Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2025/Spirituality and mental health

Comments

Hi Alicia,

Great work on your theoretical writing in your chapter so far. I can see that you have structured your focus questions quite strictly and thats ok but you might want to reword the last one 'What is the Humanistic approach and how does it contribute to improving mental health in clinical practice?' to something more like; which psych theories contribute to improving mental health?

The reason I think this could be a good idea is so that you can incorporate the SDT theory or even Maslow's hierarchy model to help you demonstrate the importance of spirituality in mental health.
I think your table of findings is a great way of getting info across simply. have you considered what you want the reader to take from your chapter at the end? that might help your direction as you write the chapter.

Good luck,

Ari --Ubaldo111 (discuss • contribs) 05:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Initial suggestions

@AliciaEdwards1212: 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/Mental health
  • Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Spirituality
• 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 11:21, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Heading casing

Hi AliciaEdwards1212. 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 ~~~~

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 The title and/or sub-title were not correctly worded and/or formatted (fixed) User name removed – authorship is as per the list of topics and the page's editing history 2. Headings See earlier comment about Heading casing Basic, 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development (expand) The Overview and Conclusion should not have sub-headings Definition(s) tend to be pedestrian headings. Incorporate definitional material into the Overview and/or subsequent sections with embedded inter-wiki link(s) to further information. 3. Overview A scenario or case study is presented in a feature box at the start of this section. Add an image to the scenario to help attract reader interest. Abbreviate the scenario to make it punchier (or consider distributing this scenario throughout the chapter) A brief, evocative description of the problem/topic is provided A brief, evocative description of the problem/topic is planned Description of the problem/topic should be brief and evocative. Keep this section user-friendly. Move detail into subsequent section. Add a brief, evocative description of the problem/topic Simplify/abbreviate the description of the problem/topic to make it more user-friendly. Move detail into subsequent sections. Use present, rather than future, tense Use 3rd person perspective (except 1st/2nd person can work for feature boxes/scenarios) Label the feature box with focus questions with "Focus questions:" One of the four proposed focus questions is relevant to the topic (see the sub-title) Adopt closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings 4. Key points Looks and feels like unacknowledged genAI content which would be a violation of academic integrity Insufficient citation Start with a better heading structure and set of focus questions so that the key points are focused on the best psychological science (theory and research) about this topic Avoid providing too much background information. Aim to briefly summarise general concepts and provide internal links to relevant book chapters and/or Wikipedia pages for further information. Then focus most of the content on directly answering the core question(s) posed by the chapter sub-title. Use Australian spelling Strive for an integrated balance of the best psychological theory and research about this topic, with practical examples Conclusion (the most important section): Hasn't been developed 5. Figure One or more relevant figure(s) is/are presented and captioned The figure caption(s) provide(s) a clear, appropriately detailed description that is meaningfully connected with 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 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 Consider including one or more quiz question(s) about the take-home messages Promising use of one or more table(s), but content lacks sufficient evidence of direct consultation of relevant academic work Add table caption and cite the table at least once in the text 7. References Very good Well done on identifying relevant systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses All references need to be cited in the text Only cite sources you directly consulted Check and correct APA referencing style: capitalisation include hyperlinked dois page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) cite all authors if there are 20 or less 8. Resources See also Not developed – needs work (see Tutorial 2) External links Not developed – needs work (see Tutorial 2) 9. User page Basic – minimal, but sufficient Very 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 Links provide insufficient evidence of at least three different types of contributions To add direct links to evidence: view the page history, select the version of the page before and after your contributions, click "compare selected revisions", and paste the comparison URL on your user page. For more info, see Making and summarising social contributions.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:28, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Focus question clarification and theory idea

Hello!

Great topic choice and very interesting research for you I am sure. Visually, the page is looking really appealing and I like your attention to detail on the opening scenario.

One of your focus questions is "what is the difference between spirituality and religion?", however, I did not come across the answer to this in your content so far. It might be difficult to answer this question directly, and if you are still interested in keeping it within your research, my suggestion is that spirituality is referred to as a deeply personal and individualistic process, rather than religion, which is seemingly more organised around specific traditions and practices.

In saying that, spirituality can be found within religion and the two can overlap, so it might be difficult to find complete distinctions overall.

One theory that I had in mind to support your spirituality argument can be found in Carl Jung's theory of individuation, which is said to be about bridging the gap between the conscious and unconscious or the self and the ego, as a process of self development and spirituality. It also lends itself to the idea of being social creatures and a part of the 'whole' in a mystical sense, yet, also reaching towards the individual evolution and actualisation. I see you have already referred to Maslow in your writing, so there is potential to make that argument stronger by adding Jung's theory alongside it.

Well done! Looking forward to reading your finished chapter. Danikollas (discuss • contribs) 04:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Feedback

Great work Alicia,

your written component is off to a good start. One adjustment I would suggest for your chapter is ensuring the figures you refer to are ordered and situated accordingly to when they are referred to within the text. I noticed in the first few sections, your figure numbers were scattered with the first figure being labelled as figure 2. I just thought this may be distracting and confusing for readers as they try to grasp your topic and develop an understanding.

Additionally, regarding your references, don't forget to format them correctly according to APA guidelines and the desired assessment format. I noticed there were a few citations that deviated from these APA guidelines and had certain titles italicised when they should not have been. Additionally, as per the assessment guidelines, don't forget to list your resources with a hanging indent.

