SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY IN FILM
Psychology 190, Maymester 2014
Monday – Friday, 9:00 – 12:30
DW Reynolds Room 12
Instructor: Dr. Leslie Zorwick
Phone: 450-1493
Office: DW Reynolds 106
E-mail: zorwick@hendrix.edu
Office Hours during Maymester are by appointment, but I can be available for office hours
any afternoon of the three-week term.
Texts:
 Tavris, C., & Aronson, E. (2007). Mistakes were made (but not by me): Why we justify
foolish beliefs, bad decisions, and hurtful actions. New York: Harcourt.

All additional readings are posted on the course Moodle website. Readings are listed
in this syllabus.
Course Description:
This course will cover current theory and empirical research in Social Psychology and will use
popular films to provoke thought and analysis over this theory and research. Students will
learn about basic topic areas in Social Psychology (stereotypes, obedience, persuasion, helping
etc.) by reading articles and will discuss these readings in the context of films associated with
each major topic area. Participation is critical for this course to go well.
Course Objectives for Psychology 190:
 Students should be able to demonstrate a basic understanding of major topic areas in
social psychology.
 Students should be able to summarize psychological research in their writing and to
connect research across the topics in the course.
 Students should be able to comfortably discuss social psychological research in the
context of movies.
 Students should engage their critical thinking skills and improve their expression of
these skills in writing through reaction papers and a final paper.
In accordance with the Hendrix College Psychology Department learning objectives, this class
will 1) help students develop the capacity to think scientifically about behavior, 2) provide
students with a sound knowledge base in the discipline, 3) allow students the opportunity to
gain practical experience in the application of psychology, and 4) strengthen students’ oral
and written communication skills.
DATE
MOVIE
READINGS
May 19 (M)
Cognitive
Dissonance
May 20 (Tu)
The Self
INSIDE JOB (2011)
Tavris & Aronson (2007) – Introduction, Chapters 1 & 2
May 21 (W)
Need to
Belong
May 22 (Th)
Subjective
Well-Being
May 23 (F)
Affective
Forecasting
May 26 (M)
Groups and
Conformity
May 27 (Tu)
Obedience
May 28 (W)
Relationships
Greenberg, J., Kosloff, S., Solomon, S., Cohen, F., & Landau, M.J.
(2010). Toward understanding the fame game: The effect of mortality
salience on the appeal of fame. Self and Identity, 9, 1-18.
THE FISHER KING Baumeister, R. F., Brewer, L. E., Tice, D. M., & Twenge, J. M. (2007).
Thwarting the need to belong: Understanding the interpersonal and
(1993)
inner effects of social exclusion. Social and Personality Psychology
Compass, 1, 506-520.
HAPPY-GO-LUCKY Lyubomirsky, S. (2001). Why are some people happier than others?:
The role of cognitive and motivational processes in well-being.
(2008)
American Psychologist, 56, 239-249.
CHICAGO (2002)
UP IN THE AIR
(2009)
EASY A (2010)
1. Wilson, T. D. (2002). Stranger to ourselves: Discovering the adaptive
unconscious. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. READ: pp.
137-158
2. Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2005). Affective forecasting: Knowing
what to want. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 131-134.
1. McAndrew, F. T., Bell, E. K., & Garcia, C. M. (2007). Who do we tell
and whom do we tell on? Gossip as a strategy for status enhancement.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 1562-1577.
2. Cialdini, R. B. (1984). Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New
York: Collins. READ: pp. 167-176, 188-207
Tavris & Aronson (2007) – Chapters 5, 7, & 8
GHOSTS OF ABU
GHRAIB (2007)
1. Murray, S. L. (2005). Regulating the risks of closeness: A
ETERNAL
SUNSHINE OF THE relationship-specific sense of felt security. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 14, 74-78.
SPOTLESS MIND
(2004)
May 29 (Th)
Ambivalent
Stereotypes
POCAHONTAS
(1995)
May 30 (F)
Prejudice
Reduction
REMEMBER THE
TITANS (2000)
2. Tavris & Aronson (2007) – Chapter 6
Fryberg, S., & Watts, A. (2010). We’re Honoring You Dude: Myths,
Mascots, and American Indians. In Markus, H. R., & Moya, P. M. L.
