Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2021/Brief motivational interviewing as a health intervention

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 00:23, 18 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 and formatted The sub-title is correctly worded and formatted User page Excellent - 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 Excellent - summarised with direct link(s) to evidence Headings Promising 2-level heading structure - could benefit from further development by expanding the structure See earlier comment about Heading casing The Overview and Conclusion should not have sub-headings Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading - use 0 or 2+ sub-headings Consider adding a heading about MI Use default heading formatting (e.g., avoid bold, italics, underline etc.) Key points Promising development of key points for most sections, with relevant citations Overview - Consider adding/modifying: a description of the problem and what will be covered focus questions an image an example or case study Write the chapter using 3rd person perspective, although a case study or feature box could use 1st or 2nd person perspective Avoid overcapitalisation (APA style) - more info It could probably help to provide a clear explanation of MI (theory and research) at the outset, with embedded links to further info (i.e., related book chapters and/or Wikipedia articles), before exploring more about how it can be applied as a health intervention. Excellent applied focus 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. Conclusion (the most important section): what might the take-home, practical messages be? in a nutshell, what are the answer(s) to the question(s) in the sub-title and/or focus questions? Figure A figure is presented Caption should include Figure X. (note italics) Caption could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text Cite each figure at least once in the main text References Good For APA referencing style, check and correct: capitalisation doi formatting (links should be clickable) separate page numbers by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Resources See also Good Include source in brackets after link - I've added these External links Good Include source in brackets after link

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:23, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Article Suggestion

Hi, it's great to see the work you have done so far on your book chapter. I have found an article that may be helpful for your "limitations" sub-heading, and potentially provide another section for the opportunities that brief motivational interviewing can provide. Emmons and Rollnick (2001) dive into the opportunities and limitations of motivational interviewing in health care settings. I think this could have some great information that you could add to your chapter. I hope this helps :) --CharliU3203035 (discuss • contribs) 07:18, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Headings

Hi! I noticed some of your headings used title casing instead of sentence casing, these have been changed. Your book chapter is looking really good! - --TaraU3187760 (discuss • contribs) 09:46, 15 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 an insufficient chapter. The main areas for potential improvement are to: Focus more directly on the topic; there is too much general motivational material. A more indepth review of relevant research is needed. More practical examples of brief MI in healthcare settings are needed. The quality of written expression can be improved. Move non-peer reviewed links into the external links section. Addressing the topic development feedback could have helped to improve this chapter. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits. Overview Too long. Move detailed content in subsequent sections. The purpose of the Overview is to briefly explain the topic, engage reader interest, and establish focus questions for the chapter. The focus questions could be improved by being more specific to the topic (i.e., the sub-title). Ideally, provide open-ended, rather than closed-ended focus questions. Consider introducing a case study or example or using an image to help engage reader interest. Theory — Breadth There is too much general theoretical material. 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). Build more strongly on other *-related chapters (e.g., by incorporating embedded links to other chapters in this category: Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Health). Theory — Depth Insufficient use of relevant psychological theory (i.e., about brief MI in healthcare settings). More examples could be useful to illustrate key concepts. Research — Key findings Insufficient use of relevant psychological research. Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful. Research — Critical thinking Insufficient 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 Insufficient integration of theory and research. Conclusion Insufficient summary. Lacks identification of key points from psychology theory and research about how brief MI can be effectively implemented in healthcare settings. Address the focus questions. Add practical, take-home message(s). Written expression — Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is basic. Direct quotes should be embedded within sentences and paragraphs, rather than dumped holus-bolus. Even better, communicate the concept in your own words. Internationalise: Write for an international, rather than domestic, audience. Australians make up only 0.32% of the world human population. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences. Reduce use of weasel words which bulk out the text, but don't enhance meaning. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences. Layout See earlier comments about heading casing. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading - use 0 or 2+ sub-headings. Headings should use default wiki style (e.g., remove additional bold). Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections. 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. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs individuals').[1]. APA style 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). Direct quotes need page numbers - even better, write in your own words. Do not capitalise the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc.. Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numerals (e.g., 10). Figures and tables Table captions should use APA style. See example. Refer to each Table and Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1). Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text. Citations are not in full APA style (7th ed.). For example: Check and correct how to cite multiple citations (e.g., "(Morrow, 2015); (Tannenbaum et al., 2015)" -> "(Morrow, 2015; Tannenbaum et al., 2015)") References use correct APA style. References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and correct use of capitalisation[2] Check and correct use of italicisation Written expression — Learning features Overall, the use of learning features is basic. Basic 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. Use in-text interwiki links, rather than external links, per Tutorial 1. Links to non-peer-reviewed sources should be moved to the external links section. Good use of image(s). Basic use of table(s). No use of feature box(es). Basic use of quiz(zes). Basic use of case studies or examples. Social contribution Use a numbered list. ~9 logged, useful, minor to moderate social contributions with direct links to evidence. ~1 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:58, 12 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 an insufficient presentation because it does provide a cogent summary of psychological theory and research about "How can brief motivational interviewing be used as a health intervention?". Overview Display and narrate a slide with the same title and sub-title as the book chapter to help the viewer understanding the purpose of the presentation. A context for the topic is established. However, it is not directly related to the topic. Be more precise. Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. This will help to focus and discipline the presentation. Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section. This presentation doesn't adequately address the topic. This presentation doesn't cover motivational interviewing until 2:20 mins - and then only in a very vague way!? An appropriate amount of content is presented - not too much or too little. The selection of content is poor because it doesn't adequately use the most relevant psychological theory and/or research to address the topic. The presentation makes insufficient use of relevant psychological theory. The presentation makes insufficient use of relevant psychological research. Include citations. The presentation could be improved by making more use of examples or case studies. Check and correct grammar (e.g., shes -> she's) and formatting (e.g., remove double-spaces). Conclusion The presentation could be strengthened by adding a Conclusion slide with practical, take-home messages. Audio The audio is easy to follow. Audio communication is clear and well paced. Good intonation enhances listener interest and engagement. Audio recording quality was OK. Probably an on-board microphone was used (e.g., keyboard and/or mouse clicks were audible). Consider using an external microphone. The narrated content isn't well matched to the target topic (see content). Video Overall, visual display quality is good. The presentation makes basic use of text and image based slides. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read. The amount of text presented per slide makes it easy to read and listen at the same time. The visual communication is supplemented by images and/or diagrams. The presentation is well produced using simple tools. The visual content isn't well matched to the target topic (see content). Meta-data The correct 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. A link to the book chapter is not provided. A link from the book chapter is provided. Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are not provided. Either provide details about the image sources and their copyright licenses in the presentation description or remove the presentation. A copyright license for the presentation is provided on the last slide but not in the meta-data.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)