SW 702
Fall 2008
School of Social Work
University of Southern California
Helen Land, Ph.D.
Office: MRF 335
Phone: 213-740-0299
e-mail: land@usc.edu
Office Hrs: by apt.
HUMAN BEHAVIOR IN THE CONTEXTS OF SOCIAL ENVIRONMENTS:
BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE THEORY AND RESEARCH
Course Description and Objectives:
This doctoral seminar is designed to assist you to critically examine behavioral and social science
theories and research and their use in the knowledge base for social work practice. Emphasis will be given
to developing your ability to understand significant questions related to theory development, knowledge
building, and knowledge utilization; and enhancing your critical thinking ability in articulating a rationale
for applying a specific theoretical perspective for social work practice and research. It is hoped that this
course will provide an introduction to theories you may use for your own research experiences why at the
school.
The course is designed to highlight theory that enhances our understanding of human behavior
and human adaptation from the person-environment perspective and interface. Throughout the seminar,
we will ask the question, how do we know what we know? What gestalt of ideas, assumptions, theories
and empirical evidence influences our thinking within social work? In what ways is social work anchored
to these issues in pursuit of new knowledge? And most important, what paradigms guide us in designing
interventions and services to prevent, ameliorate, or treat human problems?
The course is divided into sections that focus on theories that address specific interactions
between people and their environments. Course readings and assignments and seminar participation
should enhance your ability to:

Understand the nature and functions of behavioral and social science theory and research in
relation to the bio psycho social lens, the ecological framework, social work research, practice,
and public policy.

Critically examine theory and research that aim to enhance our understanding of human
behavior within the contexts of social environments.

Critically examine a range of behavioral and social science theories regarding: a) the adequacy
of empirical research to support the theory; b) the utility of the theory for social work practice;
and c) theoretical and empirical gaps presented by social work practice.

Develop a set of criteria for the evaluation of behavioral and social science theories and their
applications to selected practice areas.
1

Formulate conceptual frameworks linking theory and research to further develop and refine
knowledge about behavioral and social problems and clinical and policy interventions to address
these problems.
Assignments:
1.
Seminar participation. You will be expected to participate in class discussion of course readings
and will have occasional responsibility to present a summary of specific course readings to the class.
Each student should be on the look out for new readings that will aid the class in discussion. Please bring
them to class to share. In addition, please bring 1 or 2 burning questions you have on the readings each
class session. Take courage and find your voice in the academic discourse of human behavior theory.
20% of grade.
2.
Class presentation. Each student will select one theory and present the central propositions and a
review of relevant research for the chosen theory. Critically analyze the application to and/ or usefulness
of the theory to social work literature. Critique the theory in regard to its contribution to our
understanding of the person-environment configuration. Analyze the empirical foundation or research that
supports elements of the theory. A brief outline, bibliography, and illustrative handouts should be
prepared and handed out for our shared learning. Presentation times to be determined with the class by the
third meeting. See the back page of this course outline for a starting place. 35% of grade.
3.
Course paper. Due date: First Tuesday of exam week. Each student will write a major research
paper. Students are encouraged to consider the paper as a first draft of a paper to be submitted for
publication or as a draft for a conceptual frame for future research or study. There are several ways to
approach the assignment. Student should pick an approach that suits their current interests. 45% of grade.
You have considerable flexibility for this assignment; some possible approaches:

Chose a concept that is central to understanding, explaining a particular problems area. Discuss the
importance of this concept on theoretical and practical grounds. Discuss the theory base regarding
the concept and review relevant research about the concept and its significance for social work.

Choose a human problem appropriate for social work intervention. Compare and contrast the
usefulness of three theories for describing, explaining, and prescribing behavior related to the
problem. Evaluate the empirical support for the different theoretical perspectives and the
implications for social work practice.

Develop your own set of criteria for the evaluation of behavioral science theories and their
applications to selected research problem areas. Illustrate and defend your criteria.

Write a sociocultural critique of a behavioral science theory and propose, at least tentatively, a
revision of the theory that corrects failure to accurately.

Choose a theory and explicate its application in research. How has the theory been used in social
work research? Set forth gaps in existing research and a future research agenda to address these.
2
Evaluation in all areas will be based on the quality, rather than the quantity, of contributions. Oral and
written assignments are expected to display logical organization, clarity of presentation, critical analysis,
and documentation from existing literature, including primary source materials.
Required Readings:
In this course we will be reading both primary source, classical readings, and cutting edge readings. I
advise you to develop and maintain an ongoing schedule that incorporates assigned readings and your
own special interest reading in regard to the study of human behavior. Our goal is to use the seminar to
collectively enhance your knowledge base in this area of study. Required and supplemental readings are
designated for each content area. Textbooks listed below contain material relevant to course topics.
Required course readings are starred under specific course topics. Additional recommended readings are
listed by course topic and are not starred. Because each class session differs, do not expect to discuss
every reading for every class session. We may get into more depth some areas than others as a response
to class interest. The reading list is long, but we may divide up some readings to assign to each student
depending on interest area. Skim where needed.
Required
Maddi, S.R. (2001). Personality Theories: A Comparative Analysis. New York: Waveland Press.
Pierce, G.R. Sarason, B.R. & Sarason I. G. (eds.). (1996). Handbook of Social Support and the Family,
New York: Plenum.
Goldberger, L. & Breznitz, S. (eds.). (1993). Handbook of Stress: Theoretical and Clinical Aspects. 2nd.
