Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2014/Collective action for social change motivation

Feedback
This chapter is very easy to read and follow. I have made some adjustments in the form of fixed typos, added punctuation, and broken up some long sentences into shorter ones. It is now just after 9am, and I have not finished reviewing and editing your chapter. I wish I got to your chapter sooner, because I don't think any changes made from now on will not count towards your final mark. I will keep going though.

Hope this helps.

Linssen (discuss • contribs) 22:09, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Update: This is a confusing sentence. I would probably break it up into two sentences. It's not quite clear what you were trying to say here:  "Perhaps an indication that these motives are stronger when the disadvantage is not endemic in the social or political structures and that they are more effective because the barrier to change might not be so difficult to overcome."

Linssen (discuss • contribs) 22:42, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Update: The following sentences: 'A fact that both studies recognised and aligned with the dynamic nature of social action. Context remains critical to our explanatory power.'

It is not quite clear how these two sentences follow on from the previous bits of paragraph. It sounds disjointed from the rest of the paragraph. Also, what fact were you referring to?

Linssen (discuss • contribs) 23:37, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Update Apart from doing some major restructuring of some of your sentences and paragraphs in the section "What about collective action on behalf of others?" (as I could kind of make sense of what you were trying to say, but it was very disjointed and sentences were very long and confusing in places) the following sentences I am unclear of:

A study using non-Muslim Dutch university students examined attitudes to discrimination against Muslim nationals (study 1). Are you talking about the Zomeren, Postmes, Spears and Bettache's (2011) study still? If so, you will have to restate this sentence. You may have to say something like: "In their study, Zomeren et al. examined two particular group situations..... The first study was conducted using non-Muslim Dutch...." or something to that effect, because at the moment it sounds as if you are referring to another study by someone else and the bit in braces needs to read something like (see study 1 in Zomeren et al., 2011).

A finding that is consistent with Thomas, Mavor and McGarty’s (2012) analysis supporting alternative causal pathways for efficacy and injustice. Not sure what you are saying here. Was the previous study's finding consistent with that of Thomas et al. (2012)?? If so you will have to restate this sentence. "Zomeren and collegues' results were however consistent with that of...." Or something like that.

Linssen (discuss • contribs) 01:36, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Update

I've just finished reviewing your chapter. I fixed a few minor typos and some punctuation in the last two sections :) It was most definitely a very interesting read and I enjoyed reading it.  Overall I think you did a great job!  Your layout also looks very clean and neat.  Well done!!

Linssen (discuss • contribs) 02:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

ShaunaB - Talk

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:54, 26 November 2014 (UTC)