Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Disgust and hygiene

Initial suggestions

@U3214564: Thanks for tackling this topic. Some initial suggestions:

• Check out other related chapters and see how you can build on, link to, and integrate with that work:
  • Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Disgust
• Also search past book chapters for related topics
• For the topic development, consider:
  • What psychological theory(ies) can help to understand and explain this topic?
  • What is the main research in this area?
• Let me know if I can do anything else to support the development of this chapter.

Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:27, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Comment

Hey there I'm Jackster_10 and and doing a slightly relevant chapter about motivation and personal hygiene, while doing some research I came across this article https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyp002 which may be of use to you, it talks about hygiene standards and touches on motivations for hand washing including disgust, and has a paragraph on how disgust can be used as a motivator. The information isn't too detailed but you may be able to gain some information from it. Cheers, Jackster_10 Jackster 10 (discuss • contribs) 05:48, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi U3214564 so far your chapter provides a clear and engaging analysis of how disgust influences hygiene behaviours, highlighting both its evolutionary role as a disease defence and its psychological mechanisms. This is so insightful! Great work on presenting such a nuanced view of how disgust shapes our hygiene behaviours (: - U3236641

Heading casing

Hi U3214564. 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 03:14, 13 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. Adopt closer alignment between sub-title, focus questions, and top-level 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 at the start of this section. Add an image into the scenario feature box to help attract reader interest. A brief, evocative description of the problem/topic is planned Use 3rd person perspective (except 1st/2nd person can work for feature boxes/scenarios) Closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings is recommended Use bullet points (see Tutorial 2) 4. Key points Promising development of key points for each section, with some relevant citations Use either APA style or wiki style, but not both. And do not include direct links to external sources from the main body. Instead of links to external sources, provide APA style or wiki style citations then, in references, include the doi which hyperlinks to the article Strive for an integrated balance of the best psychological theory and research about this topic, with practical examples Does this plan include genAI content? If so, it needs to be acknowledged as such in the edit summaries, otherwise it violates academic integrity. For example, I suspect that this content is generated by AI but it has not been acknowledged. Conclusion (the most important section): Hasn't been developed 5. Figure Excellent - One or more relevant figure(s) is/are presented, captioned, and cited The figure caption(s) provide(s) a clear, appropriately detailed description that is meaningfully connected with the main text Figure(s) are cited at least once in the main text 6. 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 Promising use of one or more scenarios/examples/case studies Promising use of quiz question(s) Also consider using one or more tables to summarise key information 7. References OK Are there any systematic reviews about this topic? Remove bullet points Check and correct APA referencing style: capitalisation italicisation make doi hyperlinks active (i.e., clickable) Use APA style or wiki referencing style, but not both. Currently, a mixture of referencing styles is used. 8. Resources See also Not developed – needs work (see Tutorial 2) External links Not developed – needs work (see Tutorial 2) 9. User page Excellent – used effectively Excellent description about self provided Remove external links section (duplicated info) Link(s) provided to professional profile(s) 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. An external link to the book chapter is provided Use an internal link (see Tutorial 02) 10. Social contribution One out of three types of contributions made with with direct link(s) to evidence. The other types of contribution are making: direct improvements to other chapters (past or current) posts about the unit or project on other platforms such as the UCLearn discussion forum or on X using the #emot24 To add direct links to evidence: view the page history, select the version of the page before and after your contributions, click "compare selected revisions", and paste the comparison URL on your user page. For more info, see Making and summarising social contributions.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:21, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

