1
Senior Seminar, Psychology 483
Term 4, 2011
Carol Zerbe Enns
Home: 320 South 4th St. West (895-6605)
Office: LAW 106D (895-4351)
e-mail: cenns@cornellcollege.edu
Cell phone: 319-540-5767
Class Hours: See schedule. Hours selected from AM: 9:00-11:00 and PM: 12:30-3.
This course requires substantial and sustained independent research time, which is devoted to the writing
of a senior capstone paper. As a result, the class will not meet as many hours as a typical Cornell College
course. In addition to meeting times listed in the schedule, each class member will meet with me for an
individual conference on a weekly basis.
Overview:
This course is a capstone experience for psychology majors, and provides opportunities to reflect on the
science and profession of psychology. This class focuses on what it means to be a psychologist, how the
field of psychology is currently developing, and what issues and conflicts must be addressed if
psychology is to maintain a viable and effective influence in society. Themes and topics include diversity
within psychology, gender issues, multiculturalism, social responsibility, ethics, applied practice,
research, and the role of scientific psychology in society (e.g., public policy implications).
Class members will engage in activities that encourage them to consider future interests and directions in
psychology and related fields of study. Class members also will write a major paper that demonstrates
their ability to summarize and integrate a major research literature in psychology.
A seminar is a class with many teachers and usually involves gaining a deep understanding of crucial
issues and methods in a specific area of study. As a result, each seminar member is responsible for
reading assigned material and reflecting about issues before class sessions.
Readings and Resources:
American Psychological Association. (2009). Publication manual of the American Psychological
Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Class readings are posted on Moodle.
Discussion Topics:
1. The role and significance of undergraduate psychology: What should a psychology student gain
from a psychology education? Is there a standard body of knowledge in psychology? What are
some current issues in undergraduate psychology?
2. Competing cultures within psychology: Are psychology’s identifications with science and the
helping professions compatible? What is the appropriate blending of science and practice?
3. Multicultural issues in psychology: Does academic psychology continue to maintain a
racial/cultural bias? To what degree is cultural competence important for contemporary
psychologists? What are some tools for enhancing multicultural competence?
4. Gender issues in psychology: In what ways is psychology “gendered?” What are the
implications of the changing gender composition of psychology/psychologists for the future?
How has the study of gender and gender issues changed over time? How should psychologists
study and conceptualize the complex intersections of social identity (e.g., gender, sexual
orientation, ethnicity etc.)?
5. Culture, globalization, social justice, and psychology: How will globalization change the face of
psychology? In what ways is the practice of western psychology ethnocentric? What might a
truly inclusive transnational psychology (or psychologies) look like? What are the
responsibilities of psychologists who work for social justice in the international context?
2
6. Ethical issues in the practice of psychology: What are the major ethical dilemmas faced by
practicing psychologists (e.g., mental health practitioners)? How are psychological ethics
relevant to other fields?
7. Research Dilemmas and Research Ethics: Emerging ethical issues, “research scandals,” and the
challenge of communicating with the public. What are the enduring research ethics questions
within the field of psychology? What is our obligation to protect vulnerable participants? How is
sound research design relevant to ethics? How do we communicate about research findings with
members of the public?
8. What is psychology’s role in the area of public policy? This discussion will explore the range of
public policy issues relevant to psychology. It will examine one issue in greater detail: how
psychological research findings inform controversies related to sexual orientation, gay marriage,
and gay parenting.
Class Evaluation: (approximate percentages assigned to each activity or assignment)
Seminar meetings:
Participation, including writing questions,
leading discussion, & psychology subfield
presentation
Personal statement & ethics autobiography
Review Paper:
Working outline, note cards, brief summaries
First draft of review paper
Final draft of review paper
24-26%
12-14%
8-10%
20-22%
32-35%
Major Research/Literature Review Paper:
Class members will write a comprehensive review paper. The purpose of a review paper is to summarize
the existing research on a given topic in order to describe, evaluate, and synthesize the current state of
knowledge in a topic area.
This assignment will be completed in phases in order to make the task less daunting, and we will discuss
the review paper at regular intervals during the seminar. Personal attributes that help students write a
good-to- excellent review paper include patience, tolerance for ambiguity, appropriate pacing of writing
and research tasks, the ability to work through frustration, and the willingness to formulate and revise
working plans, outlines, and drafts.
Major Research Review Submission Schedule:
By Friday of week 1 (December 2, 5:00 P.M.), class members will submit an APA style reference page
with a minimum of 10 references related to the topic for the final paper. The content of the referenced
articles should be summarized on 10 individual note cards (1 for each study). At this point in the writing
process, students should begin to note similarities and differences across obtained references in terms of
methodology, research question, statistical analyses, and conclusions. (See class handout on note cards for
additional detail.)
a. APA Style References Page with a minimum of 10 references
b. 10 note cards (1 per reference - summarizing the content of each article. For studies, the
note card should include information about participants, methodology, results, and
implications. The note cards become the “building blocks” that you will use when
writing the paper.
