Advanced Social Psychology, Fall 2019

Class Information

Instructor Information

PSYCH 6204

Helen C. Harton, Ph.D.

Bartlett 34

Bartlett 2080

W 7-9:45pm

273-2235; harton@uni.edu

 

Office Hours: M 3-4; WF 11-11:50; whenever I’m around

 

Course Information

 

Course Learning Outcomes: By the end of this course, you should be able to:

1) Critically evaluate theory and research relevant to the major areas of social psychology;

2) Apply theories and research in social psychology to other topics and to societal issues;

3) Design a study that would adequately test novel predictions based on previous research and theory; 

4) Orally present about and defend your study and design; and

5) Write a scientific paper that describes this study using best practices in design, ethics, statistics, and APA style.

 

Instructor Course Description: In this class we will explore several major (and overlapping) areas of social psychology. 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. We will also talk a lot about the “replication crisis” in social psychology and what it means for our findings. In addition to the overview of each area provided by the text, we will usually focus on about three or four articles or chapters each week in depth. The additional readings include newer theoretical approaches as well as empirical and classic articles. There are so many choices that no two graduate social psychology courses will ever be the same, but I chose articles with an eye toward interesting ideas and recent events/controversies (both in psychology and in the world). The course will primarily be discussion-based, but I may sometimes give introductions to an area or provide you with further information about research findings.

 

Course Catalog Description: Covers the major areas of classic and current research in social psychology. Students engage in an in-depth, critical analysis of the research in areas including, but not limited to, conformity, obedience, social norms, social cognition, interpersonal relationships, aggression, and helping behavior. Substantial proportion of the course focuses on social cognition. Examines the socio-historical context of social psychology and the application of social psychological research. Prerequisite(s): an undergraduate course in social psychology; graduate standing in psychology or consent of instructor.

 

Course Policies

 

Makeup and Late Paper Policies: Class discussion grades cannot be made up, but you can drop your one lowest one. You can drop two discussion point grades. You can also turn in one up to 24 hours late with no penalty. Makeup tests will only be given in very limited circumstances. Proposals will be accepted up to three days (days, not business days) past the due date, but one letter grade will be deducted for each day until they are turned in. The proposals are due at 12pm (noon), so after that counts as the next “day.” Plan ahead and don’t wait until the last minute to finish (or start) the paper, in case something unexpected arises.  

 

Academic Ethics Policy Statement: Students must observe the Academics Ethics Policy (http://www.uni.edu/policies/301). Cheating and plagiarism of any kind or amount will not be tolerated and will result in lowered grades, including a possible 0 on the assignment in question, regardless of intentions. 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, quoting or too closely paraphrasing material in a paper without proper attribution, using secondary citation sources for primary citations, or looking at or using any outside information (outside your head) during tests. Ignorance of the rules is no excuse. If you have any questions about what is acceptable, ask.

 

Diversity and Inclusion Policy: It is my intent that students from all diverse backgrounds and perspectives be well served by this course, that students’ learning needs be addressed both in and out of class, and that the diversity that students bring to this class be viewed as a resource, strength, and benefit. It is my intent to present materials and activities that are respectful of various types of diversity, including but not limited to gender, sexuality, disability, age, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, race, religion, and culture. Your suggestions are encouraged and appreciated. Please let me know ways to improve the effectiveness of the course for you personally or for other students or student groups. In addition, if any of our class meetings conflict with your religious events, please let me know so that we can make arrangements for you.

 

Classroom Civility Policy: It is important that we discuss topics calmly and respectfully. We want to have an open setting where everyone feels free to contribute, where no one tries to dominate the conversations, and where we all remain open to other’s ideas. Ad hominem comments are not appropriate.

 

Credit Hour Statement: This course meets the Course Credit Hour Expectation outlined in the Course Catalog. Students should expect to work a minimum of 2 hours per week outside of class for every course credit hour. Since this is a graduate course, the expectation is that you will work approximately 4 hours per week outside of class for every course credit hour.

 

Required Readings

 

Finkel, E., J., & Baumeister, R. F. (Eds.) (2019). Advanced social psychology: The state of the science (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

 

Additional chapters and articles assigned for each week are listed in the course schedule below. Those that are not available freely online (check ahead of time—these things change!) using your UNI account can be found in Blackboard.

