Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2021/Brain fog

Heading casing

FYI, the recommended Wikiversity heading style uses sentence casing. For example: Self-determination theory rather than Self-Determination Theory Here's an example chapter with correct heading casing: Growth mindset development -- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:51, 15 September 2021 (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 The title is correctly worded Capitalisation of the title has been corrected to be consistent with the book table of contents Wording and capitalisation of the sub-title has been corrected to be consistent with the book table of contents User page Used effectively Description about self provided 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. Link provided to book chapter Social contribution None summarised with link(s) to evidence Headings Basic, 2-level heading structure - could benefit from further development It makes logical sense to use the sub-title questions as top-level headings. Consider further development of sub-headings in those sections. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading - use 0 or 2+ sub-headings See earlier comment about Heading casing Key points Promising development of key points for each section, with relevant citations Overview Good description of the problem, however it is unclear whether BF is a temporary state or chronic condition Confusing inclusion of awe/broaden and build theory - maybe this Overview was copied and partially adapted from another chapter? Consider adding: an image an example or case study For sections which include sub-section include key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings Avoid overcapitalisation (APA style) - more info Strive for an integrated balance of theory and research Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters. This is particularly important for this chapter as there are several other chapters about closely related concepts. Consider including more examples/case studies Conclusion (the most important section): underway what might the take-home, practical messages be? in a nutshell, what are the answer(s) to the question(s) in the sub-title? Figure A figure is presented Caption uses APA style Cite each figure at least once in the main text Consider increasing image size from default to make it easier to view References OK For APA referencing style, check and correct: capitalisation italicisation doi formatting separate page numbers by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Resources See also Use internal wiki link style (per Tutorial 1) Also link to relevant Wikipedia pages External links None provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:51, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Suggestion

Hey I was reading through the topics and i came across brain fog. After doing some reading i understood a lot more than i once did and i thought that the topic was super interesting. Anyway i found a useful article that might be of help to you https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10286-013-0212-z.pdf --U3202984 (discuss • contribs) 12:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Comments

Hey there, your topic looks super interesting, I've just added a quiz in your cognitive load theory section to help add some interactive features in there! All the best --U3187208 (discuss • contribs) 01:50, 17 October 2021 (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. Chapter marks will be available via UCLearn along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall Overall, this is a basic, but sufficient chapter. Well under the maximum word count. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits. Overview Somewhat lengthy Overview. Consider moving some of the detail into subsequent sections. Explaining the BF phenomenon more simply - what is it? Assume the reader doesn't know - i.e., start simple. Clear focus question(s). Consider introducing a case study or example or using an image to help engage reader interest. Theory — Breadth Basic but sufficient coverage of relevant theory is provided. Theory — Depth Basic depth is provided about the selected theory(ies). More examples could be useful to illustrate key concepts. Research — Key findings Basic overview of relevant research. More detail about key studies would be ideal. Research — Critical thinking Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags). Basic critical thinking about research is evident. Critical thinking about research could be further evidenced by: describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies discussing the direction of relationships considering the strength of relationships acknowledging limitations suggesting specific directions for future research= Integration There is basic integration between theory and research. Conclusion Basic summary. Consider reminding the reader about the importance of the problem or phenomenon of interest. Add practical, take-home message(s). Written expression — Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is basic. Some sentences are overly long; consider splitting them into shorter, separate sentences. "People" is often a better term than "individuals". The chapter could be improved by developing some of the bullet-points into full paragraph format. Use permanent, rather than relative, time references. For example, instead of "20 years ago", refer to something like "at the beginning of the 21st century". In this way, the text will survive better into the future, without needing to be rewritten. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences. Layout Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections. Provide more descriptive headings (e.g., what is the key point for the section titled "Peer-reviewed study"?). Grammar The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags). Grammar-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance. Abbreviations Once an abbreviation is established (e.g., CLT), use it consistently. Don't set up an abbreviation and then not use it or only use it sometimes. Spelling Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour). APA style Do not capitalise the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc.. 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 use correct APA style. References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and correct use of capitalisation[1] "Retrieved from" is no longer used (APA style, 7th ed.) Page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Written expression — Learning features Overall, the use of learning features is basic. Use in-text interwiki links, rather than external links, per Tutorial 1. One 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. 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. One image(s). Increase size, so that it's easier to read. Basic use of table(s). One use of feature box(es). One quiz question. Basic use of case studies or examples. Social contribution ~3 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:58, 9 November 2021 (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 good to very good presentation. The presentation is over the maximum time limit - content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking and feedback purposes. Overview An opening slide with the sub-title is presented and narrated - this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. The title is missing on the opening slide - this would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. Briefly explain why this topic is important. Focus questions are presented. Footnotes? Ideally, just present the questions rather than the sub-headings (keep it simple). Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section. The presentation addresses the topic. An appropriate amount of content is presented - not too much or too little. The presentation is well structured. The presentation makes very good use of relevant psychological theory. The presentation makes good use of relevant psychological research. The presentation makes very good use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice. The presentation provides practical, easy to understand information. Conclusion A Conclusion slide is presented with very good take-home message(s). The Conclusion mostly but didn't entirely fit within the time limit. Audio The audio is easy to follow. Audio communication is clear and well paced. Excellent intonation enhances listener interest and engagement. Audio recording quality was very good Video Overall, visual display quality is very good. The presentation makes effective use of text and image based slides. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read. Some of the font size should be larger to make it easier to read. The amount of text presented per slide should be reduced to make it easier to read and listen at the same time. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images and/or diagrams. The presentation is well produced using simple tools. Meta-data The chapter title and sub-title are missing from the name of the presentation - this would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding. Links to and from the book chapter are provided. Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are communicated. Ideally, provide clickable links to the original image sources (e.g., in the description). This presentation violates the copyrights of image owners as the images used do not appear to have been licensed for re-use. A copyright license for the presentation is provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:56, 19 November 2021 (UTC)