Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Positive body image development

Heading casing

Hi Stefany, for my social contribution I have helped you edit some of your headings (only their casing) as James had flagged me for having capitals throughout my writing. To help save you some marks I hope it is okay that I have taken the initiative change these. I think this is a really interesting topic you have chosen and something that I feel affects most people within modern society. I'm looking forward to reading your chapter! --SammyTabrett (discuss • contribs) 06:51, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion for overview case study

Well done on your chapter so far! I am looking forward to reading it. I have a suggestion about the case study. I suggest including an image in the overview that is related to your case study. Nabila.Tursun (discuss • contribs) 13:28, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

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 10:25, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Topic development feedback

The topic development submission 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 for editing changes made whilst reviewing this chapter plan. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Topic development marks are available via UCLearn. Note that marks are based on what was available before the due date.

Title The title is correctly worded and formatted The sub-title is correctly worded and formatted The wording and/or capitalisation of the title is incorrect. Be consistent with the book table of contents. Headings See earlier comment about Heading casing Excellent – Well developed 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic There are some grammar/spelling errors Overview Excellent - Scenario, image, evocative description of the problem/topic, relevant psychological theory/research, and focus questions Move the scenario or case study into a feature box (with an image) to the start of this section to help catch reader interest 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 Key points Excellent – key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations There is a risk that this plan might run over the max word count, so be prepared to be selective about choosing only the most relevant theories/research to address what it PBI is, why it matters, and how it can be developed Promising balance of theory and research. Ideally, synthesise and provide examples. Conclusion (the most important section): Well 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?) Figure Excellent - A relevant figure is presented, captioned, and cited 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 example(s)/case study(ies) Consider including more examples/case studies, quiz question(s), table(s) etc. References Good For APA referencing style, check and correct: capitalisation italicisation Resources See also Excellent External links Very good Use sentence casing User page Created – minimal, but sufficient Very brief description about self provided – 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. Link provided to book chapter Social contribution Two out of three different types of contributions with direct link(s) to evidence Also contribute to Wikiversity book chapter talk/discussion pages

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:25, 28 September 2023 (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 a good to very good chapter. It makes very good use of psychological theory and OK use of research to address a real-world phenomenon or problem. Excellent/Very good/Reasonably good/Basic use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims Use of academic, peer-reviewed citations is lacking in some places (e.g., see the tags) Insufficient use of primary, peer-reviewed sources as citations Move non-peer reviewed links into the external links section 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 interest by presenting a case study and/or scenario with an image in a feature box Clearly explains the problem or phenomenon Clear focus questions Theory A very good range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Build more strongly on related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters) Very good depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Effective use of tables, figures, and/or lists are to help clearly convey key theoretical information Key citations are well used Insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Some use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Reasonably good review of relevant research More detail about key studies would be ideal Any systematic reviews or meta-analyses in this area? Insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Basic 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 Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags) Integration Very good/Good/Reasonably good/Basic/Insufficient integration between theory and research The chapter places more emphasis on theory than on research Conclusion Very good summary and conclusion Key points are well summarised Add practical, take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is good but there are several aspects which are below professional standard Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections Include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see tags) Grammar The grammar for some/many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags) Consider using a grammar checking tool Another option is to share draft work with peersmb and ask for their assistance Check and make correct use of commas Check and correct use of that vs. who Check and correct use of possessive apostrophes (e.g., cats vs cat's vs cats')[1] Abbreviations Only use abbreviations such as e.g., i.e., et al., etc. inside parentheses, otherwise spell out Spelling Some words are misspelt (e.g., see the tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages.## 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[2]. See explanatory video (1 min) Express numbers < 10 using words (e.g., two) and >= 10 and over using numerals (e.g., 99) Figures Figures are reasonably well captioned Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text Tables Use APA style for captions. See example Refer to each Table using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation) Citations are not in full APA style (7th ed.). For example: A full stop is needed after "et al" (i.e., "et al.") because it is an abbreviation of et alii Move non-peer-reviewed sources to the external links section References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and correct use of capitalisation[3] Check and correct use of italicisation Separate page numbers using an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Include hyperlinked dois Move non-peer-reviewed sources to the external links section Learning features Very good use of learning features Reasonably good 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 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 links to non-peer-reviewed sources to the external links section Reasonably good use of image(s) Excellent use of table(s) Excellent use of feature box(es) Reasonably good use of case studies or examples Reasonably good 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 Reasonably good use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Use sentence casing Use alphabetical order Include sources in parentheses Move external links to the external links section Reasonably good use of external links in the "External links" section Use sentence casing Use alphabetical order Social contribution ~3 logged, minor social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:13, 13 November 2023 (UTC)