 

**Bring the readings to class with you when we discuss that topic (hard copy or electronic).

 

Course Elements and Expectations

 

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 each of 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 = not there

            2 = attended but didn’t participate, or turned in, but not very relevant (below average)

            3 = comments or questions relevant, but didn’t involve much insight (average)

            4 = comments or questions relevant and insightful (good)

            5 = more than one comment or question showed a significant contribution (outstanding)

 

You will also turn in at least four written discussion points each week (covering at least four of the readings for that week). This assignment is designed to help you prepare for discussion and better articulate your thoughts on the readings. They will be graded on the same scale as class discussion. Your discussion points are due each Tuesday by noon CST and should be emailed to me with “discussion points” in the subject line. The discussion points will count for 40% of your discussion grade. I may call on you in class to talk about your discussion points, so bring them to class. Your two lowest scores will be dropped. If you choose not to turn them in the first week of class, that will be one of your drops.

 

For more information on class discussion grading, click here.

 

Midterm and final exams: There will be two noncumulative exams made up of essay questions. I will give you a longer list of questions from which the test questions will be randomly drawn at least a week before the exam, but you will need to answer the questions with no notes, books, or outside help during the exam period. 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 (they don’t have to be ones discussed in class, but make sure you check with me early on whether your theory is appropriate for this assignment) 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. Papers with APA style or citation errors will be returned for you to fix, and late points will be deducted until the corrected paper is turned back in. Topics (a written description of your general idea) will be due October 2, and the final paper will be due on December 13 by noon. I will be happy to read and give you comments on (fairly complete) rough drafts, but you have to turn them to me by November 13 to get this feedback. 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 or for another class are not appropriate for this assignment, but you can do something related to (but different from) your thesis or do something that may become your thesis.

 

Click here for a rubric that explains what I expect to see in each section.

 

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., PowerPoints), should last about 15 minutes, followed by a discussion of the proposal by the class of no more than 5-10 minutes. You can integrate any helpful comments from the class into your proposal before you turn it in. Sign up for your presentation date and time here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11UYaOQIrWT-eYW6pyfgTzYLSdgH2CAUK6QSawzdB1aE/edit?usp=sharing

 

For more information on the presentation, click here.

 

Grading

 

The components of your final grades are as follows:

 

Class discussion                      30%                 Grades will be distributed as follows:

Midterm exam                         20%                 93-100 = A; 90-92 = A-; 87-89 = B+;

Final exam                               20%                 83-86 = B; etc.

Research proposal                   20%

Proposal presentation              10%

Course Schedule

*not available online (see Blackboard)

 

August 28     Introduction: History, Theory, and Methodology

Textbook Chapters 1 and 2

*Ellsworth, P. C. (2004). Clapping with both hands: Numbers, people, and simultaneous 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). Washington, DC: APA. doi:10.1037/10750-019

*Van Lange, P. A. M. (2013). What we should expect from theories in social psychology: Truth, abstraction, progress, and applicability as standards (TAPAS). Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 40-55. doi:10.1177/1088868312453088

Motyl, M., Demos, A. P., Carsel, T. S., Hanson, B. E., Melton, Z. J., Mueller, A. B., …Skitka, L. J. (2017). The state of social and personality science: Rotten to the core, not so bad, getting better, or getting worse? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 34-58. doi:10.1037/pspa0000084

Chapter 3 in the textbook is recommended

 

September 4    The Self

Textbook Chapter 5

*Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., & Greenberg, J. (2015). Thirty years of terror management theory: From genesis to revelation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 1-70. doi:10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.03.001

Watts, T. W., Duncan, G. J., & Quan, H. (2018). Revisiting the marshmallow test: A conceptual replication investigating links between early delay of gratification and later outcomes. Psychological Science, 29¸1159-1177. doi:10.1177/0956797618761661

Malte, F., Loscheider, D. D., Gleseler, K., Frankenbach, J., & Inzlicht, M. (2019). Is ego depletion real? An analysis of arguments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 23, 107-131. doi:10.1177/1088868318762183

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

September 11    Cultural Differences, Gender, and Morality

Textbook Chapters 13 and 17

*Miyamoto, Y. (2013). Culture and analytic versus holistic cognition: Toward multilevel analyses of cultural influences. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 131-188. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00003-6

Eagly, A. H., Nater, C., Miller, D. I., Kaufmann, M., & Sczensny, S. (2019). Gender stereotypes have changed: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of U.S. public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018. American Psychologist. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/amp0000494

 

September 18    Social Cognition

Textbook Chapter 4

Jost, J. T., Becker, J., Osborne, D., & Badaan, V. (2017). Missing in (collective) action: Ideology, system justification, and the motivational antecedents of two types of protest behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 99-108. doi:10.1177/0963721417690633