The brains region in relation to disgust

There is some really great information about disgust and its region of the brain. If you did physiological Psychology week 10 addressed emotions and the brain. Annabelle Taylor (discuss • contribs) 04:46, 19 September 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 an excellent presentation Overview The opening conveys the purpose of the presentation in a very good way Engaging introduction to hook audience interest A context for the presentation is established through an example Consider asking focus questions to help 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 very good use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes insufficient/no use of relevant psychological research The presentation makes insufficient/no use of citations to support claims The presentation makes excellent use of examples The presentation provides useful practical advice The presentation provides easy to understand information Conclusion The conclusion provides a good summary of the most relevant psychological theory and research about this topic The conclusion provides reasonably good take-home message(s) Audio The audio is easy to follow and interesting to listen to The presentation makes effective use of narrated audio Audio communication is well-paced Excellent intonation The narration is well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was very good The narrated content is well matched to the target topic Video Overall, visual display quality is very good The presentation makes very good use of text and image based slides The font size is (mostly) sufficiently large to make it easy 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 very good way by relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is well produced using simple tools The visual content is well matched to the target topic Meta-data The correct title is used, but the sub-title (or a shortened version of it) is not used, as the name of the presentation. This would help to convey the purpose of the presentation and be consistent. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Expand. Links to and from the book chapter are provided Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are not clearly indicated A copyright license for the presentation is clearly indicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:26, 10 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 basic chapter. Coverage of theory is good. Research review is basic. Style is basic. Basic use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims In many places, better use could be made of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) For citations, use APA style or wiki style, but not both Under the maximum word count, so there is room to expand For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Well developed Engages reader via a case study or scenario in a feature box; also include a relevant image Explains the psychological problem or phenomenon reasonably well Briefly explains the psychological problem or phenomenon; provide more detail The focus questions are reasonably clear Theory A basic range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Builds on one previous chapters and/or Wikipedia article Build more strongly on related chapters and/or Wikipedia articles (e.g., by embedding interwiki links for key terms) Basic depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Basic use of tables, figures, and/or lists to help convey key theoretical information In many places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Basic use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Basic review of relevant research More detail about key studies would be ideal Any systematic reviews or meta-analyses in this area? In many places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Insufficient 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 Many claims lack sufficient citation (e.g., see the tags) Integration Basic integration between theory and research The chapter places more emphasis on theory than on research; strive for an integrated balance Insufficient integration with chapters Conclusion Reasonably good summary and conclusion Key points are well summarised Address the focus questions Add practical, take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is basic 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 structure is overly complicated; aim for 3 to 6 top-level headings between the Introduction and Conclusion Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings See earlier comments about heading casing Include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see tags) Grammar The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags) Consider using a grammar checking tool Another option is to use a services provided by UC, such as Studiosity Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance Check and correct use of possessive apostrophes (e.g., cats vs cat's vs cats')[2] Abbreviations Check and correct formatting of abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e., etc.) Only use abbreviations such as e.g., i.e., et al., etc. inside parentheses, otherwise spell them out Spelling Some words are misspelt (e.g., see the tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Proofreading More proofreading is needed (e.g., fix punctuation and typographical errors) to bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard Remove unnecessary capitalisation – more info APA style Direct quotes need page numbers – even better, communicate about concepts in your own words Figures Reasonably well captioned Use this format for captions: Figure X. Descriptive caption goes here in sentence casing. See example. Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., "(see Figure 1)") Citations use basic APA style (7th ed.). To improve: More proofreading is needed List multiple citations in alphabetical order by first author surname References use basic APA style: Remove bullet points (fixed) Include hyperlinked dois (fixed) Check and correct use of capitalisation[3] Remove "Retrieved ..." Use hanging indent (fixed) Learning features Excellent/Very good/Good/Reasonably good/Basic/Insufficient use of learning features 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. 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. Basic use of figure(s) No use of table(s) Reasonably good use of feature box(es) Basic use of scenarios, case studies, or examples Reasonably good use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Use bullet points per Tutorial 02 Also include links to related book chapters No use of external links in the "External links" section Move the external links into References and cite Add more links Social contribution ~1 logged contributions with direct links to evidence ~3 logged contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess. See tutorials for guidance about how to get direct links to evidence.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:48, 20 November 2024 (UTC)