Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Emotional self-efficacy

Feedback
Hi, I saw that you were looking for feedback. I don't have much, its looking really good overall. 1. I think the case studies work well and I like how they're linked by all being about the same person. 2. I think that you missed referring to figure 3 in the text. 3. You had quite a few apostrophe mistakes, like individual's where you needed individuals'. I changed all the ones I could find but I may have missed some. I hope this helps! U3170940 (discuss • contribs) 02:49, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey! Thanks so much for your edits and feedback it is much appreciated.

--U3190210 (discuss • contribs) 22:07, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

How to improve self-efficacy
Hi! Really liking how it's coming along! May I suggest to look into adding a section on improving self-efficacy? Can't wait to see the rest of your chapter! --U3169316 (discuss • contribs) 07:39, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Culture and self-efficacy
Hello! This chapter is really interesting, I like the specific topics you have covered about the variations in self-efficacy (gender, culture,etc.)I was wondering if you have found anything about the differences in individualistic and collectivist cultures regarding self-efficacy?--U3188019 (discuss • contribs) 00:54, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:16, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback
Looks good Amberley!

I made a few minor edits which you can see in the page history. The case study is excellent and really helped me understand what you found when researching.

I did notice some sweeping statements were made as if they were well-known facts, but they didn't have references. Perhaps you could squeeze a reference in if you have words to spare. (eg. In the SES section, you wrote 'ESE is a widely utilised sub-sector of self-efficacy theory and is a pivotal aspect of motivation and emotion theories and concepts.'). That's all I have - it's a really good chapter!

- Tia 03:34, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey Tia, thanks for your feedback. I have definitely taken it on board.

--U3190210 (discuss • contribs) 05:33, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Some general suggestions
Hey! Your chapter is looking really well developed and you’ve definitely put a lot of work in to it. I’ve just noticed a couple of things that could be fixed. •	Your internal links for self-efficacy are inconsistent. I personally would just internally link the first time you refer to it and remove any following links. •	“Synonymous with ESE. Where both terms are viewed as alternative labels for one another.“ – This feels like one sentence split into two. Maybe try using a linking word to begin your second sentence to improve flow. •	In your first paragraph in the culture section, I would internally link the first time you mention culture as opposed to the section. Other than those things, your chapter looks great!

--U3190229 (discuss • contribs) 05:17, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the in-depth feedback. I have utilised them all in my chapter, thanks!

--U3190210 (discuss • contribs) 05:33, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Some general suggestions
Hi Amberley, Your chapter is looking really good - it's organised and covered really well and answers the question. I just have a few suggestions I hope this helps! U3025324 (discuss • contribs) 04:09, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Your chapter starts with a direct quote from Bandura - this would usually require a page number to be included in APA formatting.
 * Your figure 1 has two captions - one within the image and one outside. This is confusing. Did you create this yourself? If so I would edit the image to remove the caption 'figure 5..." and add some details in the caption for figure 1 relating to the source. If you are using someone else's image I would consider re-doing this yourself, or adding a reference in the caption to where you have gotten it from.
 * Under Age you have a reference: as (cited in Alessandri et al., 2015), but no information as to who is being cited.
 * Where citing multiple references these should be listed in alphabetical order. E.g under learning you have: (Millioni et al., 2015; Alessandri et al., 2009)
 * Check the capitalisation of journal titles in your references. For example: Association Between Adolescent Suicide Ideation, Suicide Attempts and Emotional Self-Efficacy

Hey, thanks for your suggestions they were extremely helpful. I have now made these changes to my page. Thanks again! --U3190210 (discuss • contribs) 04:40, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

{{MEBF/2020
 * 1=


 * 1) Overall, this is an excellent chapter that successfully uses psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
 * 2) A key strength was that the chapter embraces the Wikiversity platform (e.g., excellent use of in-text links) and provides excellent embedded case study progression to illustrate key points.
 * 3) The main area for potential improvement is in the quality of written expression.
 * 4) For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits.
 * 2=


 * 1) Relevant theoretical perspectives are well selected, described, integrated, and explained. A key strength of this chapter is its comprehensive theoretical coverage.
 * 2) What was labelled "physiological" I think might be better described as demographic or individual differences - I've changed this in some places.
 * 3) Perhaps the cognitive aspects could be unpacked a bit further because, at the end of the study, SE comes to down to cognitions.
 * 3=


 * 1) Relevant research is reviewed and discussed in relation to theory, but some key research reviews or studies could be considered in more detail
 * 2) When describing important research findings, consider including a bit more detail about the methodology and indicating the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
 * 3) Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.
 * 4=


 * 1) Written expression
 * 2) Overall, the quality of written expression is good to very good.
 * 3) "People" is often a better term than "individuals"; similarly "participants" is preferred to "subjects".
 * 4) Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead, use section linking.
 * 5) The chapter benefited from a well developed Overview and Conclusion, with clear focus question(s). Some more practical, take-home/self-help messages in the Conclusion could be helpful.
 * 6) Layout
 * 7) The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections.
 * 8) Avoid having sections with only one sub-section.
 * 9) Learning features
 * 10) Excellent use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia and Wikiversity articles.
 * 11) Very good use of image(s).
 * 12) Good use of table(s).
 * 13) Very good use of feature box(es).
 * 14) No use of quiz(zes).
 * 15) Excellent use of a progressive case study.
 * 16) Grammar
 * 17) Use serial commas - it is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists.
 * 18) APA style
 * 19) Use double- rather than single-quote marks for emphasis.
 * 20) Citations are not in full APA style. For example:
 * 21) Multiple citations in parentheses should be listed in alphabetical order by first author surname.
 * 22) Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets.
 * 23) References use correct APA style.
 * 24) References are not in full APA style. For example:
 * 5=

}} -- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:20, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) ~30 logged, useful, social contributions with direct links to evidence
 * 2) Thankyou for your excellent social contributions - much appreciated! Bonus marks added {{smile}

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC)