Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2022/DMT and spirituality

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Heading casing[edit source]

FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for sentence casing. For example, the wikitext should be:

== Cats and mice ==

rather than

== Cats and Mice ==

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:33, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Heading casing issue was fixed as of (Latest revision as of 07:34, 9 November 2020) U3187226 (discusscontribs) 07:52, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Things to consider[edit source]

  • Linking multimedia video
  • Expanding point ideas into paragraph form
  • Incomplete sections (Is DMT dangerous?, Subjective effects, Depression, Conclusion)
  • Overview is an outline and summary of the whole chapter. Consider moving the sub-focus questions under a new heading.
  • Recovered loss references which you may have been accidentally deleted during an edit
  1. Blair, R. J. R. (2004). The roles of orbital frontal cortex in the modulation of antisocial behavior. Brain and Cognition, 55(1), 198-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2626(03)00276-8
  2. Buckholtz, J. W., & Meyer-Lindenberg, A. (2008). MAOA and the neurogenetic architecture of human aggression. Trends in Neurosciences, 31(3), 120-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2007.12.006
  3. Eckardt, M., File, S., Gessa, G., Grant, K., Guerri, C., Hoffman, P., & Tabakoff, B. (1998). Effects of moderate alcohol consumption on the central nervous system. Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research, 22(5), 998-1040. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.1998.tb03695.x
  4. Griffiths, R. R., Hurwitz, E. S., Davis, A. K., Johnson, M. W., & Jesse, R. (2019). Survey of subjective" God encounter experiences": Comparisons among naturally occurring experiences and those occasioned by the classic psychedelics psilocybin, LSD, ayahuasca, or DMT. PloS one, 14(4), e0214377.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214377
  5. Cameron, L. P., Benson, C. J., DeFelice, B. C., Fiehn, O., & Olson, D. E. (2019). Chronic, intermittent microdoses of the psychedelic N, N-Dimethyltryptamine (DMT) produce positive effects on mood and anxiety in rodents. ACS chemical neuroscience, 10(7), 3261-3270.https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.8b00692
  6. Timmermann, C., Roseman, L., Williams, L., Erritzoe, D., Martial, C., Cassol, H., ... & Carhart-Harris, R. (2018). DMT models the near-death experience. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 1424.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01424

U3187226 (discusscontribs) 07:52, 9 November 2020 (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 and sub-title[edit source]

  1. OK
  2. Very good
  3. Sub-title has been corrected to be consistent with the book table of contents
  4. Capitalisation of the title/sub-title has been corrected to be consistent with the book table of contents
  5. Authorship details removed - authorship is as per the page's editing history
  6. Excellent

User page[edit source]

  1. Basic, sufficient
  2. Add working link to book chapter

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. Summarised with link(s) to evidence.
  2. Use a numbered list.

Section headings[edit source]

  1. Focus more specifically in on "How can DMT facilitate spiritual experiences?" (and less about DMT per se).
  2. Basic, 2-level heading structure
  3. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an overview paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings.

Key points[edit source]

  1. Incomplete
  2. Overview:
    1. focus questions.
    2. an image.
    3. a case study.
  3. Remove or adapt generic template content.
  4. Avoid providing too much background information. Briefly summarise generic concepts and provide internal wiki links to further information. Then focus most of the content on directly answering the core question(s) posed by the chapter sub-title.
  5. Basic development of key points for some sections.
  6. Theory?
  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) hasn't been developed.

Image[edit source]

  1. An image (figure) is presented.
  2. Caption
    1. uses APA style.
    2. explains how the image connects to key points being made in the main text.
  3. Figure(s) are cited at least once in the main text.
  4. Cite each figure at least once in the main text.

