Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Biofeedback and motivation

Heading casing

Hi U3239962. 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 03:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@U3239962: Just a reminder about the correct heading casing. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:46, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Topic development feedback

The topic development submission has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is below, plus see the general feedback page. Please also check the page history for changes made whilst reviewing the chapter plan. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Marks are available via UCLearn. Marks are based on the latest version before the due date.

1. Title The title and sub-title are correctly worded and formatted User name removed – authorship is as per the list of topics and the page's editing history 2. Headings See earlier comment about Heading casing Excellent – Well developed 2-level heading structure. Meaningful headings clearly relate directly to the core topic. Reasonably good alignment between focus questions and heading structure, but consider closer alignment The Overview and Conclusion should not have sub-headings Avoid having sections with only 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings Remove links from headings 3. Overview Excellent - Scenario, image, evocative description of the problem/topic, relevant psychological theory/research, and focus questions A scenario or case study is presented in a feature box with an image at the start of this section A brief, evocative description of the problem/topic is planned Reasonably good alignment between focus questions and heading structure, but consider closer alignment Open-ended focus questions are usually better than closed-ended (e.g., yes/no) questions 4. Key points Excellent – key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations Good balance of theory and research Use APA style 7th edition for citations Move references into the References section. Keep citations in the main body. Move links to citations into the references section and use the dois Conclusion (the most important section): Well developed 5. Figure A relevant figure is presented and 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 6. Learning feature One use of in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters Excellent use of one or more scenarios/examples/case studies Consider including one or more quiz question(s) about the take-home messages Promising use of table(s) Add table caption and cite the table at least once in the text 7. References Good Are there any systematic reviews about this topic? Check and correct APA referencing style: capitalisation italicisation doi formatting make doi hyperlinks active (i.e., clickable) 8. Resources See also Not developed External links Not developed 9. User page Basic – minimal, but sufficient Very brief description about self – 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. A link to the book chapter is provided 10. Social contribution Good – two out of three types of contributions made with with direct link(s) to evidence. The other type of contribution is making posts about the unit or project on other platforms such as the UCLearn discussion forum or on X using the #emot24

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Feedback

Hi!

I have read over your draft and I think it looks really promising! Your tables and figures are really informative and help the chapter flow.

Here are some suggestions for improvement:

1. After running your chapter through the readability test you scored 48.7 and should be aiming for a score of 50. To improve your score I would suggest trying to shorten some of your paragraphs by either spliting them into two seperate paragraphs or trying to cut them down to around 5 sentences (as per the rubric suggestions). I also think when you build out the rest of your dot points it will help improve the score.
2. You will also need to add in more referneces to indicate that you have done extensive reading (the assessment instructions suggests a dozen references at least) and to prove your information is factual as well as avoiding plagurism.
3. Finally, I can see you have two quiz questions you are yet to update from the template, if you want to break up your writing a little bit more I would suggest adding some more quiz questions to the end of each section to helpo with the flow of information. Alternatively, a case study or feature box could also work to do this.

I have also made a few edits in your reference list to the casing of the titles of a few references to align with APA formatting.

Best of luck with the rest of the assignment! I am excited to see how your work progresses!

~~~=U3228753 U3228753 (discuss • contribs) 09:14, 2 October 2024 (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 very good presentation Overview An opening slide with the title and sub-title is displayed. Also narrate or paraphrase the title and sub-title — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. The presentation has a basic introduction to engage audience interest A basic context for the presentation is established 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 addresses the topic An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation makes excellent use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes very good use of relevant psychological research The presentation makes excellent use of citations to support claims The presentation makes good use of one or more examples The presentation provides practical advice The presentation provides easy to understand information Conclusion The conclusion provides an excellent summary and take-home message(s) The Conclusion only partly fitted within the time limit The Conclusion did not fit within the time limit Audio The audio is easy to follow The presentation makes good use of narrated audio Audio communication is well paced Good intonation The narration is well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was good. However, volume was low. Review microphone set-up to achieve higher recording quality. The narrated content is well matched to the target topic Video Overall, visual display quality is reasonably good The visual resolution is low (e.g., text is fuzzy) The presentation makes basic use of text and image based slides Some of the font size could be larger to make it easier to read The amount of text presented per slide makes it easy to read and listen at the same time The visual communication is supplemented in a reasonably good way by relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is basically produced using simple tools Meta-data 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 A very brief written description of the presentation is provided. Expand. Excellent use of time codes Links to and from the book chapter are provided A link from the book chapter is provided Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are communicated A copyright license for the presentation is clearly indicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:09, 6 November 2024 (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 very good to excellent chapter Excellent use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Very good Engaging case study or scenario in a feature box; also include a relevant image The case study seems to more about using biofeedback to manage emotion than using biofeedback for motivation Explains the psychological problem or phenomenon reasonably well The focus questions are basic but good Theory An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Builds well on other chapters and/or Wikipedia articles Insightful depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Excellent use of tables, figures, and/or lists to help clearly convey key theoretical information Key citations are well used Excellent use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Excellent review of relevant research More detail about key studies would be ideal Any systematic reviews or meta-analyses in this area? Reasonably good 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 considering the strength of relationships acknowledging limitations pointing out critiques/counterarguments suggesting specific directions for future research Integration Excellent integration between theory and research The chapter places more emphasis on theory than on research; strive for an integrated balance Excellent integration with chapters Conclusion Very good summary and conclusion Summarise key points Add practical, take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is excellent 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 Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections Abbreviations Check and correct formatting of abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e., etc.) APA style Use sentence casing for the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc. Use serial commas[2][3] Figures Briefly captioned; provide more detail to help connect the figure to the text Check and correct figure numbering Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., "(see Figure 1)") Tables Use APA style for captions (see example) Each Table is referred to at least once within the main text Citations use excellent APA Style (7th ed.): References use reasonably good APA style: Check and correct use of capitalisation[4] Check and correct use of italicisation Reeve (2024) is incorrect (not published in 2024) Learning features Excellent use of learning features Very good use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles Excellent use of embedded in-text links to related book chapters Very good use of figure(s) Very good use of table(s) Excellent use of feature box(es) Excellent use of scenarios, case studies, or examples Reasonably good use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) The quiz questions could be improved by being more focused on the key points and/or take-home messages Excellent use of the "See also" section Good use of the "External links" section Social contribution ~8 logged, useful, mostly moderate to major contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:27, 27 November 2024 (UTC)