Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2025/Stockholm syndrome 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 sub-title are correctly worded and formatted 2. Headings Under-developed, 1-level heading structure – develop further, perhaps using a 2-level structure for larger section(s) Adopt closer alignment between sub-title, more refined focus questions, and top-level headings 3. Overview Basic development Needs scenario Image added Needs evocative description of the problem/topic Focus questions lack development and focus 4. Key points Limited development of key points with relevant citations to the best psychological science about this topic 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 Placeholder 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) Focus table content directly on the topic/question 7. References Very good All references need to be cited in the text Check and correct APA referencing style: italicisation 8. Resources See also Excellent External links One of two required relevant external links provided Target an international audience; Australians only represent 0.33% of the world population 9. User page Very 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. 10. Social contribution Good – two out of three types of contributions made with with direct link(s) to evidence. The other type of contribution is making: comments on the talk pages of other chapters (past or current)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:22, 28 August 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 The title and sub-title are correctly worded and formatted 2. Headings 2-level heading structure Consider the flow (e.g., seems odd to start straight into instinct theory) 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 at the start of this section; I moved an image into the feature box to help attract reader interest Simplify/abbreviate the description of the problem/topic. Move detail into subsequent sections. Integrate the "This chapter will unpack" dot points with the focus questions. Only keep focus questions. Use these to sharpen up the heading structure. 4. Key points Excellent – key points are well developed for each section 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 Writing is clear, concise, and easy to follow Excellent use of citations Use "&" instead of "and" inside parentheses Good balance of theory and research Conclusion is well developed 5. Figure One or more relevant figure(s) 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) Consider decreasing image size to make it less dominant in relation to the text (done) Well done on creating and uploading your own image! – this can also be listed as a social contribution 6. Learning feature Add in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to relevant book chapters (see Tutorial 2) Promising use of more scenarios/examples/case studies Excellent use of quiz question(s) Also consider using one or more tables to summarise key information 7. References Very good What are the most relevant systematic reviews/meta-analyses about this topic? Check and correct APA referencing style: italicisation) include dois where available instead of other links 8. Resources See also Very good Use alphabetical order External links Very good Use sentence casing 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 At least three different types of contributions with direct link(s) to evidence The comment link should be more direct to the contribution (see social contributions).

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:14, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Suggestion to add meta-analyses into the chapter

Hi, I was just looking at your amazing chapter which is coming along fantastically!! I notice you didn't have any meta analyses in your references (which is apart of the marking rubric and suggested form James) and I thought I could provide some to help you:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gulnaz-Anjum/publication/329643210_Intimate_Partner_Violence_and_Psychological_Distress_Mediating_Role_of_Stockholm_Syndrome/links/5c136d664585157ac1c0c41e/Intimate-Partner-Violence-and-Psychological-Distress-Mediating-Role-of-Stockholm-Syndrome.pdf : This could be added into the first section “stockholm syndrome and emotion”. It adds that Stockholm syndrome can go beyond kidnapping/hostage situations and it can manifest from partner violence expanding the effects of trauma bonding beyond the rare kidnapping cases.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1080/00048670701261178?casa_token=wFbdCFKRz0gAAAAA%3AgqrTa8fKwxvFi2i1gXuDY-FEAK9e0vfDlf9wbh5y6c_UbZtbDw-Qsf82WYJIXtHMZzdcAsJXvgw :This meta analysis could be inserted into “environmental conditions” section to further support the mechanisms mentioned.

Sincerely U3214459 U3214459 (discuss • contribs) 05:45, 18 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 very good chapter that makes very good use of psychological theory and research to address a real-world phenomenon or problem The main area(s) for potential improvement: quality of written expression Very good use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Very good Engaging scenario or case study in a feature box with a relevant image Clearly explains the psychological problem or phenomenon Clarity of written expression can be improved The focus questions are very good The focus questions could be improved by: being open-ended rather than closed-ended Theory Excellent—key theories are very well explained and applied Builds exceptionally well on Wikipedia articles Doesn't build on related chapters Insightful depth is provided about key theory(ies) Excellent use of tables, figures, and/or lists to clearly convey key theoretical information Key citations are well used Excellent use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Very 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 Very 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 Integration Excellent integration between theory and research Conclusion Excellent summary and conclusion Key points are well summarised The focus questions are addressed Style Written expression The quality of written expression is OK but there are several aspects which are below professional standard Use active (e.g., "this chapter explores" or "this chapter has explored") rather than passive voice (e.g., "this chapter will explore" or "this chapter has explored") [1][2] Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") instead of 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") in the main text. 1st of 2nd person can work well for case studies or feature boxes. Remove weasel words—they add bulk without improving meaning Layout The chapter is reasonably well structured, with major sections using sub-sections The headings could be more clearly aligned with the focus questions Grammar The grammar for some/many 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') Check and make correct use of commas Spelling Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour) APA style Use serial commas[3][4] Use sentence casing for disorders, therapies, theories, etc. Express numbers under 10 using words (e.g., two) and 10 and over using numerals (e.g., 99) Use double (not single) quotation marks "to introduce a word or phrase used ... as slang, or as an invented or coined expression" (APA Style 7th ed., 2020, p. 159) Direct quotes need page numbers—even better, communicate about concepts in your own words Figures Reasonably well captioned Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text using APA style Tables Very 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.): Citations should be included within sentences (i.e., before the ending period) In parentheses, a comma is needed between the author and the year Use ampersand (&) inside parentheses and "and" outside parentheses References use very good APA style: Check and correct use of italicisation Separate page numbers using an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) 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. Reasonably good use of figure(s) Excellent use of table(s) Very good use of feature box(es) Excellent use of scenarios, case studies, or examples Good use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) Basic use of the "See also" section Also include links to related book chapters Add more links Basic use of the "External links" section Add more links Social contribution ~8 logged, useful, mostly moderate contributions with direct links to evidence ~8 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.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:53, 5 October 2025 (UTC)