3
By Monday of Week 2 (December 5, 5 P.M.), class members will submit summaries of two research
articles, which will be integrated at a later point within the review paper.
By Thursday of Week 2 (December 8, 5 P.M.) class members will submit an APA-style references page
citing a minimum of 25 references (15 new references beyond those submitted during Week 1). The
content of the referenced articles should be summarized on 25 individual note cards. (See class handout
on note cards for additional detail.)
a. APA Style References Page with a minimum of 25 references
b. 25 note cards (1 summarizing the content of each reference and noting differences and
similarities across references)
By Monday of Week 3 (December 12, 5 P.M.), class members will submit an outline that specifies the
structure of their first draft of the paper. The outline should be comprehensive, outlining key points in the
order that they will be addressed and identifying references that will be used to support each key point.
Draft 1 of the paper will be submitted by Wednesday of Week 3 (December 14, 5 P.M.). I will read first
drafts and return them to students as soon as possible. Class members will also participate in a peer
review process following this initial submission.
After receiving feedback, class members will refine and revise the paper. In some situations, the revision
process may require substantial rewriting and the inclusion of additional resources to support points. The
revised draft should be comprehensive, and paragraphs should flow logically from one another. The
language should be concise, and the tone should be formal. Differences in conclusions across studies
should be explained in terms of methodological differences and the author should offer 1) overall
conclusions regarding the state of current research, 2) limitations of the current research, and 3) directions
for future research.
The final draft of the paper should be submitted (in hard copy) by 12:00 noon on the final Wednesday of
the course (December 21). Final papers will be graded according to overall quality, depth, adherence to
APA style, and whether the final draft integrates feedback provided by the instructor on draft one (10
points). Draft one (with revision notes) should be submitted alongside draft two. All research literature
should also be submitted (electronic version is preferred).
During Week 4, each class member will also provide a class presentation (including power point slides)
based on her or his paper. This presentation may become the foundation for a presentation at the annual
student research symposium.
The following are general standards I apply when evaluating the research review.
Superior (A): This paper does not only fulfill the assignment, it also has something original and
important to say and the points it makes are supported well. It is organized effectively, develops
smoothly, and it is written clearly and correctly. It is based on data or a review of the literature that is
clearly related to the points it has to make. Findings from the literature are integrated into a readable
and comprehensive paper. The conclusion suggests that the writer has synthesized the literature and
has identified strengths and limitations of the literature as well as future directions for research and
theory. The paper is correct with regard to mechanics and citation style.
Good (B): This paper fulfills the assignments well. Its general ideas are clear and it is presented
effectively. It handles its sources well, with no serious errors of fact or interpretation. Although it
may not represent insight into the issues, it reports on adequate and appropriate data or literature.
Generally, the paper is correct in usage, appropriate in style, and correct in mechanical standards of
writing, including bibliographic citation.
4
Average (C): This paper fulfills the assignment adequately, but it might be better described as an
annotated bibliography. Points may be hard to follow and the paper may be poorly organized (e.g.,
unbroken narrative with no headings or clear relationships; literature review that summarizes sources
merely in sequence without synthesizing points). There may be errors of fact of interpretation.
Sources or data may be poorly chosen – insufficient in number, of inappropriate types, too old,
lacking in authority, etc. There may be errors in usage, the style may be inappropriate for the
assignment, or there may be errors in mechanics of writing or citation.
Marginal (D/F): This paper does not fulfill the assignment, and may not do what was required. It
may fail to focus on a single topic or subject. It may omit important material lying within its declared
scope or make repeated errors of fact of interpretation.
Personal Statement: Due December 12
The personal statement provides opportunities for students to reflect on their knowledge of psychology,
their strengths as students of psychology, and future growth areas and/or limitations that will be important
to address as they consider future directions. The statement should include commentary about current
goals, personal qualities, and values as they relate to a potential career in psychology. Copies of the
personal statement are shared with the student’s adviser and are kept on file in the department. During
the final stage of the senior year, class members are encouraged to consult advisers to gain additional
feedback about areas discussed in the commentary.
Discussion Leadership and Participation:
This seminar is a course in which participants work together to gain a deeper understanding of issues in
psychology. Each student is responsible for reading assigned material and reflecting on the issues raised
by readings prior to class meetings. Class members will have the opportunity to demonstrate their
understanding of and reactions to reading materials by participating in class discussion and submitting
questions designed to facilitate deeper understanding of issues.
Each class member is responsible for leading class discussion on one occasion (1-2 persons per discussion
topic). Discussion leaders should prepare questions and material for approximately one hour. Each dyad
of discussion leaders should develop a minimum of 10 questions related to the assigned readings, which
should also be submitted at the conclusion of the discussion. Class discussion should be used to develop
understanding of issues, examine various points of view, critically evaluate issues, and draw connections
between various perspectives. I use the following guide to evaluation discussion facilitation. You will
also be asked to fill out a self-evaluation.
