Faculty of Health, School of Psychology and Counselling PYB202 SOCIAL AND ORGANISATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY Assignment 1 Marking Criteria: Advertisement Analysis (1500 words, 25% weighting in final mark) Grade (approx.) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Mark 5 – 4.5 4 3.5 3 - 2.5 2 - 1 Mark 10 - 9 8 7 6 - 5 4 - 1 Mark 15 - 14 13 - 12 11 - 10 9 - 7 6 - 1 Define/explain type of persuasion strategy (5 marks per strategy) • Very clear, concise definition of strategy type • Exceptionally clear and appropriate explanation of the psychological process • Clear, concise definition of strategy type • Clear and appropriate explanation of the psychological process, but not exceptional • Mostly clear, concise definition of strategy type, but with notable issues • Mostly clear and appropriate explanation of psychological process, but with notable issues • Definition of strategy type was quite unclear • Explanation of the psychological process was understandable, but quite confusing or unclear in parts • Definition of strategy type was very unclear or incoherent • Explanation of the psychological process was very confusing or mischaracterised Explain use of strategy in advertisement (15 marks per strategy) • Description makes it very easy to identify strategy in ad • Each element of the strategy used in the ad explained very clearly and thoroughly • Provided several nonobvious or creative insights or analysis that enriched the reader’s understanding • Description makes it easy to identify strategy in ad • Each element of the strategy used in the ad explained clearly and thoroughly, with minor exceptions • Provided one or a few nonobvious or creative insights or analysis that enriched the reader’s understanding • Description identifies strategy in ad, but requires moderate effort from the reader to understand • Most elements of the strategy used in the ad explained clearly and thoroughly, but with notable or frequent exceptions • Provided insights or analysis that slightly enriched the reader’s understanding • Description identifies strategy in ad, but is quit unclear and/or the example does not clearly reflect the strategy – the reader is left not quite sure what the example is • A minority of elements of the strategy used in the ad explained clearly and thoroughly, with most less clear or with major issues • Insights and analysis were almost all obvious (e.g., very similar to lecture content)– did little to enrich the reader’s understanding • Description fails to adequately identify strategy in ad, provides a very poor example, or has a mismatch between the example and the strategy – the reader is left with little idea about the strategy from the description, or concludes that the strategy was mis-classified • Description of elements of the strategy is very hard to follow or missing critical elements • Insights or analysis were logically flawed or incoherently argued – the reader is left confused or with no greater understanding Explain likely effectiveness of strategy (10 marks per strategy) • Identification of a very clearly defined and plausible target audience • Clear statement about likely level of effectiveness, justified using a clear and convincing argument • Identification of a reasonably clearly defined and plausible target audience • Reasonably clear statement about likely level of effectiveness, justified using a generally clear and convincing argument • Identification of plausible target audience, but with some vagueness • Somewhat clear statement about likely level of effectiveness, with moderate issues in justification, clarity, convincingness • Quite vague or overly general identification of target audience, and/or doubtful plausibility • Includes statement about likely level of effectiveness, but with very significant issues in justification, clarity, convincingness • Very unclear, incoherent, or implausible identification of target audience (based on their description) • Statement about likely level of effectiveness circular or incoherent, with a very unconvincing or unclear explanation and justification General (10 marks) • Near-perfect grammar and spelling • Exceptionally good logical structure and flow between points and sections • Met all formatting guidelines • Very good grammar and spelling • Clear logical structure and flow between points and sections, but with some minor issues • Met formatting guidelines, but with some minor issues • Good grammar and spelling • Good logical structure and flow between points and sections, but with some moderate issues • Met formatting guidelines for length and style, with some moderate issues • Generally good grammar and spelling, but with several notable issues • Structure and flow between points and sections acceptable, but with some serious issues. • Generally met formatting guidelines, but with many moderate or some serious issues • Poor to very poor grammar and spelling for this level • Very substantial issues in logical structure and flow. • Many serious or some very serious failures to meet formatting guidelines