Hills, T. T. (2019). The dark side of information proliferation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14, 323-330. doi:10.1177/1745691618803647

Wróbel, M., & Imbir, K. K. (2019). Broadening the perspective on emotional contagion and emotional mimicry: The correction hypothesis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14, 437-451. doi:10.1177/17456916188808523

 

September 25     Prejudice

Textbook Chapters 11 and 12

Crandall, C. S., & Eshleman, A. (2003). A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 414-446. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.414

*Barreto, M., & Ellemers, N. (2015). Detecting and experiencing prejudice: New answers to old questions. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 139-219. doi:10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.02.001

Gawronski, B. (2019). Six lessons for a cogent science of implicit bias and its criticism. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14, 575-595. doi:10.1177/1745691619826015

 

October 2     Attitudes

Textbook Chapter 6

Hornsey, M. J., & Fielding, K. S. (2017). Attitude roots and Jiu Jitsu persuasion: Understanding and overcoming the motivated rejection of science. American Psychologist, 72, 459-473. doi:10.1037/a0040437

Dalege, J., Borsboom, D., van Harreveld, F., van den Berg, H., Conner, M., & van der Maas, H. L. J. (2016). Toward a formalized account of attitudes: The Causal Attitude Network (CAN) model. Psychological Review, 123, 2-22. doi:10.1037/a0039802

Ajzen, I., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2019). Reasoned action in the service of goal pursuit. Psychological Review. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/rev0000155

 

Paper ideas due.

 

October 9    Midterm exam

 

October 16   Social Influence

Textbook Chapter 7

Griggs, R. A. (2017). Milgram’s obedience study: A contentious classic reinterpreted. Teaching of Psychology, 44, 32-37. doi:10.1177/0098628316677644

Le Texier, T. (2019). Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment. American Psychologist. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/amp0000401

Gelfand, M. J., Harrington, J. R., & Jackson, J. C. (2017). The strength of social norms across human groups. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 800-809. doi:10.1177/1745691617708631

 

October 23    Groups and Cultural Emergence

*Wittenbaum,. G. M., & Max, E. J. (2018). Group processes. In T. D. Nelson (Ed.), Getting grounded in social psychology: The essential literature for beginning researchers (pp. 317-342). New York: Routledge.  

Hogg, M. A. (2015). Constructive leadership across groups: How leaders can combat prejudice and conflict between subgroups. In S. R. Thye & E. J. Lawler (Eds.), Advances in group processes, Volume 32 (pp. 177-207). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Greenway, K. H., & Cruwys, T. (2019). The source model of group threat: Responding to internal and external threats. American Psychologist, 74, 218-231. doi:10.1037/amp0000321

Varnum, M. E. W., & Grossmann, I. (2017). Cultural change: The how and why. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 956-972. doi: 10.1177/1745691617699971

 

October 30    Relationships

Textbook Chapters 9 (but not part on rejection) and 10

Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., Griffin, D. W., & Derrick, J. L. (2015). The equilibrium model of relationship maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 93-113. doi:10.1037/pspi0000004

*Arriaga, X., Kumashiro, M., Simpson, J. A., & Overall, N. (2018). Revising working models across time: Relationship situations that enhance attachment security. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22, 71-96. doi:10.1177/1088868317705257

Conley, T. D., Matsick, J. L., Moors, A. C., & Ziegler, A. (2017). Investigation of consensually nonmonogamous relationships: Theories, methods, and new directions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 205-232. soi:10.1177/1745691616667925

 

November 6    Helping and Happiness

*Schroeder, D. A., & Graziano, W. G. (2015). Prosocial behavior. In T. D. Nelson (Ed.), Getting grounded in social psychology: The essential literature for beginning researchers (pp. 317-342). New York: Routledge.  

Latané, B., & Darley, J. M. (1969). Bystander “apathy.” American Scientist, 57, 244-268.

Phillpot, R., Liebst, L. S., Levine, M, Bernasco, W., & Lindegaard, J. R. (2019). Would I be helped? Cross-national CCTV footage shows that intervention is the norm in public conflicts. American Psychologist. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/amp0000469

*Franco, Z. E., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2016). The psychology of heroism: Extraordinary champions of humanity in an unforgiving world. In A. G. Miller (Ed.), The social psychology of good and evil (2nd ed.) (pp. 494-523). New York: Guilford. doi:10.7748/ns.19.51.37.s38

*Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nature Human Behavior, 2, 253-260.