Superior (A): Asks thoughtful questions that engage class members; offers insights that have not
been thought of by others. Contributes an appropriate amount to discussion; doesn’t dominate, but
offers more than simply a few good observations. Redirects a discussion that has strayed from the
topic back to critical points.
Very Good (B/B+): Poses questions and discussion comments that are insightful, targeted, and
thoughtful; but offers only a few of these to overall discussion. Alternatively, offers good comments
and questions but may dominate discussion.
Average (C): Contributes to and is attentive to discussion, but tends to restate the obvious or may
ask questions that do not lend themselves effectively to discussion. May reject some viewpoints outof-hand without considering possible implications.
Below Average (C-/D): May offer a few helpful comments to discussion, but otherwise comments
tend to re-state the obvious. Offers personal anecdotes that are tangential to the main topic. Exhibits
some periods of disengagement from discussion.
5
Each class member will also fulfill the role of discussant for one discussion topic. At most psychology
conference symposia, presentations are followed by observations offered by one or two discussants.
Although the roles of discussants can vary somewhat, a major aspect of the role involves advancing
audience understanding by summarizing main points, highlighting key ideas, and identifying key
integrative themes. Sometimes discussants also pose new questions or identify “next steps” for future
discussion. In this class, the most important role of the discussants is to help class members organize their
thinking through a clear summary of what has transpired during discussion. In our class, it will also be
helpful for discussants to comment on the “process” of discussion (e.g., noting times when discussion was
especially productive or less than inspiring).
Discussion Participation and Discussion Questions (including short responses):
Each class member is expected to be an active participant in class discussion. In addition, each class
member will prepare two discussion questions for each discussion issue, as well as a short initial response
to each question (1/3-1/2 page). (Discussion leaders do not need to complete this task on the day they are
responsible for class discussion.) Discussion questions should be posted on Moodle before 11 AM for
any afternoon discussions. Discussion questions may encourage reflection and the expansion of personal
frameworks, promote critical thinking, build connections between the topic and other issues discussed
during the class, or/or help class members consider the implications of the topic or issue. Your questions
should encourage serious reflection on the material and encourage analytical, engaged discussion (not
simply ask for summary or opinion). Below are some generic sentence stems that may help you write
questions that promote critical thinking.
-What are the strengths and weaknesses of....?
(analysis/drawing inferences)
-What is the similarity/difference between.....?
(comparison-contrast)
-What are the personal and social implications of…
(implications of arguments & issues)
-Explain why.....explain how.......
(analysis)
-Why is.....happening?
(analysis/drawing inferences)
-What is another example of......?
(application)
-What are the implications of....?
(analysis/drawing inferences)
-What do we already know about....?
(activation of prior knowledge)
-How does....affect?
(analysis of relationship, cause-effect)
-How does.....tie in with what with.....?
(activation of prior knowledge)
-What does....mean? Why is….important?
(analysis, analysis of significance)
-How does....apply to everyday life?
(application to the real world)
-What is the counterargument for?
(rebuttal to argument)
-What is the best....., and why?
(evaluation of evidence)
-What is a solution to the problem of...?
(synthesis of ideas)
-What causes....? Why?
(analysis of relationship)
-Do you agree/disagree with this statement..? Why?
(evaluation/provision of evidence)
-What is another way to look at?
(adopting other perspectives)
Superior (A): Questions and brief responses demonstrate insightful engagement with several key
concepts or issues identified in articles. Entries show a level of specificity that communicates careful
reading of the content and attention to the type of content listed above. When relevant, entries also
address how themes discussed in separate articles are related to each other.
Good (B): Good questions and entries that address several issues but may not be as insightful or as
detailed as superior entries.
Average (C): Questions and observations tend to be vague (e.g., “This reading is difficult.”),
oversimplify issues, or draw overgeneralizations.
6
Ethics Statement and Autobiography (including genogram): Due December 19
Becoming acculturated within the discipline of psychology includes being attentive to ethics. A variety of
psychologists have proposed that this process should include self-reflection about the origins and content
of one’s personal ethical code (see Bashe, Anderson, Handelsman, & Klevansky, 2007; Handelsman,
Gottliev, & Knapp, 2005; Peluso, 2003). The goal of this paper is to encourage class members to explore
the values, beliefs, motivations, and ideals that they bring to psychology. Understanding and clarifying
the roots of a personal code of ethics are likely to help individuals be more reflective about the ethics
codes they encounter in psychology. In other words, if one has self-awareness about personal influences
on her/his ethical beliefs, the person is less likely to view ethics codes as a document to memorize or
apply in a rigid manner. I am hopeful that class members will view ethics codes as sets of values and
principles that guide thinking and action. By integrating an ethical foundation that has been built over
time with the values of an ethical tradition in psychology, students are more likely to be prepared to deal
with difficult real life issues in professional roles.
