Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2025/Defensive avoidance and goal pursuit

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 The title and/or sub-title were not correctly worded and/or didn't use sentence casing (fixed) 2. Headings Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development and/or refinement Develop closer alignment between sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings 3. Overview Very good A scenario or case study is presented in a feature box with an image at the start of this section Hone the scenario to highlight more clearly how defensive avoidance can impact goal pursuit Consider abbreviating the scenario Make it more clear how the image relates to the scenario (find a better thematic match) Simplify/abbreviate the description of the problem/topic. Move detail into subsequent sections. The description should focus on how DA impacts GP rather than describing these as separate constructs 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 4. Key points Insufficient development It may be that all planned aspects cannot be reasonably covered within the final word count, so be selective and concentrate on key aspects that address the question in the sub-title Select the best theories about this topic Insufficient use of citations For sections with sub-sections, provide key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings 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 One use of in-text interwiki links for first mention of key terms to Wikipedia. Also embed links to book chapters Consider use of more scenarios/examples/case studies Consider including quiz question(s) about the take-home messages Also consider using tables to summarise key information 7. References Good What are the most relevant systematic reviews/meta-analyses about this topic? All references need in-text citation Check and correct APA referencing style: italicisation) page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) 8. Resources See also Basic One of two link types provided Also link to related motivation and emotion book chapters Use sentence casing Use alphabetical order External links One of two required external links provided Move academic sources into the "References" sections and provide in-text citation Use sentence casing Link to the most relevant external resources about this topic 9. User page Used effectively 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. 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: direct improvements to other chapters (past or current) comments on the talk pages of other chapters (past or current)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:01, 18 August 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 reasonably good chapter that makes good use of psychological theory and some use of research to address a real-world phenomenon or problem Very good use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Well developed Engaging scenario or case study in a feature box with an image Figure 1 could be more relevant to the scenario Clearly explains the psychological problem or phenomenon The focus questions are clear and relevant Theory Very good—key theories are well explained and applied; minor areas for improvements There are a lot of theories discussed, but the chapter could be strengthened by being more selective and better integrating theory with a critical review of relevant research and more applied use of examples of the ideas in action I didn't understand the material about environmental stability. How does it contribute to defensive avoidance? Got an example? Builds exceptionally well on Wikipedia articles but not other chapters and/or Wikipedia articles Reasonably good depth is provided about key theory(ies) Good use of tables, figures, and/or lists to clearly convey key theoretical information Key citations are well used Insufficient use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Reasonably good review of relevant research Greater emphasis on systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses would be ideal More detail about key studies would be ideal Claims are well referenced 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 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. This section is quite abstract. Remind the reader about the importance of the problem or phenomenon of interest Key points are summarised in a basic way The take-away messages for each focus question could be spelt out more clearly Add practical, take-home message(s) Style Written expression The quality of written expression is reasonably good Some sentences could be explained more clearly (e.g., see the and tags) Some sentences are overly long. Strive for the simplest expression. Consider splitting longer sentences into two shorter sentences. Shorter words and sentences are more readable. Try conducting a readability analysis such as via https://www.webfx.com/tools/read-able/. This chapter gets a score of . Aim for 50+. Avoid phrases such as “as previously mentioned” or “as noted above,” as these add little value and can disrupt flow. If referencing another part of the chapter is necessary, use section linking. Remove weasel words—they add bulk without improving meaning Layout The headings could be more clearly aligned with the focus questions Grammar The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see tags); consider using a grammar checking tool, Studiosity, and/or peer feedback Possessive apostrophes are not used correctly (e.g., cats vs cat's vs cats') em-dashes should be used instead of hyphens as punctuation marks Abbreviations Only introduce abbreviations (e.g., DAD) which are subsequently used Only use abbreviations such as e.g., i.e., et al., etc. inside parentheses, otherwise spell them out APA style Use serial commas[1][2] Use sentence casing for disorders, therapies, theories, etc. Figures 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)") Increase some image sizes to make them easier to read Tables Very well well captioned Each Table is referred to at least once within the main text using APA style Citations use reasonably good APA Style (7th ed.): Multiple citations for a single point should be included within a single set of parentheses Use ampersand (&) inside parentheses and "and" outside parentheses Check and correct use of parentheses References use very good/ APA style: Check and correct use of italicisation Separate page numbers using an en dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Include hyperlinked dois Learning features Overall, the learning features are excellent Excellent use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles 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. Very good use of figure(s) Very good use of table(s) Very good use of feature box(es) Basic use of scenarios, case studies, or examples Basic use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) The quiz questions could be improved by being more focused on the key points and/or take-home messages Very good use of the "See also" section Use alphabetical order Very good use of the "External links" section Use alphabetical order Move peer-reviewed articles to the References section and cite Social contribution ~10 logged contributions with direct links to evidence; mostly image uploads and discussion forum posts. No direct edits or comments on other chapters.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:59, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Why do we partake in defensive behaviour?

Hi, Your paragraph shows a strong understanding of defensive avoidance and its adaptive role, but it could be even clearer and easier to read by fixing a few grammar issues and simplifying some of the longer, more complex sentences.

I have also fixed one grammar mistake in that paragraph. Dsanad (discuss • contribs) 10:41, 15 November 2025 (UTC)