Edition. New York: Free Press.
Zeidner, M. & Endler, N. S. (eds). (1996). Handbook of Coping: Theory, Research, Applications. New
York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Recommended
Calhoun, C. et. al. Contemporary Sociological Theory. (2002). Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
Collins, Randall. (1988). Theoretical Sociology. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Janovich, Publishers.
Kiesler, D.J. (1999). Beyond The Disease Model of Mental Disorders. Connecticut: Praeger.
Martin, P.Y. & O'Connor, G.G. (1989). The Social Environment: Open Systems Application. New York:
Longman Press.
Turner, F.J. (1996). Social Work Treatment: Interlocking Theoretical Approaches. (4th ed.). New York: The
Free Press.
3
Session 1: Introduction to Course and The Significance of Behavioral and Social Science
Theory for Social Work
“No organized activity…can claim professional standing until it rests upon scientific knowledge
and has developed definite methods to reach its goals…Zeal alone…is a frail equipment for those who
are genuinely interested in human welfare.” Lee, 1915
"Knowledge cannot prosper, When science is one-sided,
The basic and applied must be, United, not divided" Forsyth, 1988
"There is nothing so practical as a good theory"
Lewin, 1951
A. Discussion of strengths, interests, gaps or needs in the knowledge base for social work
practice
B. Review of course syllabus and discussion of student interests
C. Discussion of assignments and readings
D. Area and scope of knowledge about human behavior theory
E. Framework for the course: the person-environment configuration
F. Knowledge building: paradigm and paradigm progression; theory and theory integration
Also:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Philosophy of science and nature of society
Nature and functions of theory
Attributes of a "good" theory
Behavioral and social science theory and research
Theory in the social work knowledge base
Behavioral and social science theory and research utilization in social work
Critical thinking
4
Session 2: The Person-Environment Transaction, General Systems Theory & the Ecological
Perspective
“The traditional wisdom embodied in the phrase ‘Nature proposes, environment disposes’ is in
need of some emendation, for both the proposing and the disposing are jointly determined.”
Bronfenbrenner & Ceci, 1994
A. The General System Paradigm
B. The ecological perspective as distinct from ecological theories
C. Biological basis of the ecological perspective
 evolutionary theories
 genetic-ecological theories
 Social-ecology theories
 Eco-systems perspective in social work
Readings
*Wakefield, J.C. (1996). Does social work need the eco-systems perspective? Part 2. Does the
perspective save social work from incoherence? Social Service Review, 70, 183-213.
*Wakefield, J.C. (1996). Does social work need the eco-systems perspective? Part 1. Is the perspective
clinically useful? Social Service Review, 70, 1-32.
*Tracey, T. et. al. (1999). Integration of theory, research design, measurement, and analysis: Toward a
reasoned argument. Counseling Psychologist, 27, 299-324.
*Rowe, D. (2001). Do people make environments or do environments make people? Annals New York
Academy Sciences, 935, 62-74.
*Schriver, J.M. (2000). Human Behavior and the Social Environment: Shifting Paradigms in Essential
Knowledge for Social Work. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. skim
*Gilgun, C. (1996). Human development and adversity in the ecological perspective, pt. I: A conceptual
framework. Families in Soc., sept., 395-402.
*Ryan, R. & Deci, E. (2001). On happiness and the human potential: A Review of research on hedoniac
and eudaimonic Well-Being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141-166.
Chambless, D.L. & Hollon, S.D. (1998). Defining empirically supported therapies. J Consulting &
Clinical Psychology, 66,7-18.
Bush, I.R., Epstein, I., & Sainz, A. (1997). The use of social science sources in social work practice
journals: an application of citation analysis. Social Work Research, 21, 45-56.
Collins, R. chap. 2 "Systems Theory" skim
Bertallanfy, L.Von. (1974). General systems theory in psychiatry. In S. Arieti (ed.), American Handbook
of Psychiatry, (Vol, pp. 1095-1120). New York: Basic Books.
McEwen, B. (1997). From Molecules to Mind: Stress, individual differences, and the social
environment. Annals of the N.Y. of Sciences, 42-49.
Rosen, et.al (1995) Rationales for Practice Decisions: Variations in Knowledge Use by Decision Task
and Social Work Service. Research on Social Work Practice, (5:4, pp. 501-523)
Chambless, Dianne (1998) Defining Empirically Supported Therapies, Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology. I (66:17, pp. 7-18)
5
Session 3: Person in Environment: The Biological Perspective
“It is one thing to describe abnormal behavior. It is quite another to explain how abnormal
behavior arises and why it occurs in some people but not in others.” Willerman & Cohen, 1990
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Psychobiology of stress: psychoneuroimmunology, update on neurobiology & brain research
Biology of psychopathology
Diatheses models of mental disorder
Biopsychosocial perspective
E. Health Belief models, behavior and help seeking
*Schiffer, F. (1998). Of Two Minds: the Revolutionary Science of Dual Brain Psychology. New York,
Free Press. Chs. 1,2 & 3. 1-1-102. Skim as needed.
*Wahlberg, K-E., Wynne, L.C., et al. (1997). Gene-environment interaction in vulnerability to
schizophrenia; findings from the Finnish adoptive family study of schizophrenia. Am. J Psychiatry,
154 (3) 355-362.
* Kiecolt-Glaser, J. & Glaser, (1995). Psychoneuroimmunology and health consequences: Data and
shared mechanisms. Psychosomatic Medicine, 57, 269-274.
