Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Rejection sensitivity

Initial suggestions

@Yonis Yousufzai: 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/Relationships
• 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 09:47, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi James hope you're doing well, just have a quick question regarding AI, when it comes to analysing a pdf file I use Ai to tell me about the content inside if it's related to my topic and then I cite it myself. When it comes to source editing since its a kind of coding that makes me confused and lost so I use ChatGPT to generate the code, for instance, for the attachment theory from Wikipedia I copy the URL and then AI gives me the code for Wikiversity on how to put it in the text do I have to say that in the references? Here is one of the links for a better understanding of what I mean.

Regards Yonis

https://chatgpt.com/share/b176fa04-d82a-4c16-acdb-29ad3c88b485 Yonis Yousufzai (discuss • contribs) 01:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Yonis,

Thanks for questions about using genAI (and discussing in class).

These are reasonable/acceptable uses that do not require acknowledgement.

However, be aware that genAI makes mistakes and that you are responsible for those mistakes.

Ideally, you should also be reading the original sources yourself, even if you are using genAI to help summarise key points from the article. But asking for text summarisation is usually reliable.

I also noted that it suggested some ways of making links which are not as good as what was taught in Tutorial 2 (i.e., it is suggesting adding Wikiversity links as external rather than internal links).

So, remember, genAI can provide helpful but imperfect assistance, so user beware.

Sincerely,

James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:14, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Heading casing

