Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2025/Cognitive strategies and emotion regulation

Heading casing

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 08:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Topic development feedback

The topic development has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is provided below, plus see the general feedback page. Also check the page history for changes made whilst reviewing the plan. If you don't understand the feedback or would like further information, get in touch to discuss. Marks are available via UCLearn. Marks are based on the latest version before the due date.

1. Title Title and sub-title correctly worded and use sentence casing 2. Headings See earlier comment about heading casing Basic, 1-level heading structure – could benefit from further development, perhaps using a 2-level structure (i.e., use subheadings) Basic alignment between between sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings. Aim to improve. Use default heading formatting (i.e., avoid additional formatting such as bold, italics, underline, changing the size etc.) Are the headings based on genAI content? If so, this needs to be acknowledged in the edit summaries, otherwise it violates academic integrity. 3. Overview Basic Add a scenario or case study in a feature box (with an image) at the start of this section to help engage reader interest A reasonably good description of the problem/topic is planned or presented Develop closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings 4. Key points Promising development of key points The writing style is clear and easy to follow Good coverage of theory; strive to balance the theoretical content with critical review of relevant research Good use of citations Do these key points include genAI content? If so, this needs to be acknowledged in the edit summaries, otherwise it violates academic integrity. Conclusion (the most important section) hasn't been 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 Relevant figure(s) are presented and captioned Figure caption(s) 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 (e.g., see Figure 1) 6. Learning feature Add in-text interwiki links for first mention of key terms to Wikipedia and/or book chapters (see Tutorial 2) Consider use of more scenarios/examples/case studies Promising use of quiz question(s) Place quiz each question in the most relevant section Focus the quiz question(s) on the take-home messages Also consider using tables to summarise key information 7. References Excellent Well done on identifying relevant systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses Check and correct APA referencing style: italicisation 8. Resources See also To be developed (see Tutorial 2) External links Good Move academic sources into the "References" sections and provide in-text citation Use bullet-points (see Tutorial 02) Use sentence casing Include source in brackets after link Use alphabetical order 9. User page Used effectively 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 None summarised on user page with direct link(s) to evidence (see Tutorial 02). Looking ahead to the book chapter, see social contributions.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Heading consistency

Hey there,

I had a small suggestion for your book chapter. Right now your headings for the cognitive strategies are all unique (e.g. "The role of cognitive reappraisal" and "Attentional deployment: Directing the mind elsewhere"). My thought was since these are meant to be a list of cognitive strategies, it might make each heading look more consistent with each other if you just list their names, and remove the words after the colon (e.g. "Cognitive reappraisal" and "Attentional deployment"). Just a thought, keep up the good work! U3158916 (discuss • contribs) 02:58, 20 September 2025 (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 This is a basic chapter The main area(s) for potential improvement: more detailed review of the best psychological research about the topic overuse of genAI—express more in your own words; watch out for AI slop genAI use has not been appropriately acknowledged in edit summaries with links to the conversation sources; it appears that the feedback about the topic development in this respect has gone unheeded. Insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Reasonably good Basic scenario or case study Figure 1 is relevant to the scenario Include figure caption and cite figure in main text Scenario uses an appropriate feature box Description of problem is too long/overly complicated – explain the psychological problem or phenomenon in a simpler way. Move detail into subsequent sections. Remove bold; replace with links to related Wikipedia articles and/or Wikiversity book chapters The focus questions are clear and relevant Theory Reasonably good—a reasonably good range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained; there is considerable room for improvement Doesn't build on Wikipedia articles and/or related chapters by embedding interwiki links for key terms Reasonably good depth is provided about key theory(ies) Reasonably good use of tables, figures, and/or lists to clearly convey key theoretical information In many places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Excellent/ use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Insufficient review of relevant research Greater emphasis on systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses would be ideal More detail about key studies would be ideal In many places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Bullet-points are over-used. Integrate into sentences and paragraphs. 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 Integration Basic integration between the most relevant theory(ies) and the best research The chapter places more emphasis on theory than on research; strive for an integrated balance Insufficient integration with related chapters Conclusion Basic summary and conclusion Reads like generic, unacknowledgement genAI output; write more compellingly in your own words and clearly acknowledge the source of text Style Written expression The quality of written expression is OK but there are several aspects which are below professional standard Bullet points are overused. Develop more of the bullet point statements into full sentences and paragraphs. Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") instead of 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") in the main text. 1st or 2nd person can work well for case studies or feature boxes. Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections See earlier comment about heading casing Spelling Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour) APA style Use sentence casing for disorders, therapies, theories, etc. Figures Briefly captioned; provide more detail to help connect the figure to the text Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., "(see Figure 1)") Most images were removed because of a lack of sufficient/appropriate copyright information Tables Add an APA style caption to each table (see example) Refer to each Table at least once within the main text (e.g., see Table 1) In many places, better use could be made of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) List multiple citations in alphabetical order by first author surname (e.g., Giraffe, 2024; Zebra & Aardvark, 2020) References use very good/good APA style: Check and correct use of italicisation Learning features Good use of learning features Add 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. Add 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. Poor use of copyrighted figure(s) Basic use of table(s) Reasonably good/ use of feature box(es) Excellent use of scenarios, case studies, or examples Basic use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) The quiz questions could be more effective as learning prompts by being embedded as single questions within each corresponding section rather than as a set of questions at the end Insufficient use of the See also section Also include links to related book chapters Also include links to related Wikipedia articles Use sentence casing Use alphabetical order Include sources in parentheses after the link Move peer-reviewed articles into the References section and cite Insufficient use of the External links section Rename links per Tutorial 02 Use sentence casing Use alphabetical order Include sources in parentheses after the link Move peer-reviewed articles to the References section and cite Link to the top 3-6 external resources about this topic Social contribution No logged contributions for this unit (links point to a different unit)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:05, 20 October 2025 (UTC)