Although there is no rigid format for this paper, each person should begin by drawing a simple genogram
and using it as a catalyst for thinking. (I will provide more detail about drawing a genogram.). Second,
this paper assignment may ask you to engage in a higher level of self-disclosure than you would prefer. I
am willing to discuss options for tweaking the assignment if you prefer a more “objective” approach.
Third, although there is no one format that is necessary for this paper, the following questions are
appropriate areas to discuss
 What are your ideas about right and wrong personal behavior, and what are the sources of these
ideas? Whom do you identify as influential? What writers (both within and outside of
psychology) have influenced your thinking?
 What did you learn from your family of origin about ethics, about the concepts of right and
wrong? What formative experiences help to account for how you live your life?
 How do your personal values, background, and traditions interact, support, or conflict with the
professional ethics and principles found in psychology?
 In your interactions with others, what differences have you observed in how individuals define
ethics and wrong/right? What are the sources of these differences?
 What ethical dilemmas have you encountered, and how have these dilemmas influenced your
life?
 What ethical issues are you most aware of in the present? What kinds of things have changed for
you as you have become aware of these issues?
 What aspects of professional ethics (e.g., APA code) are most compatible with your own personal
values, and which professional ethics are least compatible?
 What aspects of psychological ethics codes strike you as “not intuitive?”
 What aspects of the ethics code might be most difficult for you to apply?
 What are your top three values and where do they come from?
 What are three personal needs that you think might conflict with fulfilling your roles as a
psychologist?
 What are some of the issues about which you still need some clarity, and how do you hope to go
about gaining greater clarity?
References. The articles below will serve as good resources for your paper.
Bashe, A., Anderson, S.K., Handelsman, M.M., & Klevansky, R. (2007). An acculturation model for
ethics training: The ethics autobiography and beyond.
Handelsman, M. M., Gottlieb, M. C., & Knapp, S. (2005). Training ethical psychologists: An
acculturation model. Professional Psychology, 36, 59-65.
Peluso, P.R. (2003). The ethical genogram: A tool for helping therapists understand their ethical decisionmaking styles. The Family Journal, 11, 286-291.
7
Presentations on Psychology Subfields:
Students will deliver a 10-minute Powerpoint presentation regarding a subfield within psychology or a
closely related field. The purpose of these presentations is to inform students of career options and
options for further study. The type subfields discussed will be tailored to class interest, but may include:
1) counseling psychology, 2) clinical Psychology, 3) social psychology, 4) neuroscience, 5)
developmental psychology, 6) cognitive/behavioral psychology, 7) industrial-organizational psychology,
8) health psychology, 9) gerontology, 10) quantitative psychology, 11) forensic psychology, 12)
experimental psychology, 13) biological psychology, 14) social work, 15) marriage and family therapy,
16) school Psychology, 17) sports psychology, 18) rehabilitation counseling, 19) physical/occupational
therapy, 20) marketing psychology, 21) media psychology, 22) psychiatric nursing, or 23) psychological
practice in primary care settings (e.g. integrated with general medical practice. If you wish to explore
other options, please discussion these possibilities with me.
In these presentations, students should discuss as many of the following features as possible: 1) the scope
of the subfield and roles played by individuals in the subfield, 2) the career options within the subfield, 3)
salary ranges, 4) career prospects, 5) length of graduate study, 6) competitiveness of educational
programs in the area, 7) educational requirements. Class members should leave the presentation with a
strong grasp of the focus of the field, training requirements, and career outlook. In order for the audience
to gain this information, students must be well-prepared with relevant information and must engage the
audience with adept presentation skills (pacing, voice tone and control, amount of information per slide),
and the tone of the presentation should be conducive to student learning.
Class Policies
Attendance and Timely Submission of Work:
Two unexcused absences will result in the lowering of the final grade by one letter. Please notify me in
advance if you must be absent on a particular date, or let me know as soon as possible if you are ill so I
can make appropriate arrangements.
Due dates for papers may be adjusted for legitimate health, personal reasons, or complications in the
research process. Students who wish to be granted extensions must notify me in a timely fashion. When
class members have not consulted with me about the need for additional time, papers that are submitted
after deadlines will be penalized 1/2 grade for every 24 hour period after the stated deadline.
Make-up Exams and Late Papers
Occasionally students become ill immediately before an exam or the due date of a paper. Students who
wish to request extensions because of illness or personal crises must notify me in a timely fashion (e.g.,
before the day the assignment is due and before a test begins.) In other cases, papers that are submitted
after the deadline will be considered late and will be penalized 1/2 grade for every 24 hour period after
the stated deadline.
Accommodations for Disabilities
Cornell College is committed to providing equal opportunities to all students. If you have a documented
learning disability and will need any accommodation in this course, you must request the
accommodation(s) from the instructor of the course within the first three days of the term. Additional
information about the policies and procedures for accommodation of learning disabilities is available on
the Cornell website at http://cornellcollege.edu/student_affairs/compass/academic-policies.shtml.
