Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Health belief model

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Peer comments[edit source]

Hi! super interested in your topic of choice as i have recently completed an assignment on the HBM. I have left some extra resources related to this topic that might be useful in the progression of your book chapter! Champion, V. L., & Skinner, C. S. (2008). The health belief model. Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice, 4, 45-65. Sulat, J., Prabandari, Y. S., Sanusi, R., Hapsari, E. D., & Santoso, B. (2018). The validity of health belief model variables in predicting behavioral change: A scoping review. Health Education (Bradford, West Yorkshire, England), 118(6), 499–512. https://doi.org/10.1108/HE-05-2018-0027----U3229619 (discusscontribs) 22:20, 2 October 2023 (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
  2. The sub-title is correctly worded and formatted
  3. The capitalisation of the title is incorrect. Be consistent with the book table of contents.
  4. Note that APA style does not capitalise theory names

User page[edit source]

  1. Good
  2. Brief description about self provided – consider expanding
  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
  2. If adding the second or subsequent link to a page, create a direct link like 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. Basic, 1-level heading structure – would benefit from further development, perhaps using a 2-level structure
  2. These sections aren't needed (or abbreviate/summarise/integrate):
    • What is motivation?
    • What is health-promoting behaviour
  3. Instead, unpack this section in more detail:
    • How can the HBM be used to enhance motivation for health-promoting behaviour

Key points[edit source]

  1. Basic development of some key points
  2. The planning is quite basic; expand to show more detail about the best available psychological theory and research on this topic, with illustrative examples/case studies
  3. Overview - Consider:
    1. adding a brief, evocative description of the problem
    2. revising the focus questions to better align with the sub-title and planned headings
    3. an image
    4. an example or case study
  4. 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.
  5. Strive for an integrated balance of theory and research
  6. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters
  7. Consider including more examples/case studies
  8. Conclusion (the most important section):
    1. Under developed
    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. A figure is presented
  2. Ideally, identify images that are more relevant to the main topics of the chapter
  3. Caption could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text
  4. Cite each figure at least once in the main text

References[edit source]

  1. Poor
  2. Remember that the goal is to identify and use the best academic theory and research about this topic; use primary, peer-reviewed sources
  3. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. capitalisation
    2. italicisation
    3. doi formatting
    4. page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-)
    5. etc.

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Excellent
    2. Use sentence casing
  2. External links
    1. Excellent
    2. Very good
    3. Include source in brackets after link

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 20:52, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Heading casing[edit source]

Hi Dee320. 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 10:04, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note this also applies to the title. APA style is lower case for theory names. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:04, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@U3226487: Note this feedback. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:59, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback[edit source]

Great job here and very well structured book chapter. U3216563 (discusscontribs) 06:44, 16 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 insufficient chapter
  2. I suspect that this chapter plagiarises (e.g., there is strong match with https://www.verywellmind.com/health-belief-model-3132721)
  3. I suspect that the recommended 5 topic development hours and 45 book chapter hours were not invested in preparing this chapter.
  4. Insufficient use of primary, peer-reviewed sources as citations
  5. Move non-peer reviewed links into the external links section
  6. The heading casing in the title has been corrected to match the index of topics
  7. Addressing the topic development feedback could have helped to improve this chapter
  8. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits

Overview[edit source]

  1. Basic Overview
  2. Briefly outlines the problem or phenomenon, but doesn't give any insight into its components
  3. Consider introducing a case study or example or using an image to help engage reader interest
  4. Basic focus question(s). The third question could be more focused.

Theory – Breadth[edit source]

  1. Insufficient use of psychological theory about this topic
  2. Insufficient understanding of the best available academic peer-reviewed literature on this topic is evident (e.g., many claims lack citation; where citations are used, there is an overreliance on a small number of citations such as Jones et al. (2015))
  3. Build more strongly on other related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters)
  4. There is too much general theoretical material (e.g., about motivation). Instead, summarise and link to further information (such as other book chapters or Wikipedia articles), to allow this chapter to focus on the specific topic (i.e., the sub-title question).

Theory – Depth[edit source]

  1. Insufficient use of academic peer-reviewed literature about this topic
  2. Basic use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts
  3. More examples could be useful to illustrate key concepts

Research – Key findings[edit source]

  1. Insufficient use of relevant psychological research
  2. Greater emphasis on effect sizes, major reviews, and/or meta-analyses would be helpful

Research – Critical thinking[edit source]

  1. Insufficient critical thinking about relevant research is evident
  2. Critical thinking about research could be further evidenced by:
    1. describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies
    2. discussing the direction of relationships
    3. considering the strength of relationships
    4. acknowledging limitations
    5. pointing out critiques/counterarguments
    6. suggesting specific directions for future research
  3. Many claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)

Integration[edit source]

  1. Insufficient integration of relevant theory and research
  2. The chapter places more emphasis on theory than research

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. Insufficient as a cohesive summary of what the best available psychological theory and research has to say about the topic
  2. Address the focus questions
  3. Add practical, take-home message(s)

Written expression – Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is basic
  2. Layout
    1. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings
    2. See earlier comments about heading casing
  3. APA style
    1. Do not capitalise the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc.
    2. Figures
      1. Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text
      2. Figure captions use the correct format
      3. 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 use correct APA style
    5. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Provide the full journal title
      2. Check and correct use of italicisation
      3. Page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-)
      4. Include hyperlinked dois
      5. Move non-peer-reviewed sources to the external links section
      6. Acknowledge all sources (e.g., why aren't the plagiarised sources acknowledged?)

