Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2022/Work and flow

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Resources[edit source]

Hey,

Below are some resources that might be useful for the topic. They look at the experience of flow in the workplace from different perspectives.

Ceja, L., & Navarro, J. (2011). Dynamic patterns of flow in the workplace: Characterizing within-individual variability using a complexity science approach. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(4), 627–651. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.747

Kawalya, C., Munene, J. C., Ntayi, J., Kagaari, J., Mafabi, S., & Kasekende, F. (2019). Psychological capital and happiness at the workplace: The mediating role of flow experience. Cogent Business & Management, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1685060

van den Hout, J. J.J., Davis, O. C., & Weggeman, M. C. D. P. (2018). The Conceptualization of Team Flow. The Journal of Psychology, 152(6), 388–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2018.1449729

U3216256 (discusscontribs) 03:28, 4 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. Created – minimal, but sufficient
  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 – at least one contribution has been made and summarised in a numbered list with direct link(s) to evidence

Headings[edit source]

  1. Logical structure
  2. Promising 2-level heading structure

Key points[edit source]

  1. Excellent – key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations
  1. Be aware of not providing too much background information. Briefly summarise general concepts (e.g., about flow) 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 (i.e., relationship between work and flow).
  1. As I recall, Csikentmihalyi's original flow studies include some professions such as surgery.
  1. Good balance of theory and research
  2. Include more in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters.
  3. Consider including more examples/case studies
  1. Overview and Conclusion are well developed - these are the most important sections

Figure[edit source]

  1. Excellent – A relevant figure is presented and it is appropriately captioned and cited

References[edit source]

  1. Excellent
  2. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-)

Resources[edit source]

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

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:28, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion[edit source]

Hi there !

Your topic is very intriguing and encouraged me do some of my own research which might be beneficial to you ! Firstly, I found this awesome book that focuses on the psychophysiology of the flow experience which would be an interesting perspective to add. Here is the link: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-53468-4_8

Additionally, this also got me thinking about eustress and how this might be connected to flow so I found this source that discusses the correlation between eustress, flow and other factors in a cross-national comparison of University students : https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00223980.2015.1024595?casa_token=fThypyjFXhgAAAAA%3A6PNKbhty9VJC8LMe1yEOOYORfcJitzqQtm5heKhuzOZMRWTEGKuqpLwRjqDD52b3edhz5-XBrFrMew

I hope these help ! Good luck :) U3210431 (discusscontribs) 23:10, 7 October 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. It 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. Briefly explains the problem or phenomenon
  3. Engages reader interest by introducing a case study and/or example and/or using an image
  4. Reasonably clear and focused question(s)

Theory – Breadth[edit source]

  1. An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained
  2. Builds well on related chapters

Theory – Depth[edit source]

  1. Insightful depth is provided about relevant theory(ies)
  2. Effective use of tables and/or lists are to help clearly convey key theoretical information
  3. Basic use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts
  4. Key citations are well used

Research – Key findings[edit source]

  1. Excellent review of relevant research

Research – Critical thinking[edit source]

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

Integration[edit source]

  1. Excellent integration between theory and research

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. Excellent summary and conclusion
  2. Key points are well summarised
  3. Clear take-home message(s)

Written expression – Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is very good
    2. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead:
      1. it is, most often, not needed at all, or
      2. use section linking
    3. Avoid starting sentences with a citation unless the author is particularly pertinent. Instead, it is more interesting for the the content/key point to be communicated, with the citation included along the way or, more typically, in parentheses at the end of the sentence.
  2. Layout
    1. The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections
  3. Grammar
    1. The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags)
      1. Grammar-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages.[1]
      2. Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance.
    2. Check and make correct use of commas
    3. Figures
      1. Figures are very well captioned
      2. Figure captions use the correct format
      3. Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text
    4. Citations use correct APA style
    5. References use correct APA style

Written expression – Learning features[edit source]

  1. Excellent use of learning features
  2. Excellent use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles
  3. Excellent 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 tables
  6. Excellent use of numbered lists (but use wiki format)
  7. Excellent use of feature box(es)
  8. Excellent use of quiz(zes)
  9. Good use of case studies or examples
  10. Excellent use of interwiki links in the "See also" section
  11. Very good use of external links in the "External links" section
    1. Use sentence casing
    2. Include sources in parentheses

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~17 logged, useful, minor to major social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:07, 21 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 an excellent presentation

Overview[edit source]

  1. This presentation has a very engaging introduction to hook audience interest
  2. The context is established through an engaging example
  3. Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. This will help to focus and discipline the presentation.
  4. The Overview could be abbreviated - it takes a third of 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 excellent use of relevant psychological theory
  5. The presentation makes implied use of relevant psychological research; ideally make more explicit use of research
  6. The presentation includes citations to support claims
  7. The presentation makes very good use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice
  8. Consider using a work rather study example
  9. The presentation provides practical, easy to understand information

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. A Conclusion slide is presented with excellent take-home message(s)

Audio[edit source]

  1. The audio is fun, easy to follow, and interesting to listen to
  2. Excellent use of humour
  3. The presentation makes effective use of narrated audio
  4. Audio communication is well paced
  5. Excellent intonation enhances listener interest and engagement
  6. Audio recording quality was excellent

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 amount of text presented per slide makes it easy to read and listen at the same time
  5. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images and/or diagrams
  6. The presentation is very well produced
  7. Mihaly -> Mihalyi

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

Licensing[edit source]

  1. Image sources and their copyright status are communicated
  2. A copyright license for the presentation is provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]