8
Honesty in Academic Work
(From the Cornell College Compass)
The College considers Cornell students to be responsible persons whose maturity will develop in a
community that encourages free inquiry. The College expects the highest degree of personal integrity in
all relationships. Any form of dishonesty is a violation of this spirit and of College rules.
A student is expected to explicitly acknowledge ideas, claims, observations, or data of others, unless
generally known. When a piece of work is submitted for credit, a student is asserting that the submission
is her or his work unless there is a citation of a specific source. If there is no appropriate
acknowledgement of sources, whether intended or not, this may constitute a violation of the College's
requirement for honesty in academic work and may be treated as a case of academic dishonesty.
Dishonesty in academic work includes both cheating and plagiarism.
Cheating refers to the use of unauthorized sources of information on examinations or any attempt by
students to deceive the evaluator of an examination, paper, or project. Plagiarism is the act of taking the
work of another and presenting it as one's own, without acknowledgement of the original source.
In general the appropriate acknowledgment of sources involves meeting the following requirements:
Quotations and Paraphrasing.
All direct quotations, even if mingled with original words and ideas, must be placed within quotation
marks and accompanied by a specific citation for the source of the quotation. Unless the information is
generally known, all phrases that are not original to the author - even two or three words - must be placed
in quotation marks and cited. If an existing idea is used but paraphrased or summarized, both the original
author's words and sentence structure must be changed and a specific citation for the source must still be
made. It is always the responsibility of the student to provide precise sources for all ideas, information, or
data he or she has borrowed or adapted. Simply listing sources in a bibliography is not sufficient. Students
who use information from the World Wide Web are expected to follow these same guidelines for the
citation of sources. Failure to cite sources properly constitutes academic dishonesty, whether the omission
is intentional or not.
Ideas and Data.
All students are required to acknowledge the ideas of others. Every student is expected to do her or his
own work in the completion of an assignment or an examination unless either (a) the sources for these
ideas are explicitly cited, or (b) the instructor explicitly allows such collaboration. In addition, a person
giving unauthorized assistance to another on an examination is just as guilty of cheating as the person
who accepts or solicits such aid.
Submitting revisions of academic work previously submitted, either in the current course or in previous
courses, qualifies as academic dishonesty unless the student obtains the explicit permission of all of the
instructors involved.
All data sources must be cited accurately. It is dishonest to fabricate or alter research data included in
laboratory reports, projects, or other assignments. A safe guide is to provide a full citation for every
source consulted. Sources may include, but are not limited to, published books, articles, reviews, Internet
sites, archival material, visual images, oral presentations, or personal correspondence. In addition,
students should always keep previous drafts of their work in order to provide documentation of their
original work. Finally, due to disciplinary differences, students should consult their professor, a librarian,
and/or the Writing Studio for specific instructions on properly providing citations for sources.
9
Class Schedule and Readings
Monday, November 28 (9:00 A.M.)
9:00 AM: Introduction and overview of class assignments
PM: Individual conferences
Reading:
Kuther, E. L. (2012). The psychology major’s handbook (3rd ed.). Wadsworth. (Chapter 5, Writing a
literature review.)
Wagenmakers, E. (2009). Teaching graduate students how to write clearly. Observer, 22(4), 29-30.
DeAngelis, T. (2008). Craft a winning manuscript. GradPSYCH: The magazine of the American
Psychological Association of graduate students, 6(4), 38-40.
Munsey, C. (2008). Making small talk: Experts share secrets for sparking great discussions in the tiniest
of classes. gradPSYCH, 6(4), 14-15.
Recommended reading:
Madigan, R., Johnson, S., & Linton, P. (1995). The language of psychology: APA style as epistemology.
American Psychologist, 50, 428-436.
Tuesday, November 29 (9:00 A.M.)
9:00 AM: Library resources and advanced searching in psychology
Identifying the appropriate depth, breadth, and specificity for the literature review
Instruction with Greg Cotton (Library, Room 212)
PM: Individual conferences
Wednesday, November 30 (12:30 P.M.)
Discussion Topic 1, Part 1:
The role and significance of undergraduate education in psychology
Reading:
McGovern, T. V., Furumoto, L., Halpern, D. F., Kimble, G., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). Liberal
education, study in depth, and the arts and sciences major--psychology. American Psychologist, 46,
598-605. (Pay special attention to sections on orienting assumptions, goals, and structure of the
major.)
American Psychological Association. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major.
Washington, DC: Author. (Skim and review the 10 goals discussed in this document.)
American Psychological Association. (2011). Principles for quality undergraduate education in
psychology. American Psychologist, 66. (Consider quality principle #1 and #3 especially carefully
and consider their relevance to your situation.)
Stoloff, M., McCarthy, M. et al. (2010). The undergraduate psychology major: An examination of
structure and sequence. Teaching of Psychology, 37, 4-15. (How has your program of study been
similar and different from the typical programs described in this research study?)
