Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2022/Actively open-minded thinking

Heading casing

Hi Teermeej Hossain. 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 21:18, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Suggestions for this chapter

Hello! I was reading through your book chapter which was really good but I think it would benefit from more images implemented into the page to make it more engaging. WikiCommons is a really good place to find images which can be easily inserted by copying the link of the image and pasting it in the search tab. As well as providing more hyperlinks to relevant theories and concepts could help as well. An example would be when you introduce the concept of self-efficacy, adding a hyperlink here could be very useful. Hope this helps! U3216389 (discuss • contribs) 01:36, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi! just some feed back, just to make the book chapter more interact-active adding case studies throughout can help the reader solidify what they have read in the paragraph. Overall your book chapter looks like its coming along nicely! --U3230861 (discuss • contribs) 04:06, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi there! Some positive feedback to make your page even better! Breaking up all that text with a few more images would have made the chapter visually more engaging. Also think about including some external learning resources such as a podcast from the respected location, or even a related video via Youtube. Overall, your page is great!(U3215755 (discuss • contribs)(U3215755 (discuss • contribs) 05:51, 24 August 2023 (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 see editing changes made whilst reviewing this 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 below may also be about all material on the page at the 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 - fantastic Link(s) provided to professional profile(s) Link provided to book chapter Social contribution At least one contribution has been made and summarised with indirect link(s) to evidence Use a numbered list Headings See earlier comment about Heading casing Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development by expanding the structure Key points Promising development of key points for each section, with relevant citations Overview - Consider adding: an example or case study Include a clear definition of AOT and perhaps a little about its history - where does it come from? (e.g., which field of psychology). How does it differ, say, to open-mindedness as a personality dimension? (i.e., what is the "active" part?) Strive for an integrated balance of theory and research Promising use of in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters Consider including more examples/case studies Conclusion (the most important section): Underway Figure Excellent – A relevant figure is presented and it is appropriately captioned Well done on creating and uploading your own image! Cite each figure at least once in the main text References Good For APA referencing style, check and correct: alphabetical order capitalisation not used for minor words in journal titles italicisation doi formatting (have tidied this up) page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Resources See also Good Use bullet-points Also link to relevant Wikipedia pages External links Very good Use bullet-points Have tidied up style

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:01, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

Hi, your chapter looks great however I think some more explanation you the theory and please don't forget your case study to help reader understanding your topic. Additionally, remember to focus on your main topic "How can AOT be used to improve human performance?", here are some reference that might be useful for you.

Karlsson, P. E., Braun, S., Broadmeadow, M., Elvira, S., Emberson, L., Gimeno, B. S., ... & Wilkinson, M. (2007). Risk assessments for forest trees: the performance of the ozone flux versus the AOT concepts. Environmental Pollution, 146(3), 608-616.

Haran, U., Ritov, I., & Mellers, B. A. (2013). The role of actively open-minded thinking in information acquisition, accuracy, and calibration. Jingru shao 0906 (discuss • contribs) 13:55, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Feedback

