Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2021/Factitious disorder imposed on another motivation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Any suggestions? Please feel free to contribute![edit source]

My book chapter is on what motivates one to impose factitious disorder upon another. Clawson2 (discusscontribs) 07:46, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! An I interesting subject! During my reading, I noticed an issue with spacing in the case study that I corrected. Look forward to reading your chapter once completed!--U3167879 (discusscontribs) 12:48, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]


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[edit source]

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

User page[edit source]

  1. Excellent - 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
  2. Note for second contribution to add direct links to evidence. To do this: 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.

Headings[edit source]

  1. Well focused
  2. Consider making some headings more detailed

Key points[edit source]

  1. Key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations
  2. For sections which include sub-section include key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings
  3. Overview - Consider adding:
    1. focus questions
  4. Good balance of theory and research
  5. Excellent use of in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters
  6. Conclusion (the most important section):
    1. what might the take-home, practical messages be?
    2. in a nutshell, what are the answer(s) to the question(s) in the sub-title?

Figure[edit source]

  1. A figure is presented.
  2. Caption should include Figure X. ...
  3. Cite each figure at least once in the main text.
  4. Consider decreasing image size.

References[edit source]

  1. Use either wiki style or APA style - but not both.
  2. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. commas missing
    2. remove colon after issue number
    3. doi formatting

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Very good
    2. Use bullet-points
  2. External links
    1. None provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:36, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

General feedback for this chapter[edit source]

Hey. I saw this chapter in the discussion forum open for help, so I left some feedback for you. 1. I would consider re-jigging the order of your headings. I personally would move history above motivation 2. On that, I would not spend too much time on the history because this disorder is particularly 'odd' so you can really play with the content and really engage the reader. 3. Great case study, although very over popularised. Consider using another to supplement or at least being more critical. Try linking the case to the theory which you speak about! The medical literature dates these disorders and has multiple accounts back to Plato and Aristotle so there is no reason not to use them! This one is just Hollywood-ised

--> Have a look at this chapter for a good example of multiple cases: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Motivation_and_emotion/Book/2021/Indigenous_Australian_well-being

4. Love the way you popped a picture into the textbox; haven't seen that before and it took me a few mins to figure out how to do it! 5. Consider rewording 'warning signs' to 'predictors' or something like that; more professional 6. Overall great start. I think you have a fab chapter on the way!

Hi, just providing some quick feedback on a few things I noticed: - once you have introduced a non-abbreviated word and choose to abbreviate it later on, ensure it is first put in brackets, eg Factitious disorder imposed on another (FDIA)… - great use of case study - consider adding a source at the bottom of the textbox (for reference reasons) - continue to add to the chapter and to finish it off - great work! --J.Payten (discusscontribs) 03:24, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I really love your inclusion of the media aspects of factitious disorder. The movie Run (2020) also portrays this kind of relationship and briefly touches on the recovering process at the end if that is something that would interest you/you think would be applicable to your section. Another aspect to your media section I think would benefit your chapter is the impact of social media on factitious disorder. https://www.lifescienceglobal.com/pms/index.php/ijcs/article/view/7659/3919 is a good broad-approach to how social media can easily be manipulated, and I think that if you search for a case study based on social media it would bring it back nicely to the case study at the start, while also demonstrating the impact social media has on the disorder.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2912683/ has a similar theme but focuses more on how seeing the attention garnered by the media influences factitious disorder.

I really enjoy what you have written so far, and I found your 'Working notes: *hysterical screaming*' both really, really funny but also relateable. This is a tough assignment, but you're doing well and I can't wait to see the finished product!!! --U3187741 (discusscontribs) 00:20, 16 October 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.

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is an excellent chapter that successfully uses psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
  1. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits.

Overview[edit source]

  1. Engaging, well-written Overview.

Theory — Breadth[edit source]

  1. Relevant theories are well selected, described, and explained.
  2. The chapter doesn't wander off into discussion of irrelevant theory.

Theory — Depth[edit source]

  1. Appropriate depth is provided about the selected theory(ies).
  2. Key citations are well used.
  3. Tables and/or lists are used effectively to help clearly convey key theoretical information.
  4. Useful examples are provided to illustrate theoretical concepts.

Research — Key findings[edit source]

  1. Relevant research is well reviewed.

Research — Critical thinking[edit source]

  1. Critical thinking about research is evident.

Integration[edit source]

  1. Discussion of theory and research is well integrated.

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. Key points are well summarised.
  2. Clear take-home message(s).

Written expression — Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is excellent.
    2. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences.
  2. Layout
    1. The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections.
    2. Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections.
  3. Grammar, spelling, and proofreading are excellent.
    1. Abbreviations
      1. Once an abbreviation is established (e.g., PTSD), use it consistently. Don't set up an abbreviation and then not use it or only use it sometimes.
  4. APA style
    1. Do not capitalise the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc..
    2. 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).
    3. Direct quotes need page numbers.
    1. Figures and tables
      1. Use APA style for Figure captions. See example.
      2. Refer to each Table and Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1).

Written expression — Learning features[edit source]

  1. Overall, the use of learning features is excellent.
  2. Excellent use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles.
  3. Excellent use of embedded in-text links to related book chapters.
  4. Format bullet-points and numbered lists, per Tutorial 1.
  5. Basic use of image(s).
  6. No use of table(s).
  7. Basic use of feature box(es).
  8. No use of quiz(zes).
  9. Excellent use of case studies or examples.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~2 logged, useful, minor/moderate/major social contributions with direct links to evidence.
  2. ~3 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:33, 9 November 2021 (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 very good presentation.
  2. The presentation is under the maximum time limit.

Overview[edit source]

  1. An opening slide with the title and sub-title is presented and narrated - this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  2. A context for the topic is established.
  3. Focus questions are presented.

Content[edit source]

  1. Comments about the book chapter also apply to this section.
  2. The presentation addresses the topic.
  3. There is too much content, presented too fast. It is best to cover a small amount of well-targetted content than a large amount of poorly selected content.
  4. The presentation is well structured.
  5. The presentation makes excellent use of relevant psychological theory.
  6. The presentation makes very good use of relevant psychological research.
  7. The presentation provides an excellent description of FDIA and its motivations.
  8. The presentation provides easy to understand information.

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. A Conclusion slide is narrated but not presented with take-home message(s).

Audio[edit source]

  1. The audio is well-articulated but hard to follow because the speaking rate is so fast. Consider slowing down to help the viewer to cognitively digest the information that has just been presented before moving on to the next point.
  2. The presentation makes good use of narrated audio.
  3. Good intonation enhances listener interest and engagement.
  4. Audio recording quality was good (e.g., there is some fading in/out?).

Video[edit source]

  1. Overall, visual display quality is excellent.
  2. The presentation makes effective use of text and image based slides.
  3. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read.
  4. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images.
  5. The presentation is well produced using simple tools.

Meta-data[edit source]

  1. The chapter title but not the sub-title is used in the name of the presentation - the latter 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 may have 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 22:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]