(Eds.), Doing Race: 21 essays for the 21st century (pp. 458-480). W.H.
Norton & Company, Inc.: New York.
1. Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading,
Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. READ pp.
261-282
2. Cialdini, R. B. (1984). Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New
York: Collins. READ: pp. 176-187
DATE
MOVIE
READINGS
June 2 (M)
Moral
Conviction
DOUBT (2008)
June 3 (Tu)
Persuasion
June 4 (W)
Aggression
Bauman, C. W., & Skitka, L. J. (2009). In the mind of the perceiver:
Psychological implications of moral conviction. In D. Bartels, C. W.
Bauman, L. J. Skitka, & D. Medin (Eds.) Moral judgment and decision
making. Psychology of learning and motivation, Vol. 50 (pp. 341-364). San
Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Bohner, G., & Wanke, M. (2002). Attitudes and attitude change. New
York: Psychological Press. READ: pp. 117- 134
12 ANGRY MEN
(1957)
Bushman, B. J., & Anderson, C. A. (2001). Media violence and the
BOWLING FOR
COLUMBINE (2002) American public: Scientific facts versus media misinformation.
June 5 (Th)
AMELIE (2001)
Prosocial
Behavior
STUDENT MOVIE
June 6 (F)
Final
CLIPS
Presentations
American Psychologist, 56, 477-489.
Salovey, P., Mayer, J. D., & Rosenhan, D. (1991). Mood and helping:
Mood as a motivator of helping and helping as a regulator of
mood. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 215-237.
Final paper presentations and Course wrap up
Accommodations for Students with Disabilities:
It is the policy of Hendrix College to accommodate students with disabilities, pursuant to
federal and state law. Any student who needs accommodation in relation to a recognized
disability should inform the instructor at the beginning of the course. In order to receive
accommodations, students with disabilities are required to contact Julie Brown in Academic
Support Services at 501-505-2954.
Grades will be based on the following components:
8 Reaction Papers:
200 points (25 points each)
Participation:
150 points (10 points per class)
Attendance:
150 points (10 points per class)
Final Paper Presentation: 50 points
Final Paper Assignment: 100 points
650 points
Final grades will be based on the following basis:
A
90% and above
B
80-89%
C
70-79%
D
F
60-69%
59% and below
Academic Misconduct:
Academic dishonesty in any form—e.g., cheating on an exam or plagiarism—will not be
tolerated. In general, acts of academic dishonesty on any assignment will result in a grade of
“0” for that assignment. Also, in accordance with College procedures, all instances of
academic dishonesty will be referred to the Academic Integrity Board.
Attendance:
Because each day of class will be the equivalent to a full week of classes during the academic
year, there will be no excused absences, unless there is an emergency. Your attendance will
represent 25% of your grade and I expect you to be on time and attentive. And, you will not
be counted as attending if you are physically present, but sleeping.
Participation:
You are expected to think about the assigned readings and lectures before coming to
the class. I want you to participate, but this participation needs to be rooted in the material
you’ve read. As you read, or attend lectures, make notes of things that are particularly
interesting or things that are confusing, so that we can discuss them as a group. We will all be
coming to an understanding of these texts together and it is important that respect governs
our discussions. While participation is encouraged, I do not want you to talk “for the sake of
talking” – make sure you’ve thought about what you want to say.
After each class, I will give each of you a grade for your participation for the day, on a
scale from 0-10. The average of these daily participation grades will determine your grade.
You will receive a score of “0” on days you are absent. Here is a rough idea of what these
numbers represent:
 10 = engaged in discussion, regularly contributing
 7 = engaged in discussion, occasional contribution
 5 = engaged in discussion, no contribution OR occasionally distracted, little
contribution
 3 = distracted and unengaged, very little contribution
 1 = distracted and unengaged in the conversation, no contribution
Please also note that if you are late to class, your discussion participation grade will be
lowered by 3 points. This is because lateness not only decreases your ability to participate, but
it also interrupts other students.