Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Gut-brain axis and emotion

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 2. Headings Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development and/or refinement Basic, 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development (expand) Good alignment between focus questions and heading structure 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 provided Focus questions are aligned with sub-title and top-level headings 4. Key points Excellent – key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations Promising balance of theory and research Is some of this genAI content (e.g., https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Motivation_and_emotion%2FBook%2F2024%2FGut-brain_axis_and_emotion&diff=2646438&oldid=2646426)? If so, it needs to be acknowledged as such in the edit summaries, otherwise it violates academic integrity. Conclusion (the most important section): Underway 5. Figure Excellent - One or more relevant figure(s) is/are presented, captioned, and cited The figure caption(s) 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 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 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 Good Are there any systematic reviews about this topic? Check and correct APA referencing style: provide the full journal titles capitalisation italicisation page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) 8. Resources See also Excellent External links Excellent 9. User page Basic 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 Rename the link to the book chapter to make it more user-friendly (see Tutorial 02) Add link to book chapter 10. Social contribution Excellent – at least three different types of contributions with direct link(s) to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:24, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

resources on bidirectional communication and gut

Hi, interesting read! I just recently read something about bidirectional communication between cortical region and limbic system, and emotion regulation. I found these two resources might be helpful to dive the topic further. Some psychiatric implications of physiological studies on frontotemporal portion of limbic system (Visceral brain) - ScienceDirect Gut feelings: the emerging biology of gut–brain communication | Nature Reviews Neuroscience

All the best! Stluciamolly (discuss • contribs) 13:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, this and your last suggestion are really interesting ill definitely look into that point of view!! U3239091 (discuss • contribs) 04:28, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

some thoughts

Hi, I find this topic very interesting. If it was me, I would talk about the bidirectional communication, and that cognitive appraisal may be a cause to gut-feeling. Cognitive appraisal influences cortical region and limbic system (emotional brain)---this is how I might start to explore the role of brain-gut axis in the emotion. The "gut" sits in the limbic system, as part of the neurological system, instead of being a separated physical entity that is influenced by or influence the "brain". What do you think?

This is the article I first found about the bidirectional link between cognition and emotion. Rethinking Feelings: An fMRI Study of the Cognitive Regulation of Emotion | MIT Press Journals & Magazine | IEEE Xplore

All the best! Stluciamolly (discuss • contribs) 01:28, 30 September 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 an excellent chapter. It successfully uses psychological theory and research to address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem. Very good use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims In some places, better use could be made of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) 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 with a relevant image Clearly explains the psychological problem or phenomenon The focus questions are clear and relevant Theory An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Builds effectively 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 In some places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Excellent use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Excellent review of relevant research Any systematic reviews or meta-analyses in this area? In some places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) 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 Some claims lack sufficient citation (e.g., see the tags) Integration Excellent integration between theory and research Conclusion Excellent summary and conclusion Clear take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is very 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 Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections 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] APA style Express numbers < 10 using words (e.g., two) and >= 10 and over using numerals (e.g., 99) Figures Very well captioned Use this format for captions: Figure X. Descriptive caption goes here in sentence casing. See example. Refer to each Figure using APA style (e.g., "(see Figure 1)"; do not use bold, italics, check and correct capitalisation) Tables Use APA style for captions (see example) Refer to each Table using APA style (e.g., do not use bold, talics, check and correct capitalisation) Citations use good APA style (7th ed.). To improve: If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year. For example, either: in-text, Smith et al. (2020), or in parentheses (Smith et al., 2020) Do not include author first name or initials Use ampersand (&) inside parentheses and "and" outside parentheses References use excellent APA style: Provide full journal titles Learning features Excellent use of learning features Excellent use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles 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. Excellent use of figure(s) Excellent use of table(s) Excellent use of feature box(es) Excellent use of scenarios, case studies, or examples Excellent use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) Excellent use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Excellent use of external links in the "External links" section Social contribution ~7 logged, useful, mostly moderate contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:23, 31 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 an excellent presentation Overview The opening slide Displays the title — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation Does not narrate the title — this would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation Displays the sub-title — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation Narrates the 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/somewhat addresses/does not adequately address 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 very good/ use of citations to support claims The presentation makes excellent 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 of the most relevant psychological theory and research about this topic 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 Very good intonation The narration is well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was excellent The narrated content is well matched to the target topic Video Overall, visual display quality is excellent The presentation makes effective use of text and image based slides The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read The visual communication is effectively supplemented by relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is very well produced Meta-data The correct 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 An excellent written description of the presentation is provided Excellent use of time codes Links to and from the book chapter are provided Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are communicated There is not explicit mention of image copyrights A copyright license for the presentation is clearly indicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:00, 7 November 2024 (UTC)