Written expression – Learning features[edit source]

  1. Overall, the use of learning features is insufficient
  2. No 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.
  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. One image
  5. Basic use of table(s)
  6. One feature box
  7. Basic use of quiz(zes)
  8. No use of case studies
  9. Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section. Also link to related book chapters.
  10. Basic use of external links in the "External links" section
  11. Include sources in parentheses

Social contribution[edit source]

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

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 20:58, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]


The topic development submission 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 for 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.

Title[edit source]

  1. The title is correctly worded and formatted
  2. The sub-title is correctly worded and formatted
  3. Author name removed – authorship is as per the page's editing history

Headings[edit source]

  1. See earlier comment about Heading casing
  2. The top-level headings make good sense as a structure
  3. Remove "we" - use 3rd person perspective except perhaps for scenarios
  4. Overly complicated 3-level structure – consider simplifying e.g., avoid having sections with only 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings
  5. Avoid using citations as headings
  6. Remove colons
  7. Remove author page section

Overview[edit source]

  1. Promising
  2. Move scenario to start to help engage reader interest. Consider putting it into a feature box and including an image.
  3. Abbreviate - keep it focused and snappy. Move detailed content into other sections.
  4. One of the focus questions should be what is the HBM. Use the sub-title as a structuring device for the focus questions. And use the focus questions as a structuring device for the top-level headings.

Key points[edit source]

  1. Excellent – key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations
  2. Theory names should not be capitalised (i.e, refer to the health belief model)
  3. Good balance of theory and research
  4. Conclusion (the most important section):
    1. Well developed

Figure[edit source]

  1. Excellent – A relevant figure is presented and it is appropriately captioned
  2. The figure caption(s) provide(s) a clear, appropriately detailed description that is meaningfully connected with the main text
  3. Cite each figure at least once in the main text
  4. Consider decreasing image size to make it less dominant in relation to the text

Learning feature[edit source]

  1. 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
  2. Very useful images and tables
  3. Excellent use of examples/case studies

References[edit source]

  1. Well selected
  2. References are cited
  3. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. capitalisation
    2. italicisation
    3. page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-)

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Very good
    2. I've tweaked the formatting and capitalisation for the first two links - replicate this style throughout
  2. External links
    1. Very good useful/relevant links
    2. Use sentence casing; Youtube -> YouTube

User page[edit source]

  1. Very good
  2. 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.
  3. Link provided to book chapter

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. A few Wikiversity page edits have been made. Provide 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.
  2. No discussion forum or social media engagement

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:17, 14 September 2023 (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. Over the maximum word count. The content beyond 4000 words has been ignored for marking purposes.
  3. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits

Overview[edit source]

  1. Well developed Overview
  2. Clearly explains the problem or phenomenon
  3. Engages reader interest by introducing a case study and/or example and/or using an image
  4. Clear, basic focus question(s)

Theory[edit source]

  1. An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained
  2. The chapter doesn't wander off into discussion of irrelevant theory
  3. Build more strongly on other health-related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters in this category: Category:Motivation an emotion/Book/Health)
  4. Insightful depth is provided about relevant theory(ies)
  5. Effective use of tables and/or lists are to help clearly convey key theoretical information
  6. Excellent use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts
  7. Key citations are well used

Research[edit source]

  1. Excellent review of relevant research
  2. Excellent critical thinking about relevant research is evident
  3. 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)

Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is excellent
    2. Some of the bullet-points should be converted into paragraphs
  2. Layout
    1. See earlier comments about heading casing
  3. Grammar, spelling, and proofreading are excellent
    1. Use serial commas[1] – they are part of APA style and are generally recommended by grammaticists. See explanatory video (1 min)
      1. Once an abbreviation is established (e.g., HBM), use it consistently. Don't set up an abbreviation and then not use it or only use it sometimes.
    2. Figures
      1. Figures are well captioned
      2. Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text
      3. There are two Figure 2s
    3. Tables
      1. Use APA style for captions. See example
      2. Refer to each Table at least once within the main text (e.g., see Table 1)
    4. Citations use correct APA style
    5. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation[2]
      2. Check and correct use of italicisation

Learning features[edit source]

  1. Excellent use of learning features
  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. Good use of image(s)
  5. Excellent use of table(s)
  6. Excellent use of feature box(es)
  7. Basic use of quiz(zes)
  8. Very good use of case studies or examples
  9. Very good use of interwiki links in the "See also" section
  10. Very good use of external links in the "External links" section
    1. Use sentence casing

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~3 logged, useful, moderate social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:51, 27 October 2023 (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 very good 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 — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation
  2. Also narrate the title and sub-title — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  3. Engaging introduction to hook audience interest
  4. A context for the presentation is clearly established through an example
  5. 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. There is too much content, in too much detail, presented within the allocated time frame. Zoom out and provide a higher-level presentation at a slower pace. It is best to cover a small amount of well-targetted content than a large amount of poorly selected content.
  4. The presentation makes very good use of relevant psychological theory, including limitations
  5. The presentation makes no explicit use of relevant psychological research; ideally make more explicit use of research
  6. Include citations to support claims
  7. The presentation makes excellent use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice
  8. The presentation provides practical, easy to understand information

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. The Conclusion did not fit within the time limit

Audio[edit source]

  1. The audio is fun, easy to follow, and interesting to listen to
  2. The presentation makes effective use of narrated audio
  3. Audio communication is well paced
  4. Very good intonation
  5. The narration is well practiced and/or performed
  6. Audio recording quality was excellent
  7. The narrated content is well matched to the target topic (see content) but lacked sufficient synthesis of the best research about this topic

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 and/or diagrams
  5. The presentation is well produced using simple tools
  6. The visual content is well matched to the target topic (see content) but lacked sufficient synthesis of the best research about this topic

Meta-data[edit source]

  1. The chapter sub-title but not the chapter title is used in the name of the presentation. The title would help 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. Image sources and their copyright status are communicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:31, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]