tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1950279164577762341.post5705563781136727955..comments2023-10-24T19:35:29.223+11:00Comments on Social Psychology: Stereotypes in Australia: Why do we stereotype?Emmahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17616718551524269009noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1950279164577762341.post-37457395731813389612007-10-03T21:37:00.000+10:002007-10-03T21:37:00.000+10:00Official Essay FeedbackOverallA very solid effort....<B>Official Essay Feedback</B><BR/><BR/>Overall<BR/>A very solid effort. The main consideration for your writing style is the integration and application of theory to the research question. By linking principles to concrete examples of discrimination/stereotypes concerning Aboriginals you demonstrate a clear understanding of the application of key psychological principles. A very solid effort, congratulations.<BR/><BR/>Theory<BR/>It is important to more effectively link theory to examples of stereotype processes. You succeeded in doing this for many of your sections - well done. You mention a host of key theories, but the linking and communication of a complex interplay between these psychological processes is a bit lacking. As mentioned again below, linking things like homogeneity bias and categorization is key; which can then be brought back to methods by which we make shortcuts and use heuristics. Many of the theories you examined are highly related and it did not come across that there was a strong interaction of these processes and that they all occur, rather it read a little more that they were alternate explanations (theories) to each other.<BR/><BR/>Research<BR/>You support many of your comments and assertion with research evidence and highlight several good studies that demonstrate examples of your key theoretical principles. You missed out on research suggesting the role of the media and government as institutions which make use of stereotypes in their reporting of Aboriginals as a maintenance factor in these beliefs.<BR/><BR/>Written Expression<BR/>You have quite an extensive reference list presented in APA style (the first person I have marked who did not make a single mistake). Your readability was good but there were a few simple errors which could have been corrected with a few more instances of proof reading. Your format was quite accessible and easy on the eyes and your narrative style was sufficiently structures such that you did not require section titles. A major criticism is, as you acknowledge, lack of addressing how to change stereotypes. Regarding your word count, there are few sentences and paragraphs that deal with similar topics that could have been collapsed together to save you a few hundred words. For example when you discuss the similarity between out-group homogeneity bias and categorization. Finally, linking the psychological processes/theories back to examples of how we make these mistakes is key in making your message come across clearly. You succeeded in this regard for illusionary correlation, but SIT was completely missed and a bit under explored.<BR/><BR/>Online Engagement<BR/>Well done for your online engagement. You kept readers up to date with your research and topics. You had many good comments with interesting feedback and replied in kind. Well done also on including a poll to encourage others to interact. Other ideas to increase you marks are; sharing resources and links, posting drafts, including links or videos to interesting videos etc.Orangehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06505161230780190238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1950279164577762341.post-77835324629308777542007-09-02T21:09:00.000+10:002007-09-02T21:09:00.000+10:00Quick comments:- This could do with a proofread- Y...Quick comments:<BR/>- This could do with a proofread<BR/>- You will lose marks for being over 1500 words - consider editing to 1500 max.James Neillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01303497574192570961noreply@blogger.com