Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2021/Dopamine and motivational drive

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Dopaminaholic[edit source]

Check out https://twitter.com/awilkinson -- Jtneill - Talk - c 19:57, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit source]

Hello there, I have added 3 articles to your section " Dopamine schedule: How to control dopamine to optimise motivation and pleasure". One article reviews recent advances in understanding the reward and nonreward functions of dopamine. Another article talks about how enhancing excitability of dopamine neurons can promote motivational behaviour. The final article looks at a real-life application in which interventions to rebalance the dopamine motive system might have therapeutic potential for obesity and addiction. This is an interesting topic, wishing you the best of luck.--U3202315 (discusscontribs) 02:34, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heading casing[edit source]

Crystal Clear app ktip.svg
Hi U3198823. 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 06:47, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Overview[edit source]

@U3198823: Some suggestions for this section:

  • Currently, little mention of dopamine?
  • Consider the possibility of using a case study or scenario to illustrate the problem/topic.
  • Consider the possibility of introducing some focus questions which expand on the sub-title question.
  • For some other ideas, check out previous chapters with gold stars.

Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:10, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Social Contributions[edit source]

Hi there! You book chapter seems to be coming along really well! Since I'm doing something related to dopamine I thought I would suggest a reference to help you out!Link: https://nivlab.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/nivlab/files/niv2007357.pdf --U3204694 (discusscontribs) 10:19, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Topic idea[edit source]

Hey Luke, topic's looking great. I thought I'd just mention an aspect of your topic I find particularly interesting as I didn't see it explicitly mentioned yet: dopamine fasting! There's not an incredible amount of research out there yet so you may not find it worth digging deeper on, but here's a starter "source": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK-s2qBU40A&t=13sa-maladaptive-fad-2020022618917 (The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) )


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[edit source]

  1. The title is correctly worded and formatted
  2. The sub-title is correctly worded and formatted

User page[edit source]

  1. Used effectively
  2. Description about self provided
  3. 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.
  4. Link provided to book chapter

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. Excellent - summarised with direct link(s) to evidence
  2. When making the second or subsequent edit to a page or talk page, here's how to create a direct link to evidence: View the page history, select the version of the page before and after your contributions, click "compare selected revisions", and then use this website address as a direct link to evidence for listing on your user page. For more info, see Making and summarising social contributions.
  3. Add your signature to comments on talk/discussion pages

Headings[edit source]

  1. Overall, excellent
  2. I like the descriptive headings (much better than overly brief headings). Having said that, watch out for making them too long - can any be abbreviated but still convey the key message?
  3. I think this chapter can work well with the existing 1-level heading structure, but as you go, if you find a section is getting long, consider whether subheadings may be useful.

Key points[edit source]

  1. Overall, key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations, and this chapter is shaping up well.
  2. If you find that the word count blowing out, then work backwards from the take-home messages in response to the sub-title question and make sure everything covered flows towards those conclusions - if not, then its probably not needed.
  3. Write using 3rd person perspective
  4. Overview - Consider adding:
    1. a description of the problem
    2. focus questions - these can be a pithier version of "what will be covered"
    3. an image
    4. an example or case study
  5. Use bullet points (see Tutorial 1 - Using Wikiversity)
  6. Good balance of theory and research
  7. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters.
  8. Consider including more examples/case studies
  9. Conclusion (the most important section):
    1. under developed
    2. what might the take-home, practical messages be?
    3. in a nutshell, what are the answer(s) to the question(s) in the sub-title?

Figure[edit source]

  1. Excellent
  2. A figure is presented
  3. Caption uses APA style
  4. Caption could be expanded better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text
  5. Cite each figure at least once in the main text
  6. Consider increasing image size from default to make it easier to view

References[edit source]

  1. Good
  2. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. capitalisation
    2. italicisation

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Very good
    2. Include source in brackets after link
    3. Also link to relevant book chapters
  2. External links
    1. Very good
    2. Include source in brackets after link

Suggestion[edit source]

Hey was looking through your references and noticed you are missing a major literature on the topic, it was peer reviewed over 3000 times. Ill link it for you https://www.nature.com/articles/nrn1406 --U3202984 (discusscontribs) 11:39, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Journal Article Recommendation[edit source]

Hey there. I know it is after the deadline but I am fascinated by your topic and the work you've done on this chapter. In my own reading I came across this article that is directly related to your topic! You can find it here (just login with your UC credentials). Great chapter hope you enjoy my article :)

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.

