Social Psychology
Fall 2007
Reading List and Class Schedule
Class Announcements
Links
for Social Psychology and More
Back to Dr. Harton's home page
Fall 2007
|
Class Information |
Instructor Information |
|
400:264:01 |
Dr. Helen C. Harton |
|
Baker 315 |
Baker 357 |
|
W |
273-2235; harton@uni.edu |
Office Hours: W 2-3, F 11-12, 2-3; pretty much any time I’m
around
2) Articles in the grad mailbox room.
Make copies of them/print them out!!
Course
Description: In this class we will
explore twelve major areas of social psychology. Besides the broad overview of
each area provided by the Fiske text, we will generally focus on 2-3 theories
each week in depth. Social psychology has been defined as “an attempt to
understand and explain how the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of individuals
are influenced by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of others"
(Allport, 1954). This course will deal with the theory, research, and
methodology of social psychology, including both classic and contemporary
approaches. As one of the sciences of human
behavior, social psychology has many implications for areas such as
industrial/organizational, clinical, and school psychology, and I encourage you
to relate the research we discuss in class to your area of interest during
discussions. The course will primarily be discussion-based, although I will
sometimes give introductions to an area or provide you with further information
about research findings.
Course
Requirements:
Class discussion 25% Grades will be distributed as follows:
Midterm exam 20% 93-100 = A; 90-92 = A-; 87-89 = B+;
Final exam 25% 83-86 = B; etc.
Research proposal 20%
Proposal presentation 10%
Class discussion. Active class discussion is essential to the functioning of the class. You are expected to contribute meaningfully (thoughtful, relevant, critical comments) to class discussions. While mere attendance is not enough to get a good grade for this component, it is imperative in that you can’t participate if you’re not here. You should read the readings carefully and critically before class and come to class with specific questions or comments about them to add to the discussion. Think about things like how the research or theory relates to other research you know about, how you could test the theory, criticisms and solutions of the theory or area, etc. I will drop your one lowest discussion grade. Participation (frequency and quality) will be graded each week on roughly the following scale:
0 = absent
2 = attended but didn’t participate at all or very much (below average)
3 = comments or questions relevant, but didn’t involve much insight (average)
4 = comments or questions relevant and insightful (good)
5 = several comments or questions showed a significant contribution (excellent)
If we can’t get a good (and fairly equal) amount of discussion going, I reserve the right to require reaction papers on the readings as well—these would be 1-2 page informal papers about your thoughts and reactions on one or more of the week’s readings. If the majority of the class decides to, we can require these papers, which would be graded on roughly the same scale as discussion above and count 40% of the discussion grade.
Midterm and final exams. There will be two noncumulative exams made up of essay questions. The midterm will cover history, methodology, the self, attribution, social cognition, prejudice, and attitudes. The final will cover social influence, groups, relationships, helping and happiness, aggression, and evil. The test questions will cover information from the readings and class sessions. I will give you a longer list of questions from which the test questions will be drawn at least a week before the exam. Exams will be taken in the computer lab. The class can vote on whether you want to have 4 required essays, 4 required essays plus some identifications, or 5 essays on each test.
Research proposal. This original proposal should be based on one or more social psychological theories (ideally ones discussed in class) and add to the literature in the area. For this paper, you can either 1) choose a theory and propose a study to test a new prediction from the theory. This may take the form of extending or limiting the theory; 2) choose two or more theories and design a study to integrate them, either showing that they would lead to similar predictions or differentiating conditions under which they would lead to conflicting predictions; or 3) apply a theory to a research area to which it has not been previously applied (e.g., your area of interest). The proposals should contain an abstract, a relevant and focused literature review (at least 7-8 pages), a detailed method section, a results section with proposed analyses and expected results, a discussion section examining the implications and limitations of your expected findings, references, and appendices with any questionnaires or measures you designed. The paper should be in APA style. Topics will be due and discussed in class October 17, and the final paper will be due on December 14 (I will accept the papers any time from December 10 to December 14). I will be happy to read and give you comments on rough drafts, but you should turn in any rough drafts to me as soon as possible so I’ll have time to comment on them and get them back to you (you need to give me at least a week, preferably more—so basically before Thanksgiving break). If you have any questions about whether a paper topic is appropriate for any reason, ask me about it. Obviously proposals for projects that you are working on with other faculty or students are not appropriate for this assignment.
