Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2022/Gratitude and subjective wellbeing

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 11:49, 4 October 2022 (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 Very good Description about self provided – consider expanding 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 – at least one contribution has been made and summarised in a numbered list with direct link(s) to evidence Headings See earlier comment about Heading casing Basic, 1-level heading structure – would benefit from further development Key points Promising development of key points for most sections, with relevant citations Overview - Consider adding: a brief, evocative description of the problem an image an example or case study last focus question could be more about everyday applications/uses/suggestions than research 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. Promising 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 Consider including more examples/case studies Conclusion (the most important section): Hasn't been developed Figure A relevant figure is presented and it is appropriately captioned Caption could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text Figure(s) are cited at least once in the main text Cite each figure at least once in the main text References OK For APA referencing style, check and correct: remove bullet points capitalisation italicisation doi formatting page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) None Resources See also Not developed External links Not developed

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:49, 4 October 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 reasonably 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. Also include the question mark for the sub-title. This presentation has an opening scenario to hook audience interest Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. This will help to focus and discipline the presentation. Content The presentation addresses the topic Grammar: that vs. who Well done on presenting a critical perspective The psychological effects (of ...?) The presentation is reasonably well structured The presentation makes good use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes basic use of relevant psychological research Include citations to support claims The presentation makes basic use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice Conclusion A Conclusion slide is presented (but not labelled as such), with verbal but not written take-home message(s) The Conclusion only partly fitted within the time limit Audio The audio is easy to follow The presentation makes good use of narrated audio Audio communication is well paced Very good intonation The narration is well practiced Audio recording quality was excellent Video Overall, visual display quality is reasonably good The presentation makes good use of text and image based slides The font size is sufficiently large to make it reasonably easy to read Some of the font size could be larger to make it easier to read Consider using a sans-serif typeface to make the text easier to read The amount of text presented per slide makes it reasonably easy to read and listen at the same time The presentation is well produced using simple tools Meta-data The chapter title is used, but the sub-title (or a shortened version of it) is not used, as the name of the presentation. The sub-title (or an abbreviation of the sub-title that fits within the 100 character limit) would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding. A link to the book chapter is provided but the hyperlink isn't active to allow 1-click access A link from the book chapter is provided Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are communicated A copyright license for the presentation is not provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:58, 11 November 2022 (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 a basic, but sufficient chapter Well under the maximum word count, so there is room to expand For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Basic Overview Briefly explains the problem or phenomenon Consider introducing a case study or example or using an image to help engage reader interest Basic focus question(s) Theory – Breadth Reasonably good coverage of relevant theory is provided Overly focused on definitions Build more strongly on other related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters) Theory – Depth Reasonably good depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Basic use of tables and/or lists are to help clearly convey key theoretical information More examples could be useful to illustrate key concepts Research – Key findings Basic overview of relevant research 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 Basic 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 Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags) Integration Reasonably good integration between theory and research The chapter places more emphasis on theory than research Conclusion Basic summary Address the focus questions Add practical, take-home message(s) Written expression – Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is good The chapter could be improved by developing some of the bullet-points into full paragraph format Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences. "People" is often a better term than "individuals" 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.[1] Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance. Use serial commas[2] – they are part of APA style and are generally recommended by grammaticists. See explanatory video (1 min) Check and correct use of that vs. who Spelling Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour) 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) Figures Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text Figure captions should use this format: Figure X. Descriptive caption in sentence casing. See example Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1) Citations use correct APA style References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and correct use of capitalisation[3] Check and correct use of italicisation Include hyperlinked dois Written expression – Learning features Basic use of learning features 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 even 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. Basic use of image(s) No use of table(s) Basic use of feature box(es) Basic use of quiz(zes) Basic use of case studies or examples No use of interwiki links in the "See also" section No use of external links in the "External links" section Social contribution ~2 logged, useful, minor/moderate/major social contributions with direct links to evidence Thanks very much for your extensive contributions ~4 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:08, 17 November 2022 (UTC)