Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Moral dilemmas 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/or sub-title were not correctly worded and/or formatted (fixed title; adjusted sub-title in list of all topics because I prefer the new sub-title you've suggested) 2. Headings Under-developed, 1-level heading structure – develop further, perhaps using a 2-level structure for larger section(s) Reasonably good alignment between focus questions and heading structure, but consider closer alignment 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 3. Overview Add a scenario or case study in 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 planned Reasonably good alignment between focus questions and heading structure, but consider closer alignment Consider abbreviating the longest focus question 4. Key points Promising development of key points for most sections, with some relevant citations Strive for an integrated balance of the best psychological theory and research about this topic, with practical examples Use APA style 7th edition for citations Use Australian spelling (e.g., analyze -> analyse; behavior -> behaviour) Conclusion (the most important section): Under developed What might the take-home, practical messages be? (What are the answer(s) to the question(s) in the sub-title and/or focus questions?) 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 Cite each figure at least once in the main text using APA style Consider increasing image size from to make it easier to view Well done on creating and uploading your own image! – this can also be listed as a social contribution 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 ore more scenarios/examples/case studies Consider including more examples/case studies, quiz question(s), table(s) etc. 7. References OK 4 out of 6 Are there any systematic reviews about this topic? Move non-academic / non-peer reviewed sources to External links Check and correct APA referencing style: capitalisation italicisation doi formatting make doi hyperlinks active (i.e., clickable) page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Remember that the goal is to identify and use the best academic theory and research about this topic 8. Resources See also One of two link types provided Also link to related book chapters Use alphabetical order External links Not developed 9. User page Excellent – used effectively Very good Good Created – minimal, but sufficient Not created – see Tutorial 02 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 One out of three types of contributions made with with direct link(s) to evidence The other types of contribution are making: comments on chapters (past or current) posts about the unit or project on other platforms

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:37, 23 August 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 insufficient chapter The main area for potential improvement is reduce the background info about MDs and emotion as separate concepts and expand the focus on synthesising the best peer-reviewed psychological theory and research about this topic Sub-title was missing (fixed) Basic 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 Basic Engage reader via a case study or scenario in a feature box with a relevant image Explains the psychological problem or phenomenon reasonably well Basic focus questions Use open-ended rather than closed-ended focus questions (fixed) Theory A basic range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Reduce general theoretical background (e.g., if only the two-factor theory is applied to the topic, then only cover this theory). Instead, summarise and link to related resources (i.e., other book chapters and/or Wikipedia articles). Increase emphasis on substantive aspects of theory that relate directly to the specific topic (i.e., the sub-title question). Builds effectively on related chapters and Wikipedia articles Insufficient depth is provided about relevant theory(ies). The theoretical coverage is too broad and not sufficiently focused in on the relationship between MD and emotion. Use tables, figures, and/or lists to help convey key theoretical information In some places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Promising use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts The examples are too broad. Focus the examples on illustrating the relationship between MD and emotion. Research Insufficient review of relevant research More detail about key studies would be ideal 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) 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 Some claims lack sufficient citation (e.g., see the tags) Integration Insufficient integration between theory and research Conclusion Insufficient as a cohesive summary of the best available psychological theory and research about the topic Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is basic The writing style is somewhat convoluted. Many sentences could be simplified. Use active (e.g., "this chapter explores") rather than passive voice (e.g., "this chapter has explored" or "this chapter will explore") [1][2] Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") perspective[3] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes Grammar The grammar for some/many 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 APA style Use serial commas[4]. Video (1 min) Figures Briefly captioned; provide more detail to help connect the figure to the text 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) Increase some image sizes to make them easier to read Citations use insufficient APA style (7th ed.). To improve: Include a comma after author names and before year in parentheses (e.g., Smith, 2000) Do not cite author first names or initials References use poor APA style: Check and correct use of capitalisation[5] Check and correct use of italicisation Separate page numbers using an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Include hyperlinked dois Learning features Reasonably good 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. Reasonably good use of figure(s) No use of table(s) Excellent use of feature box(es) Promising use of scenarios, case studies, or examples; ideally focus on examples about MD and emotion rather than just MDs No use of quiz(zes) but case study reflection question(s) are interactive Very good use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Use sentence casing No use of external links in the "External links" section Social contribution ~3 logged minor contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Book chapter resubmission feedback

These changes were reviewed:

1. There were minor wording changes, some of which were problematic (e.g., changing open-ended focus questions to close-ended focus questions; changing Australian to American spelling; some repeated information was added; an overly long paragraph about a research method was added, but only one sentence was provided about the findings)
2. Review of relevant theory is somewhat improved
3. Review of relevant research is somewhat improved
4. Conclusion improvements are minor

Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:25, 27 November 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 basic presentation The presentation lacks sufficient synthesis of the best psychological theory and research about this topic Overview An opening slide with the title is displayed. Also display and narrate 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 does not adequately address the topic An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation makes insufficient use of relevant psychological theory The presentation is overly focused on philosophical perspectives The presentation makes no use of relevant psychological research The presentation makes no use of citations to support claims The presentation makes basic use of one or more examples The presentation could be improved by providing practical advice The presentation provides easy to understand information Conclusion The conclusion provides a reasonably good verbal summary of the most relevant psychological theory and research about this topic Provide a conclusion slide which summarises the most relevant psychological theory and research about this topic, with practical, take-home messages in response to each focus question Audio The audio is easy to follow The presentation makes good use of narrated audio Audio communication is well paced Reasonably good intonation The narration is well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was reasonably 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 theory and research about this topic Video Overall, visual display quality is basic The presentation makes basic use of (mostly) text-based slides The font size is mostly sufficiently large to make it easy to read 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 could be improved by including some more relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is basically produced using simple tools The visual content is reasonably well matched to the target topic but lacked synthesis of the best psychological theory and 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 a written description of the presentation to help potential viewers decide whether or not to watch An inactive hyperlink to the book chapter is provided because the YouTube user account does not yet have access to advanced features A link from the book chapter is provided The presentation is incorrectly categorised as being for kids. This creates limitations, such as being unable to add the presentation to a playlist. More info. Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are not clearly indicated A copyright license for the presentation is not clearly indicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:31, 5 November 2024 (UTC)