User:Med20a/Social cognitive theory/Adam12202 Peer Review

General info
Med20a, Jtm20dc, Haleymackinnon
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Med20a/Social cognitive theory
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Social cognitive theory

Evaluate the drafted changes
This article does a great job at adding some information that was not there before. For their lead, they did not add anything. I cannot comment on anything in that regard. The first paragraph they tackled was the History section. In this section, I felt they did a great job at summarizing the first paragraph. The original paragraph, on the actual article, is a little choppy and worded odd. In the sandbox, it feels much more refreshed and worded properly.

The second paragraph on their sandbox is the exact same as the original article, so there were no changes made.

The next section is the "Overview" section. There is only one paragraph and it focuses on the Behavioral Factors. In this paragraph, I felt they did a great job conjuring up this paragraph. The definition was clearly comprehendible and the example provided was also very helpful is fully understanding. What they added was not touched upon in the original article, so this seems like a key detail to add.

They also included a bulleted list of limitations that they would like to add to the future. They gave 3 very interesting topics to cover along with other small tweaks. I feel that this group has a short, but polished sandbox draft that is accurately conveying this article. I absolutely think as they add more work, it will start to really tie together. Overall, I found this draft to be well done!

--> Hi! Thank you so much for those tips. We will go and add to the Lead part of the article. We just want to collect all our ideas before the Lead is written. We will take all of these ideas into account, thank you again for your review.