Dunn et al. (2010). The undergraduate psychology curriculum: Call for a core. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.),
Undergraduate education in psychology: A blueprint for the future of the discipline (pp. 47-61).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. (Read the section on the recommended core
curriculum: pp. 55-59. Other aspects of this chapter are optional.)
Recommended reading:
Boneau, C. A. (1990). Psychological literacy: A first approximation. American Psychologist, 45, 891-900.
10
Thursday, December 1 (12:30 P.M.)
Discussion Topic 1, Part 2:
Emerging issues in psychology education: Career issues, psychology as a science, and the future
Reading:
Issues in psychology education:
Halonen, J.S. (2011). Are there too many psychology majors? White paper prepared for the State
University System of Florida Board of Governors.
Belar, C. D., Nelson, P. D., & Wasik, B. H. (2003). Rethinking education in psychology and psychology
in education. American Psychologist, 58, 678-683.
Jaffe, E. (2011). Identity shift: US psychology departments change their names to reflect the field. APS
Observer, 24 (7), 12-16.
Career issues:
Novotney, A. (2011, July). Psychology job forecast: Partly sunny. gradPSYCH Magazine, 44.
DeAngelis, T. (2008, April). Psychology’s growth careers. Monitor on Psychology, 39(4), 64-71.
Supplementary information:
Rajecki, D.W., & Borden, V.M.H. (2011). Psychology degrees: Employment, wage, and career trajectory
consequences. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(4), 321-335.
Friday, December 2 (12:30 P.M.)
Discussion Topic 2: Competing cultures within psychology
Reading and activities:
Complete the “Epistemic Differential Scale” and “Activities of Psychologists” scale prior to class
Kimble, G.A. (1984). Psychology's two cultures. American Psychologist, 39, 833-839.
Sternberg, R. J. (2005). Unifying the field of psychology. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Unity in psychology:
Possibility or pipedream? (pp. 3-14). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
Bieschke, K.J., Fouad, N. A., Collins, F. L., & Halonen, J. S. (2004). The scientifically-minded
psychologist: Science as a core competency. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 713-723. (Pay
particular attention to the competencies of a scientifically-minded psychologist, pp. 716-720.)
Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). Psychology is a hub science. Observer, 20(8).
Mills, K. (2009). Getting beyond the couch: How does the general public view the science of psychology?
Monitor on Psychology, 40(3), 28-29.
Supplementary items: Past commentaries on the challenges of maintaining a unified psychology
Spence, J. T. (1987). Centrifugal versus centripetal tendencies in psychology: Will the center hold?
American Psychologist, 42, 1052-1054.
Koch, S. (1993). “Psychology” or “the psychological studies”? American Psychologist, 48, 902-904.
Bower, G. H. (1993). The fragmentation of psychology? American Psychologist, 48, 905-907.
Carter, J. A. (2002). Integrating science and practice: Reclaiming the science in practice. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 58, 1285-1290.
Due at 5: Brief description of paper topic, 10 references, and 10 note cards.
Monday, December 5 (12:30 P.M.)
Discussion Topic 3: Multicultural issues in psychology
Presentations about psychology subfields
Reading:
Sue, D. W. (2004). APA award citation and award speech: Whiteness and ethnocentric monoculturalism:
Making the “invisible” visible. American Psychologist, 59, 759-769.
11
Cohen, A.B. (2009). Many forms of culture. American Psychologist, 64, 194-204.
Comas-Díaz, L. (2005). Becoming a multicultural psychotherapist: The confluence of culture, ethnicity,
and gender. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 973-981.
Kiselica, M. S. (1999). Confronting my own ethnocentrism and racism: A process of pain and growth.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 77, 14-17.
Supplementary materials:
Cole, E.R., Case, K.A., Rios, D., & Curtin, N. (2011). Understanding what students bring to the
classroom: Moderators of the effects of diversity courses on student attitudes. Cultural Diversity and
Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17, 397-405.
American Psychological Association. (2003). Guidelines on multicultural education, training, research,
practice, and organizational change for psychologists. American Psychologist, 58, 377-402. (also
available at www.apa.org)
Sue, D. W., Bingham, R. P., Porche-Burke, L., & Vasquez, M. (1999). The diversification of
psychology: A multicultural revolution. American Psychologist, 54, 1061-1069.
Stuart, R. B. (2004). Twelve practical suggestions for achieving multicultural competence. Professional
Psychology: Research and Practice, 35, 3-9.
Due at 5: Two article summaries
Tuesday, December 6 (12:30 P.M.)
Discussion Topic 4: Gender issues in psychology
Gender and psychology careers
Contemporary approaches to studying gender
Presentations on psychology subfields
Reading:
Gender and contemporary career and education issues in psychology
Cynkar, A. (2007). The changing gender composition of psychology. Monitor on Psychology, 38(6), 46.
