  2. Consider linking to your eportfolio page and/or any other professional online profile such as LinkedIn. This is not required, but it can be useful to interlink your professional networks.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. Excellent

Section headings[edit source]

  1. Well developed 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic.
  2. Remove colons
  3. I'm not convinced that Maslow's hierarchy of needs is amongst the most important theories for this topic - consider dropping

Key points[edit source]

  1. Overview - Consider adding:
    1. focus questions.
    2. an image.
    3. an example or case study.
  2. Key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations.
  3. Consider including more examples/case studies.
  4. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters.

Image[edit source]

  1. An image (figure) is presented.
  2. Caption
    1. uses APA style.
    2. explains how the image connects to key points being made in the main text.
  3. Cite each figure at least once in the main text.

References[edit source]

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

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Good
  2. External links
    1. Use bullet-points
    2. Include source in brackets after link

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:28, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In-text wiki links[edit source]

@Emma.w321: Remember to add in-text wiki links to related book chapters and/or Wikipedia articles e.g., unconscious mind. Sincerely, James

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 solid/good chapter that successfully uses psychological theory to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
  2. The main area for improvement is in the depth of review/summary of research.
  3. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits.

Theory[edit source]

  1. Relevant theories are well selected, described, integrated, and explained.
  2. The chapter probably overemphasises Freudian perspectives rather than more recent psychodynamic perspectives.
  3. Preferably use academic, peer-reviewed sources rather than sources such as textbooks and encyclopedias.
  4. Some examples are provided, but more would be ideal.
  5. The Reeve (2018) textbook is overused as a citation - instead, utilise primary, peer-reviewed sources.

Research[edit source]

  1. Overall, this chapter provides a basic overview of relevant research.
  2. Little Albert is an old/historical case, but the way it is written/cited implies that it is a recent case (e.g., see Little Albert experiment.
  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 good to very good.
    2. The use of tense could be improved. A lot of past tense is used. But, when talking about concepts such as id, ego, and superego, usually present tense would be preferable. "Freud saw it as central to the human mind" makes sense as past tense, but a sentence like this: "No part of the id perceived the outside world, nor could it reason (Watson, 2014)." would work better in the present tense.
    3. Use 3rd person perspective rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you")[1] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes.
  2. Layout
    1. The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections.
    2. 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. Goo 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. 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. Use in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters.
    4. Links to non-peer-reviewed sources should be moved to the external links section.
    5. Good use of image(s).
    6. Good use of table(s).
    7. Excellent use of feature box(es).
    8. Excellent 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. Use serial commas[2] - it is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists. Here's a 1 min. explanatory video.
    4. Check and correct use of semi-colons (;) and colons (:).
    5. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs individuals').[3].
  5. Spelling
    1. Some spelling can be improved (e.g., see the [spelling?] tags).
  6. 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. Do not capitalise the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc..
    3. Figures and tables
      1. Use APA style for Figure captions. See example.
      2. Use APA style for Table captions. See example.
      3. 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. 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)
      2. p.# -> p. # (space needed after period)
    5. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. More proofreading needed.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~16 logged, useful, but relatively minor social contributions with direct links to evidence.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:59, 19 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 reasonably good, basic presentation.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. Comments about the book chapter also largely apply to this section, particularly that the focus could be improved by highlighting/making more obvious the role of the unconscious in motivation.
  2. An appropriate amount of content is presented - not too much or too little.
  3. Consider adding and narrating an Overview slide (e.g., with focus questions), to help orientate the viewer about what will be covered.
  4. The presentation uses a good combination of theory and research.
  5. The presentation could be strengthened by adding a Conclusion slide with practical, take-home messages.

Communication[edit source]

  1. The presentation is easy to follow.
  2. The presentation makes basic use of text based slides with narrated audio.
  3. Well paced.
  4. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read.
  5. The visual communication is supplemented by images.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. 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.
  2. Audio recording quality was OK. Probably the best way to deal with the glitch in this middle would be to re-record. Alternatively, try a screencasting tool.
  3. Visual display quality was OK.
  4. 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.
  5. A copyright license for the presentation is not provided.
  6. A link to the book chapter is not provided.
  7. A link from the book chapter is provided.
  8. A written description of the presentation is not provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:51, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]