Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Testosterone and dominance

Heading casing

Hi Giovannihbartlett. 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 11:10, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Suggestions

Hi @Giovannihbartlett, your chapter is looking great so far, is well-written, and it looks like you've made solid progress. I have made a large amount of primarily minor edits throughout, and I suggest that you continue to proofread and consider your use of first-person writing.

Although I like the breadth achieved and connection to real life in the case study examples you are using with Ted, I am not sure if the formatting works for a wiki page. It comes off a little jarring to have a section dedicated to Ted, as even though it is rich in applied theory, it splits your paragraphs between theory and narrative. Personally, I prefer the interwoven case study style that is planned for Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Psychedelic treatment of anxiety. This is because using focus boxes make it clear to the reader what is fact (i.e. psych theory) and what is fiction (even if it is relevant). As a result, a reader can choose where to direct their attention more easily. It would also mean that you would not be dedicating as much of your page space to a case study. This could just be my opinion, but it might be useful to note! --U3213682 (discuss • contribs) 07:56, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Topic development feedback

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 The title is correctly worded and formatted Headings See earlier comment about Heading casing Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development Adopt closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings Aim for 3 to 6 top-level headings between the Overview and Conclusion, with up to a similar number of sub-headings for large sections Avoid having sections with only 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings Overview Add a scenario or case study into a feature box (with an image) at the start of this section to help catch reader interest A brief, evocative description of the problem/topic is provided Use 3rd person perspective (except 1st/2nd person can work for case studies/scenarios) Closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings is recommended Focus questions should focus on the substantive psychological topic Self-reflection questions should be separated out - they aren't focus questions Key points Promising development of key points for each section, with relevant citations 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. The most important material starts with Implications of Testosterone on Dominance - this is 2/3rds of the way through the chapter. So abbreviate everything beforehand and significantly expand this section. Applications could be removed as a heading and these applications could be turned into case studies which are embedded in earlier sections Criticisms heading should be removed and criticisms embedded elsewhere where relevant and summarised in the Conclusion Conclusion (the most important section): Hasn't been developed Figure A figure is presented and captioned Caption could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text Check and correct Figure 2 caption Figure(s) are cited at least once in the main text Figures should be numbered sequentially as whole numbers: 1, 2 etc. Figure 3 should instead be captioned as a table Learning feature Promising use of 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, quiz question(s) etc. References It is fine to wiki referencing style However, as with any referencing style, consistency is the key For example, use consistent formatting for author initials, use consistent capitalisation etc. Move non-academic / non-peer reviewed sources to External links Resources See also Good Use bullet-points (see Tutorial 02) External links Move academic sources into References User page Not developed Social contribution None summarised on user page with direct link(s) to evidence – this was covered in Tutorial 03. Looking ahead to the book chapter submission, see how to earn marks for social contributions.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:32, 29 September 2023 (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 an excellent chapter. It successfully uses psychological theory and research to address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem. The chapter provides fascinating depth of theory and research. It lacks, however, in the quality of written expression with regard to grammar. Iron out this bug and this chapter demonstrates potential to write at a high professional academic standard. Excellent use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims Move non-peer reviewed links into the external links sectiohttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/WikEd_logo.pngn Well over the maximum word count. The content beyond 4,000 words has been ignored for marking purposes. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Well developed Engages reader interest by presenting a case study or scenario in a feature box with a relevant image Clearly explains the problem or phenomenon Reasonably clear focus questions Theory An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Builds well on related Wikipedia articles Build more strongly on related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters) Insightful depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Use tables, figures, and/or lists are to help convey key theoretical information Key citations are well used Excellent use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Excellent review of relevant research Excellent critical thinking about relevant research is evident Claims are referenced Integration Excellent integration between theory and research Conclusion Very good summary and conclusion Somewhat vague Remind the reader about the importance of the problem or phenomenon of interest Key points are summarised Address the focus questions Add practical, take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression ranges from poor to excellent (overall, reasonably good) 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 Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead: it is, most often, not needed at all, or use section linking "People" is often a better term than "individuals" Layout Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings Grammar The grammar for many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags) Check and make correct use of commas Check and correct use of possessive apostrophes (e.g., cats vs cat's vs cats')[2] Spelling Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour) APA style Use sentence casing for the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc. Use serial commas[3]. Video (1 min) 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" (APA 7th ed., 2020, p. 159) Figures Figures are well captioned; check and correct sequential numbering Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1) Move non-peer-reviewed sources to the external links section References use very good wiki style Ideally, the formatting should be consistent for each reference Learning features Excellent use of learning features Very good 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. Very good use of image(s) No use of table(s) Very good use of feature box(es) Excellent use of case studies or examples No use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) Very good use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Use bullet points per Tutorial 02 Basic use of external links in the "External links" section Use bullet points per Tutorial 02 Move peer-reviewed articles into references and cite Social contribution ~1 logged, useful social contribution with direct links to evidence ~3 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:55, 17 November 2023 (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 basic presentation The main areas for potential improvement are more directly addressing the relationship between T and D, providing a stronger review of theory and especially research, improving the Overview and Conclusion, and improving the meta-data and licensing Overview The presentation could be improved by displaying and narrating a slide with the same title and sub-title as the book chapter to help the viewer understand the purpose of the presentation Engaging introduction to hook audience interest; make it more clear how it illustrates the relationship between T and D Establish a clearer context for the presentation (it is not about TDS) Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. This will help to focus and discipline the presentation. Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section The presentation somewhat addresses the topic An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation makes basic use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes insufficient use of relevant psychological research Ideally, make more explicit use of research The presentation makes insufficient use of citations to support claims Use APA style for citations The presentation makes reasonably good use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice, but I think this case study might be overdone The presentation could be improved by making more use of examples Conclusion A conclusion is presented with insufficient take-home message(s) about each focus question The conclusion provides an basic summary of the most relevant psychological theory, but insufficient summary of relevant research about this topic Audio The presentation makes basic use of narrated audio Audio communication is well paced Reasonably good intonation Consider improving articulation to enhance the clarity of speech The narration could benefit from further practice Audio recording quality was very good Review microphone set-up to achieve higher recording quality. Probably an on-board microphone was used (e.g., keyboard and/or mouse clicks were audible). Consider using an external microphone. The narrated content is reasonably well matched to the target topic but lacked synthesis of the best psychological research about this topic Video Overall, visual display quality is reasonably good The presentation makes good use of webcam, text, and image based slides The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read The visual communication is supplemented in a reasonably good way by images The presentation is well produced The visual content is reasonably well matched to the target topic but lacked synthesis of the best psychological research about this topic 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. Provide an informative description to help viewers decide whether they want to watch A link to the book chapter is not provided A link from the book chapter is provided Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are not provided A copyright license for the presentation is not provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:12, 21 November 2023 (UTC)