Willyard, C. (2011, January). Men: A growing minority, gradPSYCH Magazine, 40.
Dembling, S. (2011, November). Are men better at selling themselves? gradPSYCH Magazine, 45.
Contemporary theory and research: From “womanless” psychology to complex conceptual frameworks.
Levant, R. F. (2011). Research in the psychology of men and masculinity using the gender role strain
paradigm as a framework. American Psychologist, 66, 765-776.
Tavris, C. (1993). The mismeasure of woman. Feminism and Psychology, 3, 149-168.
Supplementary materials:
The following articles provide a variety of additional conceptual perspectives on gender in psychlogy:
Stewart, A. J., & McDermott, C. (2004). Gender in psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 519544. (pp. 519-527: background; read pp. 528-539)
Levant, R. F. (1996). The new psychology of men. Professional Psychology, 27, 259-265.
Levant, R.F. (2008). How do we understand masculinity? An editorial. Psychology of Men and
Masculinity, 9, 1-4
The following articles provide additional background on the challenges of implementing intersectional
perspectives in psychology.
Cole, E. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64, 170-180.
Shields, S.A. (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301-311.
Silverstein, L. B. (2006). Integrating feminism and multiculturalism: Scientific fact or science fiction.
Professional Psychology, 37, 21-28.
Reid, P. T. (2002). Multicultural psychology: Bringing together gender and ethnicity. Cultural Diversity
and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 8,103-104.
12
APA’s Guidelines. I (Carol) was one of three task-force co-chairs of this group. It provides a conceptual
framework for working with women.
American Psychological Association (2007). Guidelines for psychological practice with girls and women,
American Psychologist, 62, 949-979.
The following document tracing the changing status of women in psychology over a 30-year period. The
52 resolutions speak to areas of inequality. Included in the document are a variety of efforts to address
these inequalities.
Committee on Women in Psychology. (2004). 52 resolutions and motions regarding the status of women
in psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Wednesday, December 7 (12:30 P.M.)
Discussion Topic 5 : Globalization, social justice, and psychology
Presentations on psychology subfields
Reading:
Marsella, A. J., & Pedersen, P. (2004). Internationalizing the counseling psychology curriculum: Toward
new values, competencies, and directions. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 17, 413-423.
Marsella, A.J. (2009). Diversity in a global era: The context and consequences of differences. Counselling
Psychology Quarterly, 22, 119-135.
Kakkad, D. (2005). A new ethical praxis: Psychologists’ emerging responsibilities in issues of social
justice. Ethics and Behavior, 15, 293-308.
Aubé, N. (2011). Ethical challenges for psychologists conducting humanitarian work. Canadian
Psychology, 52, 225-229.
Shamoo, A.E. (2005). Debating moral issues in developing countries. Applied Clinical Trials,14(6), 8696.
Gauthier, J. (2008). Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists. Psynopsis, 30(4), 1011.
Watters, E. (2010, January 10). The Americanization of mental illness. New York Times.
Supplementary materials:
Marsella, A. J. (1998). Toward a “global-community psychology:” Meeting the needs of a changing
world. American Psychologist, 53, 1282-1291.
Arnett, J. J. (2008). The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs to become less American.
American Psychologist, 63, 602-614. Skim pp. 603-607, emphasize pp. 607-613.
Wessells, M.G. (2009). Do no harm: Toward contextually appropriate psychosocial support in
international emergencies. American Psychologist, 64, 842-854.
APA Resolution on Gender and Cultural Awareness in Psychology (2004)
Sommers-Flanagan, R. (2007). Ethical considerations in crisis and humanitarian interventions. Ethics and
Behavior, 17, 187-202.
American Psychological Association Task Force of Internationalizing the Undergraduate Psychology
Curriculum. (2005). Recommended learning outcomes for internationalizing the undergraduate
curriculum.
Thursday, December 8
Writing and research day
Due at 5: 25 references and 25 notecards
13
Friday, December 9 (12:30 P.M.)
Discussion Topic 6: Ethical issues in psychological practice
Presentations on psychology subfields
Reading:
Pope, K. S., & Vetter, V. A. (1992). Ethical dilemmas encountered by members of the American
Psychological Association: A National Survey. American Psychologist, 47, 397-411.
Jennings, L., Sovereign, A., Bottorff, N., Mussell, M. P., & Vye, C. (2005). Nine ethical values of master
therapists. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 27, 32-47.
Younggren, J. N., & Gottlieb, M. C. (2004). Managing risk when contemplating multiple relationships.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 35, 255-260.
Fisher, C.B., & Oransky, M. (2008). Informed consent to psychotherapy: Protecting the dignity and
respecting the autonomy of patients. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 64, 576-588.
Ethics Codes: Become familiar with the APA ethics code. In addition, peruse at least one additional code.
Identify distinctive features and similarities/differences. Compare the basic principles & priorities
that provide a foundation for the codes.
American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct.