*Kiecolt-Glaser, J. et. al. (2002). Psychoneuroimmunology: Psychological influence on immmune
funtion and Health. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70,3, 537-547.
*Dohrenwend, B.P. (2000). The role of adversity and stress in psychopathology: some evidence and its
implications for theory and research. i, 41: 1-19.
*Wood,G. (2003). Hypnosis, Differentail Expression of Cytokines by T-Cell Subsets, and the
Hypthalamo-Pituitary-Adrenal Axis. American Journal of /clinical Hypnosis, 43,3, 179-193.
*Zelkowitz, P., et. al. (2001). Diatheses and Stressors in Borderline pathology of childhood: The role of
neoropsychological risk and trauma. J. Am. Acad.Child Adolsec. Pschiatry, 40, 100-105.
*Olin, S.S. & Mednick S.A. (1996). Risk factors of psychosis: identifying vulnerable populations
premorbidly. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 22 (2), 223-240.
*Davey Smith, G. et. al (1998). Adverse socioeconomic conditions in childhood and cause of Specific
adult mortality: Prospective observational study. BMJ, 316, 1631-1635.
Schore, A. (2003). Affect Dysegulation and Disorders of the Self. . New York, Norton.
Nicholson, I. A. & Neufeld, R. (1992). A dynamic vulnerability perspective on stress and schizophrenia.
i(1), 117-130.
Mostofsky, D.I. & Barlow, D.H. (eds.). (2000).The management of Stress and Anxiety in Medical
Disorders. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Holzman, P.S. (1996). Reflections on the developing science of psychopathology. In S. Matthysse, D.L.
Levy, J. Kagan, & F.M.Benes (eds.). (1996). Psychopathology: The Evolving Science of Mental
Disorder. London: Cambridge Univ. Press, pp.583-605.
Simonoff, E., Pickles, A., Meyer, J., Silberg, J., & Maes, H. (1998). Genetic and environmental
influences on subtypes of conduct disorder behavior in boys. J Abnormal Child Psychology, 26, 495509.
Saleeby, D. (1992). Biology's challenge to social work: embodying the person-in-environment
perspective. Social Work, 37, 112-118.
6
Littrell, Jill. (1996) How Psychological States Affect the Immune System, Health and Social Work. (21:
4, pp. 287-295)
Marshall, J.R. (1996). Science, “schizophrenia”, and genetics: the creation of myths. J. of
Primary Prevention, 17,99-115
Moriceau S and Sullivan RM. (2005) Neurobiology of Infant Attachment. Developmental
Psychobiology. 47(3): 230-242.
Session 4 & 5: The Person-Environment Transaction: Social Learning & Behavioral Theories
“Unless challenged, contemporary culture will progressively regard homo sapiens as homo
biologicus – something on the order of a highly evolved, intricately wired, and socially verbose fruit fly.”
Pam, 1995
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Social-cognitive theory & attribution theory
Social learning theory
Symbolic interaction
Social exchange theory-social identity theory-social comparison theory
Self Efficacy theory, mastery, and control theory
Behavior genetics – ‘genome’ – ‘envirome’ interactions
Biology of socialization
*Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. i, 1-26.
*Bandura, A. (2002). Social Cognitive theory in cultural Context. J. of Applied Psychology, 51,269-290.
*Bandura, A. Self Efficacy Mechanism in Human Agency. American Psychologist, 37, 2, 122-147.
Benight, C. & Bandura, A. (2004). Social cognitive theory of posttraumatic recovery: the role of
perceived self efficacy. Behavior, Research, and Therapy, 42,1129-1148.
*Posner, M., Rothbart, M., & Gerardi-Caulton, G. (2001). Exploring the biology of socialization. Annals
New York Academy Sciences, 935, 208-216.
*Homans in Calhoun, C. Social behavior as exchange, 88-98.
* Maddi, T. The behaviorist alternative, Ch.13, 427-446, & The rise of social learning theory, Ch. 14,
447-466. skim.
*Maddi, chap. 1,13,15.
*Thyer, B.A., & Wodarski, J.S. (1990). Social learning theory: toward a comprehensive conceptual
framework for social work education. Social Service Review, 64, 144-152.
*Lal, B.B. (1995). Symbolic interaction theories. American Behavioral Scientist, 38, 421-441.
Rose, S. (2001). Moving on from old dichotomies: beyond nature-nurture towards a lifeline perspective.
Br J Psychiatry, Suppl 40, s3-s7.
Sreenivasan, Gopal (2002) Errors about Errors: Virtue Theory and Trait Attribution, Mind (111: 441)
Locke, KD and Sadler, P. (2007) Self-Efficacy, Values, and Complementarity in Dyadic Interactions:
Integrating Interpersonal and Social-Cognitive Theory. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin.
33(1): 94-109.
7
Joe SW and Lin CP (2008). Learning Online Community Citizenship Behavior: a Socio-Cognitive Model.
Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 11(3): 367-370.
Session 6 & 7: Person in Environment: Psychodynamic & Relational Theories
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Readings
From drive to object (Freud to present)
Ego Psychology
Object Relations (British and American Schools)
Attachment Theories & Neurobiology
Self Psychology, Self Esteem and self concept
Intersubjectivity
Updates on attachment theory in my office-too many to list.