Multimedia.png

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a good presentation.
  2. The presentation is over the maximum time limit — content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking and feedback purposes.

Overview[edit source]

  1. Display and narrate the correct title and sub-title to help the viewer understand the purpose of the presentation and to be consistent with the book chapter.
  2. A context for the topic is established.
  3. Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. This will help to focus and discipline the presentation.

Content[edit source]

  1. The presentation addresses the topic.
  2. An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little.
  3. The presentation is well structured.
  4. The presentation makes excellent use of relevant psychological theory.
  5. The presentation makes basic use of relevant psychological research.
  6. The presentation makes good use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice.

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. A Conclusion slide is presented with good take-home message(s).
  2. The Conclusion did not fully fit within the time limit.

Audio[edit source]

  1. The audio is easy to follow.
  2. Audio communication is clear and well paced.
  3. Good intonation enhances listener interest and engagement.
  4. Audio recording quality was good.

Video[edit source]

  1. Overall, visual display quality is good.
  2. The presentation makes good use of text and image based slides.
  3. Some of the font size could be larger to make it easier to read.
  4. The amount of text presented per slide should be reduced to make it easier to read and listen at the same time.
  5. The presentation is well produced using simple tools.

Meta-data[edit source]

  1. 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.
  2. A written description of the presentation is provided.
  3. Links to and from the book chapter are provided.

Licensing[edit source]

  1. 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.
  2. This presentation has probably violated the copyrights of image owners as images appear to have been used without permission and/or acknowledgement.
  3. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the presentation description but not in the meta-data.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:06, 23 November 2021 (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. Chapter marks will be available via UCLearn along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

[File:Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png|right|85px]]

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a very good chapter that makes good use of psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
  2. Well over the maximum word count.
  3. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits.

Overview[edit source]

  1. Well developed Overview.
  2. Clearly explains the problem or phenomenon.
  3. Clear

focus question(s).

  1. Consider introducing a case study or example or using an image to help engage reader interest.

Theory — Breadth[edit source]

  1. Relevant theories are well selected, described, and explained.
  2. Theory can be abbreviated to help the chapter fit within the word count (e.g., TMT was a side-trip).
  3. Build more strongly on other dopamine-related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters in this category: Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Neurotransmitters/Dopamine).

Theory — Depth[edit source]

  1. Good depth is provided about the selected theory(ies).
  2. Ideally, be more selective and disciplined about where to allocate the word count.
  3. Useful examples, but they could be easily abbreviated (e.g., George the monkey).
  4. Tables and/or lists are used effectively to help clearly convey key theoretical information.

Research — Key findings[edit source]

  1. Relevant research is well reviewed.
  2. Greater emphasis on effect sizes, major reviews, and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.

Research — Critical thinking[edit source]

  1. Good critical thinking about research is evident.
  2. Critical thinking about research could be further evidenced by:
    1. describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies
    2. discussing the direction of relationships
    3. considering the strength of relationships
    4. acknowledging limitations
    5. suggesting specific directions for future research

Integration[edit source]

  1. Discussion of theory and research is well integrated.
  2. The chapter places more emphasis on theory than research.

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. Basic summary.
  2. Address the focus questions.
  3. Add practical, take-home message(s).

Written expression — Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is very good. It is conversational (good), but sometimes overly so.
    2. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    3. Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") perspective[1] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes.
  2. Layout
    1. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading — use 0 or 2+ sub-headings.
  3. Grammar, spelling, and proofreading are excellent.
  4. APA style
    1. 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).
    2. Direct quotes need page numbers — even better, write in your own words.
    3. Figures
      1. Figures are very well captioned.
      2. Figure captions use the correct format.
      3. Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1).
    4. Tables
      1. Table captions should use APA style. See example.
      2. Refer to each Table using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation).
      3. Each Table is referred to at least once within the main text.
    5. Citations use correct APA style.
    6. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation[2]
      2. Include hyperlinked dois

Written expression — Learning features[edit source]

  1. Overall, the use of learning features is excellent.
  2. Very good use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. # One 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. Very good use of image(s).
  4. Very good use of table(s).
  5. Excellent use of feature box(es).
  6. Excellent use of interactive exercises.
  7. Excellent use of case studies or examples.
  8. Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section.
  9. Basic use of external links in the "External links" section.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~10 logged, useful, mixed bag of minor to major social contributions with direct links to evidence.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:48, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]