American Psychologist, 57, 1060-1073. Also available at www.apa.org (click on ethics)
Canadian Psychological Association Code of Ethics (Note how the list of 4 principles is different from
those listed in the APA Code)
National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Code of Ethics
American Counseling Association (ACA) Code of Ethics
Feminist Therapy Institute Code of Ethics
Supplementary materials:
Barnett, J. E. (2008). The ethical practice of psychotherapy: Easily within our reach. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 64, 569-575.
Pope, K. S., & Keith-Spiegel, P. (2008). A practical approach to boundaries in psychotherapy: Making
decisions, bypassing blunders, and mending fences. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 64, 638-652.
Anderson, S. K., & Kitchener, K. S. (1996). Nonromantic, nonsexual posttherapy relationships between
psychologists and former clients: An exploratory study of critical incidents. Professional Psychology,
27, 59-66.
Knapp, S., & Slattery, J. M. (2004). Professional boundaries in nontraditional settings. Professional
Psychology: Research and Practice, 35, 553-558.
Sommers-Flanagan, R., Elliott, D., & Sommers-Flanagan, J. (1998). Exploring the edges: Boundaries and
breaks. Ethics and Behavior, 8, 37-48.
Monday, December 12 (12:30 PM)
Discussion Topic 7:
Research dilemmas and research ethics: Ethical issues, “research scandals,” and the challenge of
communicating about research with members of the public
Presentations on psychology subfields
Reading:
APA Ethics Code, Sections on research (Sections 8.01-8.15)
Sieber, J. E. (1994). Will the new code help researchers to be more ethical? Professional Psychology, 25,
369-375. (Although this article was published 17 years ago and referred originally to the “new” 1992
ethics code, the major issues discussed by Sieber remain important considerations for research ethics.)
Shea, C. (2011, November 13). Fraud scandal fuels debate over practices of social psychology. Chronicle
of Higher Education.
14
Lilienfeld, S. O. (2002). When worlds collide: Social science, politics, and the Rind et al. (1998) child
sexual abuse meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 57, 176-188.
Legerski, J., & Bunnell, S.L. (2010). The risks, benefits, and ethics of trauma-focused research
participation. Ethics and Behavior, 20, 429-442.
Supplementary materials.
O’Neill, P. (2011). The evolution of research ethics in Canada: Current developments. Canadian
Psychology, 52, 180-184.
Rosenthal, R. (1994). Science and ethics in conducting, analyzing, and reporting psychological research.
Psychological Science, 5, 127-134.
Sears, D. O. (1994). On separating church and lab. Psychological Science, 5, 237-239.
Due at 5 PM: Paper outline, Personal statement
Tuesday, December 13
Research and writing day
Wednesday, December 14
Research and writing day
Due at 5 PM: Draft 1 of the review paper
Thursday, December 15 (12:30 PM)
Discussion Topic 8: Psychology and Public Policy, With Emphasis on Sexual Orientation as Example
Reading and activities:
Explore the following website: www. apa.org/ppo/pi. This section of the APA website provides
information about the Public Interest Government Relations Office. After browsing the website,
explore one of the 9 areas.
Zimbardo, P. G. (2004). Does psychology make a significant difference in our lives? American
Psychologist, 59, 339-351.
Campbell, J. F. (1996). Psychology student as advocate: Public policy in the classroom. Teaching of
Psychology,23, 116-118.
Materials related to sexual orientation:
APA Resolution on Sexual Orientation and Marriage (July, 2004)
APA Resolution on Sexual Orientation, Parents, and Children (July, 2004
Herek, G. M. (2010). Sexual orientation differences as deficits: Science and stigma in the history of
American psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 693-699.
Herek, G. M. (2006). Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: A social science
perspective. American Psychologist, 61, 607-621.
Patterson, C. J. (2009). Children of lesbian and gay parents: Psychology, law, and policy. American
Psychologist, 64, 727-736.
Supplementary materials:
Guidelines for psychotherapy with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients. (2011). Available at www.apa.org
Garnets, L. D. (2002). Sexual orientations in perspective. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority
Psychology, 8, 115-129.
Greene, B. (2009). The use and abuse of religious beliefs in dividing an conquering between socially
marginalized groups: The same-sex marriage debate. American Psychologist, 64, 698-709.
15
Friday, December 16 (12:30 AM)
TBA
Discussion: Psychological professions of the future (in the wake of health care reform)
Discussions/presentations relevant to personal statements and ethics autobiographies
Reading:
McGrath, R. E., & Sammons, M. (2011). Prescribing and primary care psychology: Complementary paths
for professional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 42, 113-120.
Monday, December 19
Writing day
Due at 5 PM: Ethics autobiography
Tuesday, December 20 (12:30 P.M.)
Paper presentations (approximately 15 minutes, PowerPoint presentations of senior seminar research)
Wednesday, December 21 (9:30 A.M.)
Paper presentations continued
Final draft of review paper due at 12 P.M.