Presentation. During one of the last class sessions, you will present your proposal to the class (background, method, expected results, what they would mean, etc.). Your presentation, which should include some audio-visual effects (e.g., overheads or PowerPoint), should last about 15 minutes, followed by a discussion of the proposal by the class. You can integrate any helpful comments from the class into your proposal before you turn it in.
Makeup and Late Paper Policies: Class discussion grades can not be made up. Makeup tests will only be given in very limited circumstances. Proposals will be accepted up to three days past the due date, but one letter grade will be deducted for each day until they are turned in. Plan ahead and don’t wait until the last minute to finish (or start) the paper, in case something unexpected arises.
Academic Honesty
Policy: Cheating and plagiarism of any kind will not be tolerated and will
result in a 0 on the assignment in question. This includes using a paper from
another class or that you have worked on with another faculty member to fulfill
a requirement in this class. For more
information on UNI’s academic honesty policies, read pages 43-44 in the University Catalog as well as the
information in the Department of Psychology Graduate Student Handbook. If you
have any questions about what is acceptable, ask.
Reading List and
Class Schedule
*indicates that article is available online
t indicates that there are published responses to the article
August 22 Introduction: History, Theory, and
Methodology
Fiske, Chapter 1
Ellsworth, P. C.
(2004). Clapping with both hands: Numbers, people, and simultaneious
hypotheses. In J. T. Jost, M. R. Banaji, & D. A. Prentice (Eds.), Perspectivism in social psychology: The yin
and yang of scientific progress (pp. 261-273).
Kruglanski, A. W.
(2006). Theories as bridges. In P. A. M. Van Lange (Ed.), Bridging social psychology: Benefits of transdisciplinary approaches (pp.
21-32).
*Rozin, P. (2001). Social psychology and science: Some lessons from Solomon Asch. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 2-14.
*Higgins, E. T. (2004). Making a theory useful: Lessons handed down. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 138-145.
*Sears, D. O. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology’s view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 515-530.
August 29 The Self
Fiske, Chapter 5
Leary, M. R.
(2005). Interpersonal cognition and the quest for social acceptance: Inside the
sociometer. In M. W. Baldwin (Ed.), Interpersonal
cognition (pp. 85-102).
*tPyszczynski,
T., Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Arndt, J., & Schimel, J. (2004). Why do people need
self-esteem? A theoretical and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin, 130,
435-468.
*Leary, M. R. (2004). The function of self-esteem in terror management theory and sociometer theory: Comment on Pyszczynski et al. (2004). Psychological Bulletin, 130, 478-482.
Optional
Leary, M. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000). The nature and function of self-esteem: Sociometer theory. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 32 (pp. 1-62).
September
5 Attribution
Fiske, Chapter 3
*Nisbett, R. E.,
Peng, K., Choi,
Malle, B. F.
(2006). Attributions as behaviour explanations: Towards a new theory. In D.
Chadee & J. Young (Eds.), Current
themes in social psychology (pp. 3-26).
Wilson, T. D.,
& Gilbert, D. T. (2003). Affective forecasting. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances
in experimental social psychology, Vol. 35 (pp. 345-411).
September
12 Social Cognition
Fiske, Chapter 4
Wegner, D. M.
(2005). Who is the controller of controlled processes? In R. R. Hassin, J. S.
Uleman, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The new
unconscious (pp. 19-36).
Dijksterhuis, A.,
Aarts, H., & Smith, P. K. (2005). The power of the subliminal: On subliminal
persuasion and other potential applications. In R. R. Hassin, J. S. Uleman,
& J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The new
unconscious (pp. 77-106).
*tJost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339-375.
September
19 Prejudice
Fiske, Chapter 11
Steele, C. M.,
Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group image: The
psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances
in experimental social psychology, Vol. 34 (pp. 379-440).
*Crandall, C. S., & Eshleman, A. (2003). A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 414-446.
TBA
September
26 Attitudes
Fiske, Chapter 6
Nosek, B. A.,
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2007). The Implicit Association Test at
age 7: A methodological and conceptual review. In J. A. Bargh (Ed.), Social psychology and the unconscious: The
automaticity of higher mental processes (pp. 265-292).
*Glasman, L. R.,
& Albarracin, D. (2006). Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: A
meta-analysis of the attitude-behavior relation. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 778-822.
Cooper, J., & Hogg, M. A. (2007). Feeling
the anguish of others: A theory of vicarious dissonance. In M. P. Zanna
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 39 (pp.
359-403).