*Aron, L. The relational orientation: an introduction. A Meeting of the Minds: Mutuality in
psychoanalysis. Hillsadle, N.J.: The Analytic Press, 1-30; Ch 2: Relational theory and its
boundaries, 30-64 ; Ch. 3: The patient’s experience of the analyst’s subjectivity, 64-91.
Buckley, P. (2003). Revolution and Evolution. A brief intellectual history of American
Psychoanalysis during the past two decades. Amer. J. Psychotherapy, 57,1,1-17.
*Fosha, D. (2002). True Self, True Other and core state: Toward a Clinical theory of affective change
process. LA psychoanalytic society ad Institute.
*Kohut, H. (1978). The disorders of the self and their treatment, 59, 413, 81-93.
*Kohut, H. (1984). How does analysis cure? International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 63, 395407. (q.v. Restoration of the Self. New York. International Universities Press).
*Liotti, G. (1999). Disorganized/Disoriented attachment in the Etiology of the dissociative
disorders. Dissociation, V, 4, 196-204.
*Lyons-Ruth, K. (1996). The disturbed caregiving system: Relations among childhood trauma, maternal
care giving, and infant affect and attachment. Infant Mental health Journal, 17,3, 257-275.
*Maddi, S.. The Conflict Model: Psychosocial version, 27-73.skim
*Siegel, D. (1996). Cognition, memory, and dissociation. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric
Clinics of North America, 5, 2, 509-536.
*Becker,T. et. al. Validty scores on three attachment style scales. Exploratory and confirmatory
evidence. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57,3, 447.
Blanck, G. and Blanck, R. (1979). Ego psychology 11: psychoanalytic developmental
psychology. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.
Bowlby, J. (1977). The making and breaking of affectional bonds. British Journal of Psychiatry,
130, 201-210.
Buckley, G. (ed).(1989). Essential papers in object relations theory. New York, New York
University Press, 102-126.
*Cassidy and Shaver, Measurement of attachment security. Handbook of attachment.
Fairbairn, W.R. (1943). Repression and the return of bad objects. British Psychological Society,
19.
8
Goldstein, Eda. (1990). Borderline disorders: Clinical models and techniques. N.Y. : Guilford.
Hartmann, H. (1958). Ego Psychology and the Problem of Adaptation. New York-.
International Universities Press, 48.
Schut, H. (1996). The role of loneliness and social support in adjustment to loss: a test of
attachment versus stress theory, 6, 1241-1249.
Weinberg, L. (1991). Infant development and the sense of self: Stern vs. Mahler. Clinical
Social Work, 19, 1, 9-22.
St. Clair, M. (1996). Object Relations and Self Psychology: An Introduction.2nd ed., Pacific
Grove, CA: Brooks Cole.
Fraley, R. &Spieker, S. (2003). Are infant attachment patters continuously or categorically
distributed? Dev. Psychol. 39, 3, 387-404.
Whitsett, D. & Whitsett, D. (1996). Anti-Black racism and its consequences: A Self
Psychology/Object relations perspective. Journal of Analytic Social Work, 3,4, 61-81.
Silk, Kenneth (2005). Object Relations and the Nature of Therapeutic Interventions, Journal of
Psychotherapy Integration. (15: 1, pp.94-100).
Jacobo, Michelle C. (2001). Revolutions in Psychoanalytic Theory of Lesbian Development,
Psychoanalytic Psychology. (18: 4, pp. 667-683).
Sanville, Jean Bovard (2004). On the Impossibility of Getting it Right the First Time: Cultural
Determinants of Theory, Clinical Social Work Journal. (32, 1, pp. 23-37).
Pickover, Sheri (2002). Breaking Up the Cycle: A Clinical Example of Disrupting an Insecure
Attachment System, Journal of Mental Health Counseling. (24:4, 358-366).
Landolt, M. et. Al (2004). Gender Nonconformity, Childhood Rejection, and Adult Attachment:
A Study of Gay Men, Archives of Sexual Behavior. (33: 2, pp. 117-128).
Rothbaum, F. et. Al (2002). Family Systems Theory, Attachment Theory, and Culture, Family
Process. (41: 3, pp. 328-350).
Cozzarelli, C. et. Al. (2003) Stability and Change in Adult Attachment Styles: Associations with
Personal Vulnerabilities, Life Events, and Global Construals of Self and Others, Journal of
Social and Clinical Psychology. (22: 3, pp. 315-346).
Haight, Wendy L. (2003) Understanding and Supporting Parent-Child Relationships during
Foster Care Visits: Attachment Theory and Research, Social Work. (48: 2, pp. 195-207).
DeOliveira, Carey Anne (2004). Emotion Socialization as a Framework for Understanding the
Development of Disorganized Attachment, Social Development. (13: 3, pp. 439-467)
Haugaard, J. et. Al (2004) Recognizing and Treating Uncommon Behavioral and Emotional
Disorders in Children and Adolescents Who Have Been Severely Maltreated: Reactive
Attachment Disorder, Child Maltreatment. (9: 2, pp. 154-160)
Fogany, P. et. Al (1996) The Relation of Attachment Status, Psychiatric Classification, and
Response to Psychotherapy, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. (64: 1, pp. 2231).
Moss, E. et. Al (2005) Stability of Attachment During the Preschool Period, Developmental
Psychology. (41: 5, pp. 773-783)
9
Mohr, J. et. Al (2003) Self-Acceptance and Self-Disclosure of Sexual Orientation in Lesbian,
Gay, and Bisexual Adults: An Attachment Perspective, Journal of Counseling Psychology.