References[edit source]

  1. Good.
  2. For full APA style, use:
    1. correct capitalisation
    2. the new recommended format for dois

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Excellent
  2. External links
    1. Very good

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:33, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest looking at Dr Rick Strassman's studies as they are well research and documented. U3191488 (discusscontribs) 13:39, 28 August 2022 (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 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[edit source]

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

User page[edit source]

  1. Very good
  2. Description about self provided
  3. Brief description about self provided – consider expanding
  4. 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.
  5. Link provided to book chapter

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. None summarised with direct link(s) to evidence – looking ahead to the book chapter submission see how to earn marks for social contribution

Headings[edit source]

  1. Looks good in terms of structure, BUT on closer reading these headings are related to the topic but not exactly directly addressing the topic - How can DMT facilitate spiritual experiences (based on the best available psychological theory and research)?
  2. See earlier comment about Heading casing

Key points[edit source]

  1. Promising development of key points for each section, with relevant citations
  2. Overview - Consider adding:
    1. an image
    2. an example or case study
  3. Avoid providing too much background information. Briefly summarise general concepts and provide internal wiki links to relevant book chapters and/or Wikipedia pages for further information. Then focus most of the content of this on directly answering the core question(s) posed by the chapter sub-title.
  4. Strive for an integrated balance of theory and research. At the moment, this looks reasonably theory-rich but research-poor
  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. Promising use of examples/case studies (e.g., not as much history needed - there will be summaries of that elsewhere that you can link to - but one at least could make for an interesting feature box/case study; another one could be used for a more contemporary example)
  7. Conclusion (the most important section):
    1. Underway
    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 and/or focus questions?

Figure[edit source]

  1. Excellent – A relevant figure is presented and it is appropriately captioned
  2. Cite each figure at least once in the main text
  3. Consider increasing image size from 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. Use bullet-points
    3. Also link to relevant Wikipedia pages
    4. Not developed
  2. External links
    1. Very good
    2. Use bullet-points

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:52, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Book 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
  2. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits

Overview[edit source]

  1. Well developed Overview
  2. Consider introducing a case study or example or using an image to help engage reader interest
  3. Clear focus question(s)

Theory – Breadth[edit source]

  1. An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained
  2. Build more strongly on other related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters)

Theory – Depth[edit source]

  1. Insightful 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. More examples could be useful to illustrate key concepts

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. Excellent critical thinking about relevant research is evident
  2. Claims are referenced

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. Layout
    1. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings
    2. The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections
  3. Grammar
    1. Use serial commas[1] – they are part of APA style and are generally recommended by grammaticists. See explanatory video (1 min)
  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. Figures
      1. Figures are very well captioned
      2. Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1)
    3. Tables
      1. Table captions should use APA style. See example
      2. Refer to each Table at least once within the main text (e.g., see Table 1)
    4. Citations are not in full APA style (7th ed.). For example:
      1. Multiple citations in parentheses should be listed in alphabetical order by first author surname
    5. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of italicisation

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. 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.
  4. Excellent use of image(s)
  5. Excellent use of table(s)
  6. Excellent use of feature box(es)
  7. No use of quiz(zes)
  8. Excellent use of case studies or examples
  9. Excellent use of interwiki links in the "See also" section
  10. Excellent use of external links in the "External links" section

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~1 logged, useful social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:08, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 basic 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. An opening slide with the title and sub-title is displayed. Also narrate — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  2. This presentation has a basic introduction to engage audience interest
  3. A basic context for the topic is established
  4. Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. This will help to focus and discipline the presentation.

Content[edit source]

  1. Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section
  2. The presentation addresses the topic
  3. The presentation is well structured (i.e., Overview, Content, Conclusion)
  4. The presentation makes good use of relevant psychological theory
  5. The presentation makes basic use of relevant psychological research
  6. Include more citations to support claims
  7. The presentation could be improved by making more use of examples or case studies

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. A Conclusion slide is presented
  2. The Conclusion only partly fitted within the time limit

Audio[edit source]

  1. Basic narration
  2. Consider slowing down and leaving longer pauses between sentences. This can help the viewer to cognitively digest the information that has just been presented before moving on to the next point
  3. Basic intonation
  4. The narration could benefit from further practice
  5. Audio recording quality was poor. Review microphone set-up to achieve higher recording quality.
  6. Probably an on-board microphone was used (e.g., keyboard and/or mouse clicks were audible). Consider using an external microphone.

Video[edit source]

  1. Overall, visual display quality is good
  2. The presentation makes basic 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 on some slides could be reduced to make it easier to read and listen at the same time
  5. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images and/or diagrams
  6. The presentation is basically produced using simple tools

Meta-data[edit source]

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

Licensing[edit source]

  1. Most image sources and their copyright status are not provided. This presentation has probably violated the copyrights of image owners as some images appear to have been used without permission and/or acknowledgement.
  2. A copyright license for the presentation is provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:06, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]