October 3 Midterm exam
October
10 Social Influence
Fiske, Chapter 13
Harton, H. C.,
& Bourgeois, M. J. (2004). Cultural elements emerge from dynamic social
impact. In M. Schaller & C. S. Crandall (Eds.), Psychological
foundations of culture (pp. 41-75).
TBA
Optional
Pratkanis, A. R. (2001). Propaganda
and deliberative persuasion: The implications of Americanized mass media for
established and emerging democracies. In W. Wosinska, R. B. Cialdini, D. W.
Barrett, & J. Reykowski (Eds.), The practice of social influence in
multiple cultures (pp. 259-285).
October
17 Groups
Fiske, Chapter 12
Paulus, P. B.,
& Brown, V. R. (2003). Enhancing ideational creativity in groups: Lessons
from research on brainstorming. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds), Group
creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 110-136).
Baron, R. S.
(2005). So right it’s wrong: Groupthink and the ubiquitous nature of polarized
group decision making. . In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental
social psychology, Vol. 37 (pp. 219-253).
*Hogg, M. A., Abrams, D., Otten, S., & Hinkle, S. (2004). The social identity perspective: Intergroup relations, self-conception, and small groups. Small Group Research, 35, 246-276.
Discuss paper
topics in class.
October
24 Relationships
Fiske, Chapter 7 (Chapter 8 is optional but also relevant)
TBA
October
31 Helping and Happiness
Fiske, Chapter 9
Batson, C. D.,
Ahmad, N., & Stocks, E. L. (2004). Benefits and liabilities of
empathy-induced altruism. In A. G. Miller (Ed.), The social psychology of good and evil (pp. 359-385).
*Penner, L. A. (2004). Volunteerism and social problems: Making things better or worse? Journal of Social Issues, 60, 645-666.
*Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K. M., & Schkade, D. (2005). Pursuing happiness: The architecture of sustainable change. Review of General Psychology, 9, 111-131.
Optional
*Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Scollon, C. N. (2006). Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well-being. American Psychologist, 61, 305-314.
November
7 Aggression
Fiske, Chapter 10
Vandello, J. A.,
& Cohen, D. (2004). When believing is seeing: Sustaining norms of violence
in cultures of honor. In M. Schaller & C. S. Crandall (Eds.), Psychological
foundations of culture (pp. 281-304).
*Williams, K. D. (2007). Ostracism. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 425-452.
*Bushman, B. J., & Anderson, C. A. (2001). Media violence and the American public: Scientific facts versus media misinformation. American Psychologist, 56, 477-489.
Student
presentations
November
14 Evil
Zimbardo, P. G.
(2004). A situationist perspective on the psychology of good and evil. In A. G.
Miller (Ed.), The social psychology of good and evil (pp. 21-50).
Duntley, J. D.,
& Buss, D. M. (2004). The evolution of evil. In A. G. Miller (Ed.), The
social psychology of good and evil (pp. 102-123).
Baumeister, R. F., & Butz, D. A. (2005). Roots
of hate, violence, and evil. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The psychology of hate (pp. 87-102).
*Moghaddam, F. M. (2005). The staircase to terrorism: A psychological explanation. American Psychologist, 60, 161-169.
Gibson, J. T., & Haritos-Fatouros, M. (1986). The education of a torturer. Psychology Today, 20, 50-58.
Bandura, A.
(2004). The role of selective moral disengagement in terrorism and
counterterrorism. In F. M. Moghaddam & A. J. Marsella (Eds.), Understanding terrorism: Psychosocial roots,
consequences, and interventions (pp. 121-150).
Student
Presentations
November
28 Final exam
December
5 Student presentations
December 12 (6-7:50??)
Student presentations
December
15 4:30pm Papers due
Bonus
*Jordan, C. H.,
& Zanna, M. P. (1999). How to read a journal article in social psychology.
In R. F. Baumeister (Ed.), The self in social psychology (pp. 461-470).
*Bem, D. J.
(2002). Writing the empirical journal article. In J. M. Darley, M. P. Zanna,
& H. L. Roediger III (Eds.), (2002).
The compleat academic: A career guide.
*Bem, D. J. (1995). Writing a review article for Psychological Bulletin. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 172-177. Available at http://dottoratopsicologia.unicatt.it/files/Writing%20a%20Review%20Paper.pdf
*Sternberg, R. J. (1993). How to win acceptances by psychology journals: 21 tips for better writing. APA Observer. Available at http://www.csustan.edu/psych/todd/sternbrg.html