(50: 4, pp. 482-495)
Belsky, Jay (1997) Theory Testing, Effect-Size Evaluation, and Differential Susceptibility to
Rearing Influence: The Case of Mothering and Attachment, Child Development. (68: 4, pp.
598-600)
Cassidy, J. et. Al (1994) The Insecure/Ambivalent Pattern of Attachment: Theory and Research,
Child Development. (65: 4, pp. 971-991)
Benoit, D. et. Al (1994) Stability and Transmission of Attachment across Three Generations,
Child Development. (65: 5, pp. 1444-1456)
Shapiro, J. et. Al (2000) Cognitive Neuroscience, Neurobiology and Affect Regulation:
Implications for Clinical Social Work, Clinical Social Work Journal. (28: 1, 9-21)
Seifer, R. et. Al (1996) Attachment, Maternal Sensitivity, and infant Temperament During the
First Year of life, Developmental Psychology. (32: 1, pp. 12-25)
Marzi, A., Hautmann G., and Maestro, S. (2006) Critical Reflections on Intersubjectivity in
Psychoanalysis. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis. 87(5): 1297-1314.
Van, HL, Hendriksen M, Schoevers RA, Peen J, Abraham RA, and Dekker, J (2008) Predictive
Value of Object Relations for Therapeutic Alliance and Outcome in Psychotherapy for
Depression: an Exploratory Study. Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease. 196(9): 655-662.
Clarkin, JF, Lenenweger, MF, et al. (2007) An Object Relations Model of Borderline Pathology.
Journal of Personality Disorders. 21(5): 474-499.
Session 8: Stress Theories: an overview
If a man could see, the perils and diseases that he elbows,
Each day he walks a mile; which catch at him,
Which fall behind him as he passes;
Then would he know that Life's a single pilgrim,
Fighting unarmed among a thousand soldiers" (Thomas Lovell Beddoes, 17981851) or "Life is just one damned thing after another" (Hubbard, 1859)
A. Response-based stress theory-physiological stress models
B. Psychological and cognitive stress models: individual differences
C. Sociological and ecological stress models: environmental context and
individual/environmental interactions
D. Psychopathological stress model: stress-related mental disorders
E. Role theory, mastery and efficacy
Readings
Andia ,J. et. al. (2003). Towards an HIV role theory: drug-related peer beliefs and role strain indicators
as predictors of IVDU in New York and Peurto Rico. J. of Drug Issues, 002, 963-982.
Biddle, B. (1986). Recent developments in role theory. Am. Rev. of Sociology, 12, 67-92.
10
*McEwen, B. (2001). From molecules to mind: stress, individual differences, and the social environment.
Annals New York Academy Sciences, 935, 42-49.
* Davis.L. (1996). Role theory and Social Work Treatment. In F.J. Turner (ed.).
*Pearlin, L.I. (1989). The sociological study of stress. J. Health & Social Behav, 30, 241-256.
*Collins, R. Select from: Chap. 6 "Interaction Ritual;" chap. 7, "Self, Mind, and Social Role'; chap. 8.
*Pearlin, L. & McKean, M. (1996). Stress and the Life Course: A paradigmatic alliance. The
Gerontologist, 36, 239-247.
*Land, H.& Hudson, S. (2004). Stress, coping, and depressive symptomatology in Latina & Anglo AIDS
caregivers. Psychology and Health.
*Dohrenwend, B. (2004). The role of adversity and Stress in psychopathology: Some evidence and its
implications for thepry and research. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 41,1, 1-19.
Foster, M. & Dion, K. (2003). Dispositional hardiness & women’s wellbeing: relating to gender
discrimination: The role of minimization. Psych. of Women Quarterly, 27,197-208.
Siebert, D. (1999).Friendship and social support: Importance of role identity to aging adults. Social
Work, 44,6,522-33.
Pearlin, L. et. al. (1990). Caregiving and the Stress Process: An overview of concepts and measures, The
Gerontologist, 30,583-594.
Stanton , A. et al. (2000). Coping through emotional approach: Scale construction and validation . J. of
Personality and Social Psychol. 78, 1150-69.
Turner, R. & Avison, W. (2003). Status variation in stress exposure: Implications for interpretation of
research on race, socioeconomic status and gender. J. of Health and Soc. Behavior, 44, 488-505.
Burnett, D. (1999). Social relationships of Latino grandparent caregivers: a role theory perspective.
Gerontologist, 39. 49-58.
Miller, T.W. (1997). Clinical Disorders and Stressful Life Events. Conn: International Universities Press.
Ell, K. & Aisenberg, E. (1998). Stress-related disorders. In J.B.W. Williams & K. Ell (eds).
Breakthroughs in Mental Health Research: Implications for Social Work Practice. Washington, DC:
NASW
Kaplan, H.B. (1996). Themes, lacunae, and directions in research on psychosocial stress. In H.B. Kaplan
(ed.). Psychosocial Stress; Perspectives on Structure, Theory, Life-Course, and Methods. New York:
Academic Press.
Selye, H. (1976). The Stress of Life. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Burke, P. J. (1996). Social identities and psychosocial stress. In H.B. Kaplan (ed.). Psychosocial Stress;
Perspectives on Structure, Theory, Life-Course, and Methods. New York: Academic Press.
Select from C.L. Cooper & R. Payne (eds.). i New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Mulsow, et.al (2002). Multilevel Factors Influencing Maternal Stress During the First Three Years,
Journal of Marriage and Family (64, 944-956).