Hi Yonis Yousufzai. 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 09:47, 6 August 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 is correctly worded and formatted 2. Headings Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development by expanding the structure Use sentence casing (e.g., Jealousy -> jealousy) Consider adopting closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings The Overview and Conclusion should not have sub-headings (I've fixed this) 3. Overview Scenario, image, evocative description of the problem/topic, relevant psychological theory/research, and focus questions Keep the Overview brief; consider moving detail into subsequent sections A scenario or case study is presented in a feature box at the start of this section A brief, evocative description of the problem/topic is provided Use 3rd person perspective (except 1st/2nd person can work for feature boxes/scenarios) Focus questions are aligned with sub-title and top-level headings Closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings is recommended Open-ended focus questions are usually better than closed-ended (e.g., yes/no) questions Use single- rather than double-barrelled focus questions Present focus questions in a feature box at the end of this section 4. Key points Promising development of key points for each section, with relevant citations There seems to be reasonably good coverage of theory, however, strive to balance the content with critical review of relevant research Has the most important peer-reviewed research about this topic been identified? For example, are there any systematic reviews about this or related topics? Strive for an integrated balance of theory and research, with practical examples Generally well-written, but I recommend using the Studiosity service and/or a service like Grammarly to help improve the quality of written expression because there are some noticeable grammatical and spelling errors. Conclusion (the most important section): Hasn't been developed 5. Figure A relevant figure is presented, captioned, and cited Caption could better explain how the image connects to key points being made 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 example(s)/case study(ies) Promising use of quiz question(s) Promising use of table(s) 7. References Very good Move non-academic / non-peer reviewed sources to External links For APA referencing style, check and correct: capitalisation italicisation doi formatting page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) 8. Resources See also OK Change linking style to internal linking (see Tutorial 02) Use sentence casing External links OK Use sentence casing Rename and format links so that they are more user friendly (see Tutorial 02) Include source in brackets after link 9. User page Good Description about self provided 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. Link provided to book chapter 10. 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 07:30, 17 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 the use of peer-reviewed sources and APA style citation of those sources. There is far too much reliance on genAI material and possible violation of academic integrity. I suspect that the recommended 5 topic development hours and 45 book chapter hours were not invested in preparing this chapter Insufficient use of primary, peer-reviewed sources as citations (e.g., see the tags) Move embedded external links into the References section as dois and provide APA style citations Move non-peer reviewed links into the external links section Well 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 with a relevant image Clearly explains the problem or phenomenon Clear focus questions Theory A promising range of ideas are presented but it is far from clear how this material is derived from a first person reading of the best peer-reviewed psychological theory and research about this topic Builds somewhat on previous, related chapters and/or Wikipedia articles Basic depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Basic use of tables, figures, and/or lists to help convey key theoretical information Insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Reasonably good use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Insufficient review of relevant research Provide more detail about key studies 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 discussing the direction of relationships considering the strength of relationships acknowledging limitations pointing out critiques/counterarguments suggesting specific directions for future research Many claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags) Integration Insufficient integration between theory and research The chapter places more emphasis on theory than on research; strive for an integrated balance Conclusion Basic summary and conclusion Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is basic Remove template material Some paragraphs are overly long. Communicate one key idea per paragraph in three to five sentences. Develop the bullet point statements into full sentences and paragraphs Avoid one sentence paragraphs. Communicate one idea per paragraph using three to five sentences. 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 Embed direct quotes within sentences and paragraphs, rather than presenting them holus-bolus. "People" is often a better term than "individuals" Use gender-neutral language (e.g., mankind -> humankind, s/he -> they) Reduce use of weasel words which bulk out the text but don't enhance meaning Use permanent, rather than relative, time references. For example, instead of "20 years ago", refer to something like "at the beginning of the 21st century". In this way, the text will survive better into the future, without needing to be rewritten. Avoid overly emotive language (e.g,. *) in science-based communication Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections Grammar The grammar for some/many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags) Check and correct use of that vs. who Consider using a grammar checking tool Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance Check and make correct use of commas Check and correct use of possessive apostrophes (e.g., cats vs cat's vs cats')[2] Check and correct use of affect vs. effect Check and correct use of semicolons (;) and colons (:) Abbreviations Spell out abbreviations on their first use, to explain them to the reader Once an abbreviation has been established (e.g., PTSD), use it consistently aftwarwards Spelling Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour) 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 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 slang, or as an invented or coined expression" (APA 7th ed., 2020, p. 159) "Use quotation marks only for the first occurrence of the word or phrase, not for subsequent occurrences" (APA 7th ed., 2020, p. 159) Express numbers < 10 using words (e.g., two) and >= 10 and over using numerals (e.g., 99) Direct quotes need page numbers – even better, communicate concepts in your own words Figures Figures are very well/well/reasonably well captioned Figures are briefly captioned; provide more detail to help connect the figure to the text Figure are not captioned Use this format for figure captions: Figure X. Descriptive caption in sentence casing. See example Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1) Refer to each Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use bold, italics, check and correct capitalisation) Some image uploads were removed because of a lack of sufficient/appropriate copyright information The figure numbering needs correcting Tables Add an APA style caption to each table Refer to each Table using APA style (e.g., do not use bold, talics, check and correct capitalisation) Citations use poor APA style (7th ed.) Move links to references into the References section and link using the dois References use basic APA style: There are surprisingly few references; it doesn't look like the best psychological theory and research has been used to prepare this chapter Check and correct use of italicisation Learning features Excellent/Very good/Good/Reasonably good/Basic/Insufficient use of learning features Excellent use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles Very good/Good/Reasonably good/Basic/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 interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding interwiki links for the first mention of key words and technical concepts would make the text more interactive. See example. Excellent/Very good/Good/Reasonably good/Basic/One/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. Use in-text interwiki links, rather than external links, per Tutorial 02 Move non-peer reviewed links into the External links section and provide APA citations Basic use of image(s) Basic o use of table(s) Basic use of feature box(es) Basic use of 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 internal linking style per Tutorial 02 Basic use of external links in the "External links" section The genAI guidelines have not been followed. Rename links per Tutorial 02 Use sentence casing Use alphabetical order Include sources in parentheses after the link Social contribution ~3 logged, mostly minor social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:45, 20 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 basic presentation The presentation is over the maximum time limit — content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking and feedback purposes Overview An opening slide with the sub-title is displayed and narrated. Also display and narrate or paraphrase the title — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation and to be consistent with the book chapter. Engaging introduction to hook audience interest A context for the presentation is established through an example Focus questions and/or an outline of topics are presented Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section The presentation addresses the topic There is too much content, in too much detail, presented within the allocated time frame. Zoom out and provide a higher-level presentation at a slower pace. It is best to cover a small amount of well-targetted content than a large amount of poorly selected content. The presentation makes very good use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes little use of relevant psychological research The presentation makes reasonably good use of citations to support claims The presentation makes very good use of one or more examples The presentation provides practical advice The presentation provides easy to understand information Conclusion The Conclusion did not fit within the time limit Audio The audio is fun, easy to follow, and interesting to listen to The audio is easy to follow The audio is hard to follow because so much content is presented so quickly The presentation makes very good use of narrated audio Audio communication is well paced Very good intonation The narration is reasonably 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 basic 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 could be reduced to make it easier to read and listen at the same time The visual communication is supplemented in a basic 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 chapter sub-title but not the chapter title is used in the name of the presentation. The title would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. An excellent written description of the presentation is provided An inactive hyperlink to the book chapter is provided (maybe because the YouTube user account does not yet have access to advanced features) A link from the book chapter is provided Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are not clearly indicated and may have violated the copyrights of image owners stated A copyright license for the presentation is clearly indicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)