 

November 13  Aggression and Rejection

Textbook Chapters 8 and 9 (part on rejection)

Calvert, S. L., Appelbaum, M., Dodge, K. A., Graham, S., Nagayama Hall, G. C., Hamby, S.,… Hedges, L. V. (2017). The American Psychological Association Task Force assessment of violent video games: Science in the service of public interest. American Psychologist, 72, 126-143. doi:10.1037/a0040413

Mathur, M. B., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2019). Finding common ground in meta-analysis ‘wars’ on violent video games. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14, 705-708. doi:10.1177/1745691619850104

Freedman, G., Williams, K. D., & Beer, J. S. (2016). Softening the blow of social exclusion: The Responsive Theory of Social Exclusion. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1570. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01570

 

November 20   Terrorism, and Extremism

*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). Washington, DC: APA.

Kruglanski, A. W., Jasko, K., Chernikova, M., Dugas, M., & Webber, D. (2017). To the fringe and back: Violent extremism and the psychology of deviance. American Psychologist, 72, 217-230. doi:10.1037/amp0000091

McCauley, C., & Moskalenko, S. (2017). Understanding political radicalization: The two-pyramids model. American Psychologist, 72, 205-216. doi:10.1037/amp0000062

Ginges, J. Atran, S., Sachdeva, S., & Medin, D. (2011). Psychology out of the laboratory: The challenge of violent extremism. American Psychologist, 66, 507-519. doi:10.1037/a0024715

*Verkuyten, M., & Yogeeswaran, K. (2017). The social psychology of intergroup toleration. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21, 72-96. doi:10.1177/1088868316640974

 

December 4     Student presentations

 

December 11   Student presentations

 

December 13   Paper due (noon CST)

 

December 18    Final exam (7-9pm)

 

 

Resources and University Policy Statements

 

Counseling Center: UNI’s Counseling Center is free, confidential, convenient, and effective. It is the mission of the University of Northern Iowa Counseling Center to promote the personal development and psychological well-being of all students and to encourage a college environment that is conducive to growth and learning. To make an appointment, call 273-2676 (8:00-5:00 M-F). For urgent situations outside of office hours, call the Counseling Center at 273-2676 and press 2 to speak to a crisis counselor. Call 911 in case of immediate danger.

 

The Learning Center: The Learning Center @ Rod Library has office hours for assistance with writing, math, science, and college reading and learning strategies. A graduate assistant assigned to help graduate students with writing will be in the LC Mondays and Thursdays from 11-2. You can also schedule appointments with Kat Wohlpart at https://uni.libcal.com/appointments/meetwithkat. Beginning week two, The Learning Center (TLC) operates on a walk-in basis and is open 10:00 am to 10:00 pm Monday through Thursday for general help. For more information, go to https://tlc.uni.edu/tutoring, email TheLearningCenter@uni.edu , call 319-273-6023, or visit the TLC desk located on the main floor of Rod Library. If you are unable to come in during normal tutoring hours, online tutoring is available through Smarthinking. You will need your CATID and passphrase to gain access. To access the Smarthinking platform go to https://tlc.uni.edu/schedule.

 

Rod Library: Rod Library is here to help, so take advantage of their services. Need help finding resources for a research paper? Need to find some information and can’t figure out where to look? Contact the Rod Library! You can stop by, chat, email, text or call the library all hours the library is open. www.library.uni.edu/research/ask-us

           

Need Other Assistance?: I am happy to help you with class content, program issues, writing, etc. If you’re a victim of a crime, you can call 1-800-770-1650 to talk to an advocate 24/7 or text IOWAHELP to 20121. If you are experiencing food insecurity, you can access the Panther Pantry in the lower level of Maucker Union (right of the computer lab) from 12-7pm (til 8 S-Th) for confidential help. I can also help you locate other resources, but be aware that if you report certain things to me (e.g., sexual abuse, criminal activity), I may be required to report it to the university.

 

Office of Compliance and Equity Management Statement: The University of Northern Iowa does not discriminate in employment or education. Visit 13.03 Equal Opportunity & Non-Discrimination Statement (https://policies.uni.edu/1303) for additional information.

 

Student Accessibility Services Statement: The University of Northern Iowa (UNI) complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Fair Housing Act, and other applicable federal and state laws and regulations that prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability. To request accommodations please contact Student Accessibility Services (SAS), located at ITTC 007 for more information, either at (319) 273-2677 or via email to accessibilityservices@uni.edu. Visit Student Accessibility Services (https://sas.uni.edu/) for additional information.