Whitsett, D. & Land, H. The role strain index. Families in Society.
Jaffee SR, Caspi A, et al. (2007). Individual, Family, and Neighborhood Factors Distinguish Resilient
from Non-Resilient Maltreated Children: a Cumulative Stressors Model. Child Abuse & Neglect.
31(3): 231-253.
Session 9: The Person-Environment Interaction: Overview of Coping theory, and Self Efficacy
A. Coping theory: dispositional, situational, or both, domain-specific vs. domain general?
11
B. Stress Resistance and the “Hardy Personality”
C. Control theories-salutogenesis, self-efficacy,
D. Resilience, adaptive functioning, growth and well-being
*Lazarus, R.S. (1993). Coping theory and research: past, present, and future. Psychosomatic Medicine,
55: 234-247.
*Parker,J. & Endler, N. (1996). Coping and Defense, a historical review. in Zeidner, M. & Endler, N. S.
(eds). (1996). Handbook of Coping: Theory, Research, Applications. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.
*Carver, C. & Scheir, M.(1994). Situational coping and coping dispositions in a stressful transaction.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56,2, 267-283.
*Compas, B. (1998).An agenda for coping research and theory: Basic and applied developmental issues.
International Journal of Behavioral Development, 22,2, 231-237.
*Florian, V. et a. (1995). Does hardiness contribute to mental health during stressful life events? The
roles of appraisal and coping. J. of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 687-695.
*Oakland, S. & Ostell, A. (1996). Measuring coping: A review and a critique. Human Relations, 49, 2,
133-155.
*Select from Frydenberg, E. (ed.). (1999). Learning to Cope: Developing as a Person in Complex
Societies. Oxford: University Press.
*Oulette: (1993). Inquiries into hardiness. In Goldberg & Breznitz, Handbbook of Stress, 77-100.
*Billings, A. & Moos, R. (1981). The role of coping responses and social responses in attentuating the
impact of stressful life events. J. of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 139-183. (landmark publication)
*Vollarth, M. (1998). Coping styles predict change in personality disorders, J. of Personality Disorders,
12,3, 198-209.
Wolchik, S.A. & Sandler, I.N. (eds.). (1997). Handbook of Children’s Coping: Linking Theory and
Intervention. New York: Plenum Press.
Kobasa,S., Maddi, S. & Kahn, S. (1982). Hardiness and Health: A prospective study, J. of Personality
and Social Psychology, 42, 168-177. (Landmark article)
Rutter, M. (1995). Clinical implications of attachment concepts. J. of Child Psychol. &
Psychiatry, 4, 549-571.
Stone, A. (1991). Self-Report, situation coping questionnaires: What are they measuring? 61, 4, 648-658.
Kohn, Paul M. (1996) On Coping Adaptively with Daily Hassles. Handbook of Coping: Theory,
Research, Applications,(Wiley, New York).
Sasaki, M and Yamasaki, K. (2005). Dispositional and Situational Coping and Mental Health Status of
University Students. Psychological Reports. 97(3): 797-809.
12
Session 10 & 11: Person-Environment Interactions Theory and Theory Integration: Social
Support & Family Theory
A. Social support theory: confidant support, multiplex support, emotional & instrumental
support
B. Family systems theory
C. Family stress and coping theory,
D. Sense of coherence theory
E. Interdependent and interactive family coping
Readings on Social Support & Networks
* Deaux, K. & Martin, D. (2003). Interpersonal networks and Social categories: Specifying levels of context
in identity processes. Social Psychology Quartery, 66, 101-117.
* Lunsky, Y. & Benson, B. (2001). Association between perceived social support and strain, and positive and
negative outcome for adults with mild intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research,
45, 106-114.
* House, J. et al.(1988). Structures and Processes of Social Support. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 293318. (classic article).
*What is Social Support and What makes you think you have it? In Social Support in Couples. 1-17.
* Marshall. N. et. al. (2001). It takes an urban village: Parenting networks of urban families. Journal of
Family Issues, 22, 163-182.
* Nelen-Hoeksema, S & Davis, C. (1999). Thanks for sharing that: Ruminators and their support networks.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 801-814.
*Ptacek, J. T. (1996). The role of attachment in perceived support and the stress and coping process. In G.R.
Pierce, B.R. & I.G. Sarason (eds.). Handbook of Social Support and the Family, New York: Plenum.
Readings on Family Stress theory
*Boss, P. (1992). Primacy of perception in family stress theory and measurement. Journal of Family
Psychology, 6,2, 113-122.
*McCubbin, H.I., Thompson, E.A., Thompson, A. I., & Fromer, J.E. (eds.). (1998). Stress, Coping, and Health
in Families. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publ.
* McCubbin, H.I., Thompson, E.A., Thompson, A. I., & Futrell, J.A. (eds.). (1999). The Dynamics of Resilient
Families. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publ.
*Lazarus, R.S. (1999). Stress and Emotion: A New Synthesis. New York: Springer Publishing Co. chap. 1.
Epistemology and Metatheory.
*Patterson, J. (2002). Integrating family reilience and family stress theory. J. of Marriage and Family, 64,
349-360.
*Peterson, D. & Hendrickson Christensen, D. (2002).Factors predictive of boundary ambiguity after divorce.