Lastly, as a frequent comment I have examined across other books, don't forget the headings should use sentence casing, where only the first letter of the sentence heading is capitalised (e.g., 'Self-determination theory' rather than 'Self-Determination Theory'. On this as well, consider shorter alternatives for some of your headings. Ultimately, headings should be an extremely short sentence, of only few words at the most, describing what the following content is going to be focused on. If you find it difficult to use these shorter headings to describe the content, utilise subheadings where necessary to break the heading down into its relevant components and sections.

Aside from this, good start on your chapter. I look forward to reading it in its final form. Good luck! Sebastian Siakimotu (discuss • contribs) 21:27, 6 October 2024 (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 Overly complicated 4-level structure – simplify Excellent alignment between sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings 3. Overview Excellent – Scenario, image, evocative description of the problem/topic, and focus questions A scenario or case study is presented in a feature box with an image at the start of this section Abbreviate the scenario or split it and present other parts later to illustrate key points in corresponding sections A clear description of the problem/topic is planned or presented Focus questions are aligned with sub-title and top-level headings 4. Key points Excellent – key points are well developed for each section It is unlikely that all planned aspects can be reasonably covered within the final word count (the plan is already over the maximum word count for the book chapter!), so be selective and concentrate on the important aspects in order to address the question in the sub-title The writing style is clear and easy to follow Reasonably good coverage of theory; strive to balance the theoretical content with critical review of relevant research Good use of citations For sections with sub-sections, provide key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings Avoid providing too much background information. Aim to briefly summarise general concepts and provide internal links to relevant book chapters and/or Wikipedia pages for further information. Focus most of the chapter on directly answering the core question(s) posed by the chapter sub-title. Conclusion is underway Keep the conclusion concise 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 Excellent - Relevant figure(s) presented, captioned, and cited Figure caption(s) provide(s) a clear, appropriately detailed description that is meaningfully connected with the main text Cite each figure at least once in the main text using APA style (e.g., see Figure 1) 6. Learning feature Promising in-text interwiki links for first mention of key terms to Wikipedia and/or book chapters Promising use of 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 Promising use of table(s) I like the idea behind this table. But it may be overly detailed for the chapter (which is not about the relationship between spiritualy and psychopathology) Add table caption Cite each table at least once in the text Include citations for sources of information presented in the table 7. References Excellent At least one relevant systematic review and/or meta-analysis has been identified Check and correct APA referencing style: capitalisation 8. Resources See also Excellent External links Excellent Use sentence casing Use alphabetical order 9. User page Excellent 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 Good – two out of three types of contributions made with direct link(s) to evidence. The other type of contribution is making: comments on the talk pages of other chapters (past or current) To add direct links to evidence of Wikiversity edits or comments: view the page history, select the version of the page before and after your contributions, click "compare selected revisions", and paste the comparison URL on your user page. For more info, see Making and summarising social contributions. This was demonstrated in Tutorial 02.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:17, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Feedback

Hi Ginger,

Well done so far, great book chapter I learned a lot. I don't have much feedback on the actual content as you have done a very good job, however, with your references, just be careful with APA 7th edition referencing, especially with capilisation. Otherwise, looks great! Thanks, Grace U3253215 (discuss • contribs) 01:51, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Grace! U3214459 (discuss • contribs) 02:53, 27 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 an excellent chapter that successfully uses psychological theory and research to address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem Good use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims In some, better use could be made of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) genAI use is appropriately acknowledged For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Well developed Engaging scenario or case study in a feature box with a relevant image Clearly explains the psychological problem or phenomenon The focus questions are very good Ideally, research would be incorporated into FQs 1-3 rather than being a separate question Consider swapping order of FQ2 and FQ3 Theory Very good to excellent—key theories are well explained and applied; minor areas for improvement Rogers focused on the fully functioning person; Maslow focused on self-actualisation Builds exceptionally well on Wikipedia articles Doesn't build on related chapters (by embedding interwiki links for key terms) Insightful 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 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 Excellent emphasis on systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses In some places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Excellent critical thinking about relevant research is evident Integration Excellent integration between theory and research Conclusion Excellent summary and conclusion Key points are well summarised The focus questions are addressed Clear take-home message(s) Style Written expression The quality of written expression is excellent Bullet points are overused. Develop more of the bullet point statements into full sentences and paragraphs. "Individuals" is overused. "People" is usually a clearer term than "individuals". Use individuals to highlight each person separately (e.g., “individual test scores”) and people when referring to humans more generally. Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections Grammar Possessive apostrophes are not used correctly (e.g., cats vs cat's vs cats') APA style Use serial commas[1][2] Figures Briefly captioned; provide more detail to help connect the figure to the text Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text using APA style Citations use very good APA Style (7th ed.): List multiple citations in alphabetical order by first author surname (e.g., Giraffe, 2024; Zebra & Aardvark, 2020) References use excellent APA style: & missing from 1st reference; : should be , Learning features Overall, the learning features are excellent Excellent use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles Add more 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) No 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) Basic use of the "See also" section Add more links Basic use of the "External links" section Add more links Social contribution ~25 logged, useful, mostly minor/moderate/major contributions with direct links to evidence ~3 logged contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess. See tutorials for guidance about how to get direct links to evidence. Thanks very much for your extensive contributions

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:55, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

AI slop

@Jtneill: please explain how the restored picture of random psychedelic imagery meaningfully illustrates the topic. Dronebogus (discuss • contribs) 01:33, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I've improved the Figure 5 caption to better explain its relevance to the topic. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:33, 10 April 2026 (UTC)