Talk:Excitation-transfer theory

Wiki Education assignment: COMM 500 Theory and Literature of Communication

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 15 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SMMC2002 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Raiyaka, IsabelGue.

— Assignment last updated by IsabelGue (talk) 03:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Major edits made (and why) and areas for further elaboration User:SMMC2002/Excitation-transfer theory(Student Editor)

Before making any edits to this article, the only built-out areas were the lead and historical sections (meaning that all the other sections were added by me). Although the historical section appeared to be longer in terms of how much content was given, a majority of the text were quotations taken directly from the references provided (which violates Wikipedia’s rules on plagiarism). Thus, there was little to nothing for me to work with regarding building out additional sections of the theory based on what was previously included. In order to expand the article as much as I did, I added 10 additional sources that I thoroughly analyzed to add detailed information defining excitation-transfer theory.

Lead

The lead of this draft has been not only elongated but also built out to include an overview of what the article later elaborates on, which I think accurately reflects the new content I added. The introductory sentence of the lead adds context to the theory and how it applies to the communication field, as I feel it is essential for a user to know before reading further into the theory. The second sentence provides a basic and clear definition of excitation-transfer theory, followed by a third sentence that gives context regarding who and when the theory was created. The entire lead (the first five paragraphs of the article) does provide a brief description of the major sections I created in the article about the theory. The only piece of information that is included in the lead but not present in the article is the definition of hedonic valences. The reason why I included a definition of this term is because there were no current Wikipedia articles that I could link to help the reader understand what it meant. Other than this term, everything else included in the lead is expanded on in the rest of the article. I do think the lead is as concise as it can be without leaving any major details out from what is present in the article.

Content

Every piece of information I added is relevant and essential to understanding the many components of this theory. Although each section can be further built out by a future editor, I feel that the information I included provides the reader with a good grasp of what the theory entails and how complex the elements of it are. While doing research on the theory, I began to notice that not many articles or published books that explained the excitation-transfer process were very recent. There were, however, some articles and research studies I incorporated that were written within the last 15 years. This is an improvement from the pieces of literature the article initially included, as most of them were published around 20-30 years ago. Overall, the content currently in the article is as up-to-date as possible. According to my research on the subject, there is no content in the article that is missing entirely or does not belong. As I mentioned previously, areas I created could be built out further, but there is no area where I think a component of the theory is completely absent. As this topic does not address historically underrepresented populations or topics, it is not filling one of Wikipedia's equity gaps.

Tone and Balance

As I wrote everything in a neutral and balanced manner, I feel that the content itself is neutral and unbiased. No claims made in the article are heavily biased or appear to favor one particular study or piece of literature. No specific viewpoints are over or underrepresented. In addition, the way the content is written does not appear to be trying to persuade the reader to favor one position over the other.

Sources and References

Every single sentence I have added includes at least one citation from the piece of literature I pulled the information from. The content in the article does accurately reflect the sources I have cited with them. The sources are as current as possible and thoroughly reflect the available literature I was able to find on the topic. Although some of the sources are written or co-written by Zillmann, there is a diverse spectrum of authors for sources that provide different viewpoints on the theory. All of the sources are either peer-reviewed journal articles or books published on the theory. Every source linked does function correctly and leads to the citation it is referring to.

Organization

I do feel that the content I added is well-written, concise and relatively easy for any reader to understand. From my proofreading of the article, I did not find any grammatical or spelling errors. In adding many sections that break up the components of the article, I think the article now reflects the major points of the theory in an organized and understandable manner.

Images and Media

I did not end up adding any images or media to this article. Although I initially planned to create a graphic like the one included in the Canvas module on this topic, I thought that what I would have made may have been too similar to the original (meaning that it would violate Wikipedia’s copyright policies). I also thought to include an image of Zillmann, given that he is the creator of the theory. I ran into an issue, however, because from the websites Wikipedia recommended using when finding appropriate images to incorporate, no images of Zillmann were available. With the article being edited in the future, I think this would be a great place for the next editor to build out (i.e. creating a unique graphic that represents the theory or finding an image of Zillmann that Wikipedia will allow to be included).  

Overall impressions

Overall, I would say I definitely improved the article in a major way (as I mentioned in detail above). The content I added to this article provides much more extensive information on the excitation-transfer process through the use of detailed sections that define the components and application of the theory. To add on, the content now provides readers with a better understanding of excitation-transfer theory and how is applied in research.

The main sections I feel that could be further built out by the next editor are the applications and areas for future research sections, given that they have the least amount of content associated with them. Specifically, the applications section could benefit from more information on what a majority of studies found when applying this theory to research (given that the information I have now is more of an overview of how this theory would apply to media violence, aggression, and sexual media). I also have a sentence under the application heading that makes note of additional areas where this theory has been applied through research. Although I do not elaborate on them, I have included citations to articles where excitation-transfer theory is applied to these areas that a future editor can use to build out these subheadings with. In regards to the future research section, future editors could also pull from the references I cited to include more information in this area. SMMC2002 (talk) 01:44, 17 December 2023 (UTC)