J. of Divorce and Remarriage, 37, 19-40.
*Antonovsky, A. & Sourni, T. (`1988). Family sense of coherence and adaptation. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 50, 79-82. (Landmark article).
Further reading
13
Muslow, M. et. al (2002). Multifactors influencing maternal stress during the first three years. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 64, 994-956.
Gilbert P. (1995). Attachment, cooperation and rank: the evolution of the need for status and social support. In
T.S. Brugha (ed). i. London: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Pam, A. (1993). Family systems theory: a critical view. New Ideas in Psychology, 11, 77-94.
Due, P., Holstein, B., Lund,R., Modvig, J., & Avlund, K. (1999). Social relations: network, support and
relational strain. Social Science & Medicine, 48, 661-673.
Select from J. Eckenrode (ed.). The Social Context of Coping. New York: Plenum Press.
Cutrona, C. E. (1996). Social Support in Couples: Marriage as a Resource in Times of Stress. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications. Chap. 1. What is social support and what makes you think you have it?
Pierce, G.R., Sarason, B.R., Sarason, I.G., Joseph, H.J. & Henderson, C.A. (1996).Conceptualizing and
assessing social support in the context of the family. In G.R. Pierce, B.R. & I.G. Sarason (eds.).
Handbook of Social Support and the Family, New York: Plenum.
Hill, R. (1949). Families Under Stress. New York: Harper and Row.
Broderick, C.B. (1994). Understanding Family Process: Basics of Family Systems Theory.
Johnson, M (2004). Approaching the Salutogenesis of Sense of Coherence: the Role of ‘Active’ Self-Esteem
and Coping. British Journal of Health Psychology. 9(3): 419-432.
Session 12: Moral Development and Moral Theory:
A. Moral theory
B. Applications of moral theory: violence willingness, abuse, personality development
Readings
*Astor, R.(1998). Moral reasoning about school violence. Educational Psychologist, 33, 207-221.
*Behre, W., Astor, R. & Meyer, H. (2001). Elementary and middle school teachers’ intervening in
school violence: An exxamination of violence-prone school sub-contexts. Journal of Moral
Education, 30, 2001, 131-153.
*Pitner, R., Astor, R. et al. (2003). The effects of group stereotypes on adolsecents’ reasoning about peer
retribution. Child Development, 74, 413-425.
Astor, R. (1994). Children’s moral reasoning about family and peer violence: The role of provocation.
Child Development, 65, 1054-1067.
Session 13 and 14: The Social Environment: Socialization and Stratification Systems
"It is because society, weak and disturbed, lets too many persons escape too completely
from its influence. Thus, the only remedy for the ill is to restore enough consistency to social groups for
them to obtain a firmer grip on the individual, and for him to feel himself bound to them" Emile
Durkheim, Suicide, 1897 (trans. 1951).
A. Culture, acculturation, and socialization theory
B. Health Belief models, Social position and social role
14
C. Alienation
D. Social and Economic contexts of human behavior: Immigration, Poverty, Social Mobility
E. Social Conflict
*Hoovey, J. (2000). Acculturative stress, depression, and suicidal ideation among Central American
Immigrants. Suicide and Life-threatening Behavior, 30,2, 125-39.*Nguyen, H. et. al. (1999).
Toward a more complex understanding of acculturation and adjustment. J. of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 30, 5-31.
*Oh, Y.., Koeske, G. & Sales, E. (2002). Acculturation, stress, and depressive symptoms among Korean
Immigrants in the US. J. of Social Psychology, 142, 511-526.
*Repuccie, N. et. al. (1999). Social, community, and preventive intervention. Ann. Rev. of Psychol, 50,
387-418.
*Sanders, J. (2002). Ethnic boundaries and idenetity in plural societies. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 28, 327-57.
*Unger, J. et. al. (2002). The AHIMSA acculturation scale: a new measure of acculturation for
adolescents in a multicultural society. J. of Early Adolescence, 22, 225-251.
*Torres, H. (2003). Theoretical fameworks of diverse identity development theories: A view through
different lens,. Identity Development of Diversity Populations. 33-52.
* Dewe, P. (2000). Measures of coping with stress at work: A review. in Leiter, M. et. al. 92000).
Coping, health, and organizations. In Issues in Occupational Health.
*Moore, M. (2003). Socially isolated? How parents and neihborhood adults influence youth behavious in
disadvantaged communities. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 26, 988-1005.
*Vankatesh, S. (1997). The three tier model: How healping occurs in urban, poor communities. Social
Service Review, 71, 574-606.
Krishnakumar, Ambika et. Al (2004) Cross-Ethnic Equivalence of Socialization Measures in European
American and African American Youth, Journal of Marriage and Family (66: pp. 809-820)
Clausen, John A. (1968) Recent Developments in Socialization Theory and Research, Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science. (377: pp. 139-155)
Fingerson, Laura (2005) Do Mothers’ Opinions Matter in Teens’ Sexual Activity? Journal of Family
Issues (26:7, pp. 947-974)
Further reading
Payne, G. (ed.) (2000). Social Divisions. Chap. 1-2. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Hobfoll, S. (1998). Stress, Culture, and Community: The Psychology and Philosophy of Stress. New
York: Plenum Press.
Darder, A., (ed.) (1995). Culture and Difference: Critical Perspectives on the Bicultural Experience in
the United States. Conn: Bergin & Garvey.
Aneshensel, C.S. (1992). Social stress: theory and research. Ann. Review Sociology, 18, 15-38.
Mirowsky, J. & Ross, C.E. (1989). Social Causes of Psychological Distress. New York: Aldine de
Gruyter. chap 1, Introduction; chap. 3, Real-World Causes of Real-World Misery; chap. 5, New
Patterns: Questioning Cultural Myths; chap. 6, Life Change; chap. 7, Alienation; chap. 8,
Authoritarianism and Inequity.
15
Smith, G.D., Hart, C., Blane, D., & Hole, D. (1998). Adverse socioeconomic conditions in childhood and
cause specific adult mortality: prospective observations study. British Medical J, 316, 1631-1635.
Lantz, P., House, J.S., Lepkowski, J. M., Williams, D.R., Mero, R.P., & Chen, J. (1998). Socoeconomic
factors, health behaviors, and mortality: results from a nationally representative prospective study of
US adults. JAMA, 279, 1703-1708.
Borduin, C.M. (1999). Multisystemic treatment of criminality and violence in adolescents. i 242-249.
Ben-Sira, Z. (1997). Immigration, Stress, and Readjustment. Conn: Praeger.
Kluckhohn, C. (1962). The concept of culture. In C. Kluckhohn, Culture and Behavior. New York: The
Free Press of Glencoe.
Lewis-Fernandez, R., & Kleinman, A. (1995). Cultural psychiatry: theoretical, clinical, and research
issues. The Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 18, 433-447.
Dilworth-Anderson, P. & Marshall, S. (1996). Social support in its cultural context. In G.R. Pierce, B.R.
& I.G. Sarason (eds.). i New York: Plenum.
*Alarcon, R.D. (1995). Culture and psychiatric diagnosis: impact on DSM-IV and ICD-10. i 449-465.
Manson, S.M. (1995). Culture and major depression: current challenges in the diagnosis of mood
disorders. The Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 18, 487-501.
Gunnell, D.J., Peters, T.J., Kammerling, R.M., & Brooks, J. (1995). relation between parasuicide, suicide,
psychiatric admissions, and socioeconomic deprivation. British Medical Journal, 311, 226-230.
Tooby, J., Barkow, J., & Cosmides, L. (1995). The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and
Generation of Culture. New York: Oxford University Press.
Anderson, L.P. (1991). Acculturative stress: a theory of relevance to Black Americans. i, 685-702.
Readings On Help beliefs model and help seeking
*Leong, F. & Zachar, P. (1999). Gender and opinions about mental illness as predictors of attitudes
toward seeking professional psychological help. British J. of Guidance and Counseling, 27, 123132.
*Kung, W. Chinese Americans’help seeking for emotional distress. Social Service Review, 77, 110-134.
* Schonert-Reichi, K. & Muller, J. (1996). Correlates of help seeking in adolescence. J. of Youth and
Adolescence, 25, 705-730.
Addis, M. Men, masculinity and the contexts of help seeking.
Pitner, R. et. Al (2003) The Effects of Group Stereotypes on Adolescents’ Reasoning About Peer
Retribution, Child Development (74:2, pp. 413-425)
Song, S. et. Al (2002) Fatigue Severity Among African Americans: Gender and Age Interactions, Journal
of Black Psychology (28:1, pp. 53-65)
Session 14: Meta-theories and Wrap-up
A.
B.
C.
D.
Review of theory development
Feminist theory, empowerment theory, narrative theory, problem-solving theory
Where do we go from here?
Constructing new theories advantages and disadvantages
16
E. Revision of standing theories
Readings
Carr, E. (2003). Rethinking empowerment theory using a feminist lens: The importance of a process.
Affilia, 18, 8-20.
Coholic, D. (2003). Incorporating spiratuality in feminist social work prespective. Affilia, 18, 49-67.
Hansen, N. (2002). Reflections on feminist identity development: Implications for theory, measurement,
and research. The Counseling Psychologist, 30, 87-95.
Land, H. (2002). The feminist approach to clinical social work. In R. Dorfman, (Ed.) Paradigms of
Clinical Social Work, Vol II. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 227-256.
Fox, G. and Murray, V. (2000). Gender and families: Feminist perspectives and family research. Journal
of Marriage and the Family, 62, 1160-1172.
Maeckelberghe, E. (2004) Feminist Ethic of Care: a Third Alternative Approach. Health Care Analysis.
12(4): 317-327.
17
Guidelines for Theory Presentation
* How did societal and cultural forces and assumptions, and forces from other schools of theory,
culminate in theory development?
* The major theoretical constructs and their adequacy and clarity
* Theextent to which the theory is comprehensive, inclusive and exhaustive with regard to the
life span
* The extent to which the theory is coherent, logical, and addresses proper problem specification
* The extent to which the theory base is adequately explicated
* The uniqueness of the theory
* Theextent to which components of the theory are adequately defined
* How the evolution and maintenance of function and dysfunction, pathology and wellbeing are
viewed
* How wellbeing is viewed
* Research findings of the model and their adequacy:
* The adequacy of the research design
Is the intervention clean
Are measures appropriate to theory and constructs
Are appropriate statistical tests used to analyze data
Are findings adequately described
* The extent to which new knowledge is useful and relevant to practice,
knowledge base
* The extent to which research has effected change in theoretical constructs.
* Thevalue of the model across variant groups respective to race, ethnicity, gender, sexual
orientation, age, class, religion.
* How the theory could be tested or evaluated given current research methods.
* The major strengths and weaknesses of the practice theory
* The need for further growth or adaptation: how it should happen
18