Hello there!! really great job and well structured book chapter. from first viewing was very capturing. My one suggestion is to maybe add hyperlinks throuhgout the help the reader be accessable to other sources that may explain key concepts and ideas throughout your chapter. This can be a major factor within your overview section in particular. U3216563 (discuss • contribs) 06:18, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, your book chapter is enticing. However, addition of multiple peer-reviewed articles could assist with the validity of some statements. As mentioned above, hyperlinks, as well as case studies, are a great way to maintain interest and deeper understanding throughout the chapter. - edit by Msherrybarr (discuss • contribs) 02:24, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Book 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 Insufficient use of primary, peer-reviewed sources as citations Addressing the topic development feedback could have helped to improve this chapter For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Solid Overview Clearly explains the problem or phenomenon Engages audience Suggestion: Make it more obvious that the problem in the scenario is a mutual absence of AOT? Quality of written expression can be improved Clear focus question(s) Theory – Breadth Insufficient use of psychological theory about this topic Rather than a psychological science approach, this chapter adopts a socio-cultural-political approach. There is nothing inherently wrong with the latter approach, but the task was to utilise the best available psychological theory and research about AOT. The chapter wanders off into discussion of marginally irrelevant theory The chapter could be improved by simplifying its approach e.g., what is AOT? Provide a very clear description with examples. What does research about AOT indicate about its relationship with desirable (and undesirable) psychological outcomes? Provide a simple, integrative summary with very concrete examples. Build more strongly on other related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters in this category: Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Cognitive) There are a lot of statements/claims made with insufficient supportive evidence. This is problematic for a chapter which is meant to use science-based communication. It may be more appropriate for other purposes (e.g., an essay, an opinion piece, etc.) Theory – Depth Insufficient use of relevant psychological theory Tables and/or lists could be used more effectively to help clearly convey key theoretical information More examples could be useful to illustrate key concepts Place more emphasis on explaining the underlying theoretical constructs than methods of measurement Research – Key findings Insufficient use of relevant psychological research The research review is overly focused on measurement issues, rather than reporting about empirically-tested theoretical insights More detail about key studies would be ideal Greater emphasis on effect sizes, major reviews, and/or meta-analyses would be helpful Research – Critical thinking Insufficient critical thinking about relevant 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 pointing out critiques/counterarguments suggesting specific directions for future research Many claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags) Note that science can't "prove" anything. It can only "disprove". See philosophy of science. Integration Insufficient integration of relevant theory and research Conclusion Basic summary Add practical, take-home message(s) Written expression – Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is below professional standard. UC Study Skills assistance is recommended to help improve writing skills Avoid overly emotive language (e.g,. huge) in science-based communication Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences Some of the written expression is quite abstract, which makes this a difficult read for an unfamiliar reader. Consider ways of simplifying the written expression to make it more accessible to a wider audience. This is the essence of science communication. 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. Reduce use of weasel words which bulk out the text but don't enhance meaning Layout Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see tags) 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 that vs. who Spelling Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. APA style Direct quotes need page numbers – even better, write in your own words Figures Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text Figure captions use the correct format Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1) References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and correct use of italicisation Page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Move non-peer-reviewed sources to the external links section Written expression – Learning features Overall, the use of learning features is reasonably good Basic use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding interwiki links for the first mention of key words and technical concepts would make the text more interactive. See example. Concentrate on linking psychological terms. 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. Links to non-peer-reviewed sources should be moved to the external links section Basic use of image(s) No use of table(s) Good use of feature box(es) Basic use of quiz(zes) Limited use of case studies or examples Very good/Good/Basic/No use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Promising use of external links in the "External links" section. Target AOT-related material. Social contribution ~5 logged, useful, minor/moderate/major social contributions with direct links to evidence Thanks very much for your extensive contributions ~1 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:06, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Multimedia presentation 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 very good presentation Overview An opening slide with the title and sub-title is displayed and narrated — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation This presentation has an engaging introduction to hook audience interest 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 Consider including some sample measurement items An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation is well structured (i.e., Overview, Content, Conclusion) The presentation makes good use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes little to no use of relevant psychological research Include more citations. The academic sources for the claims are unclear. The presentation makes good use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice Conclusion A Conclusion slide is presented with good take-home message(s) Audio The audio is easy to follow Audio communication is clear and well paced Very good intonation enhances listener interest and engagement The narration is well polished Audio recording quality was excellent Video Overall, visual display quality is very good The presentation makes good 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 Consider using sans serif font throughout (easier to read) The presentation is well produced using simple tools Meta-data The chapter title and sub-title (or an abbreviation to fit within the 100 character limit) are used in the name of the presentation — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation No written description of the presentation is provided A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding. Links to and from the book chapter are provided Licensing Image sources are communicated This presentation has probably violated the copyrights of image owners as images appear to have been used without permission and/or acknowledgement A copyright license for the presentation is provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)