Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Physical activity tracking and exercise motivation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Initial suggestions[edit source]

@U3230383: Thanks for tackling this topic.

Some initial suggestions:

Let me know if I can do anything else as you go along.

Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Heading casing[edit source]

Hi U3230383. 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 11:05, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Feedback[edit source]

Awesome start to the chapter. You're introduction so far is very engaging. I like how you started with a broad opening statement. --Taliastefanoski (discusscontribs) 10:10, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply


Topic development feedback[edit source]

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

Headings[edit source]

  1. Promising 2-level heading structure
  2. Keep the definitional background material relatively brief (e.g., types of motivation only matters if they are subsequently used to help understand the relationship between PAT and EM)
  3. Consider building out the heading structure for the most important section (e.g., The quantified self with exercise motivation).
  4. Consider rephrasing more top-level headings as questions
  5. Consider adopting closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings

Overview[edit source]

  1. A brief, evocative description of the problem/topic is provided
  2. Add a scenario in a feature box (with an image) at the start to help catch reader interest.
  3. Focus questions should ideally revolve around the 4th focus question (that's the core topic)

Key points[edit source]

  1. Basic development of key points for each section, with relevant citations
  2. 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.
  3. Theories are well selected but not sufficiently apply to PAT and EM
  4. Significant expansion of the "The quantified self with exercise motivation is recommended in order to address the topic. Use the best available psychological theory and research about this topic, with practical examples.
  5. Conclusion (the most important section):
    1. Underway
    2. What might the take-home, practical messages be? (What are the answer(s) to the question(s) in the sub-title and/or specific focus questions about PAT and EM?)

Figure[edit source]

  1. A relevant figure is presented and captioned, but not cited
  2. Strive for captions which explain how the image connects to the sub-title and key points being made in the main text
  3. Cite each figure at least once in the main text

Learning feature[edit source]

  1. Two uses of in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters
  2. Consider including more examples/case studies, quiz question(s), table(s) etc.

References[edit source]

  1. OK. Messy.
  2. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. capitalisation
    2. make doi hyperlinks active (i.e., clickable)
    3. remove additional line spaces

Resources[edit source]

  1. OK. Messy.
  2. See Tutorial 02 for how to format these links

User page[edit source]

  1. Created – minimal, but sufficient
  2. Very 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. At least three different types of contributions; some link(s) are indirect
  2. If adding the second or subsequent link to a page (or a talk/discussion page), create a direct link like / Add 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.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:46, 24 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 insufficient chapter
  2. Insufficient use of primary, peer-reviewed sources as citations
  3. Under the maximum word count, so there is room to expand
  4. This chapter "beats around the bush" for ~2,000 words (i.e., too much preamble) before starting to directly tackle the target topic in the section titled "How does the quantified self intertwine with exercise motivation?". The content is this section is the best content of the whole chapter. There needs to be more of it.
  5. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits

Overview[edit source]

  1. Reasonably good
  2. Consider providing a case study or scenario with an image in a feature box to help engage reader interest
  3. Explains the problem or phenomenon
  4. The focus questions could be improved by being more specific to the topic (i.e., the sub-title)

Theory[edit source]

  1. Insufficient use of relevant psychological theory about this topic
  2. The chapter provides relatively too much discussion of general theory
  3. Overly focused on definitions and general theoretical background; instead summarise, link to related resources, and move to the more substantive aspects of theory
  4. Build more strongly on other related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters)
  5. Insufficient depth is provided about relevant theory(ies)
  6. No use of relevant tables, figures, and/or lists are to help clearly convey key theoretical information
  7. Lack of sufficient use of the most relevant academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)
  8. The Reeve (2018) textbook is overused as a citation – instead, utilise primary, peer-reviewed sources
  9. Insufficient use of examples to illustrate relevant theoretical concepts

Research[edit source]

  1. Insufficient review of relevant research
  2. More detail about key studies would be ideal
  3. Any other systematic reviews or meta-analyses in this area? Greater emphasis on effect sizes could be helpful.
  4. Basic critical thinking about relevant research is evident
  5. 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

Integration[edit source]

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

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. Insufficient as a cohesive summary of the best available psychological theory and research about the topic
  2. Remind the reader about the importance of the problem or phenomenon of interest
  3. Summarise key points
  4. Add practical, take-home message(s)

Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is basic
    2. 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.
    3. 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
  2. APA style
    1. Direct quotes need page numbers – even better, write in your own words

>

    1. Figures
      1. Figures are well captioned
      2. Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1)
    2. Citations are not in full APA style (7th ed.). For example:
      1. If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year. For example, either:
        1. in-text, Smith et al. (2020), or
        2. in parentheses (Smith et al., 2020)
    3. 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. Insufficient use of learning features
  2. One 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.
  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. Basic use of image(s)
  5. No use of table(s)
  6. Reasonably good use of feature box(es)
  7. Basic use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s)
  8. Insufficient use of relevant case studies or examples
  9. Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section
    1. Use bullet points per Tutorial 02
    2. Include sources in parentheses
  10. Basic use of external links in the "External links" section
    1. Use bullet points per Tutorial 02
    2. Rename links per Tutorial 02
    3. Include sources in parentheses

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~1 logged, useful, minor/moderate/major social contributions with direct links to evidence
  2. ~3 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

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[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a very good presentation

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
  3. Note that "ladies and gentleman" may not be gender-inclusive
  4. Consider establishing a context for the presentation through an example
  5. Focus questions and/or an outline of topics are presented

Content[edit source]

  1. Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section
  2. The presentation addresses the topic
  3. An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little
  4. The presentation makes good use of relevant psychological theory, but is overly focused on general motivational theory - concentrate on theory that specifically helps to understand how self-tracking can influence exercise motivation
  5. The presentation makes implied use of relevant psychological research; ideally make more explicit use of research
  6. Include citations to support claims
  7. The presentation makes basic use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice
  8. The presentation provides easy to understand information

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. A Conclusion slide is presented with good summary
  2. The presentation could be strengthened by expanding on the take-home message (e.g., answers to more than one focus question)

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. Excellent intonation enhances listener interest and engagement
  5. The narration is well practiced and/or performed
  6. Audio recording quality was excellent
  7. The narrated content is reasonably well matched to the target topic (see content) but is a general overview rather than synthesising the best psychological theory and research

Video[edit source]

  1. Overall, visual display quality is very good
  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 very well produced
  6. The visual content is reasonably well matched to the target topic (see content) but is a general overview rather than synthesising the best psychological theory and research

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 very brief written description of the presentation is provided. Expand.
  3. Links to and from the book chapter are provided

Licensing[edit source]

  1. Image sources and their copyright status are communicated
  2. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the presentation description but not in the meta-data

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:41, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply