Conway, Lucian G.

English

University of Montana

University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Syllabi Course Syllabi Spring 1-2016 PSYX 594.01: Political Psychology Seminar Lucian G. Conway University of Montana - Missoula, luke.conway@umontana.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/syllabi Let us know how access to this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Conway, Lucian G., "PSYX 594.01: Political Psychology Seminar" (2016). Syllabi. 4003. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/syllabi/4003 This Syllabus is brought to you for free and open access by the Course Syllabi at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Syllabi by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact scholarworks@mso.umt.edu. Psychology 594 Syllabus Political Psychology Seminar:  Spring 2016 Course Information Scheduled Time:  8:10 – 9:30 Tuesday, Thursday in LA 138 Instructor:  Dr. Luke Conway Office:  239 Skaggs; ext. 4821 Email:  luke.conway@umontana.edu  (Please note that email is preferred, meaning:  Don’t bother calling me!) Readings:  listed below Office hours:  TBA Notes Disability Accommodations  The University of Montana assures equal access to instruction through collaboration between students with disabilities, instructors, and Disability Services for Students.  If you think you may have a disability adversely affecting your academic performance, and you have not already registered with Disability Services, please contact Disability Services in Lommasson Center 154 or call 406.243.2243.  I will work with you and Disability Services to provide an appropriate modification. Academic Misconduct You are expected to adhere to the university’s student conduct code with regard to academic integrity. Academic misconduct in this course will result in an academic penalty commensurate with the offense as well as possible disciplinary action by the university. Incompletes Departmental and university policies regarding incompletes do not allow changing “incomplete” grades after one year has passed since the “I” was granted. Credit/No Credit For students taking this course Cr/NCr, “Credit” is a grade of A, B, or C. “No Credit” is a grade of D or F.  Note: I no longer allow students to change from traditional grading to credit/no credit once the deadline for doing so has passed.  (In other words, if I have to sign something in order for you to change the grading option, I will not do so.  If you can do it without my approval, I of course will not stop that).   Pre-requisite The pre-requisite for this course is the undergraduate course in social psychology or by consent of instructor. Academic Honesty All students must practice academic honesty.  Academic misconduct is subject to an academic penalty by the course instructor and/or a disciplinary sanction by the University.  All students need to be familiar with the Student Conduct Code.   My Goals A. Provide an overview of major theories and research in Political Psychology.  I want you to get a sense of research and theory relevant to the interface between human psychology and politics. B. Get some history/systems background.  Although this class is not a direct history and systems class, you should get some background in the history and systems that have shaped this field and the culture(s) around it.  We will discuss, for example, the political forces at work in our field, as well as the socio-political forces that partially shaped this and other cultures (e.g., prejudice gender issues).   C. Hone thinking/analysis skills through discussion and debate.  So much of being a good psychologist involves learning to critically analyze the stuff we read and hear for ourselves.  So a lot of this class is designed to help facilitate the development of your own thinking skills by forcing you to interact with other folks about research and theory. D. Gain in-depth knowledge of a few topics.  I want you to get a sweeping feel for the field in general, but I’d also like for you to get really deep into a few topics partially of your choosing.   To that end, you’ll be writing a paper. E. Hone your speaking and writing skills.  In addition, the class discussions and paper will give you another chance to sharpen your speaking and writing skills.  As these skills are almost universally useful no matter what area of psychology, political science, environmental studies, etc., you go into (clinical, academic, applied), I think this is no small thing. What I Expect of You There are a few basic things that I expect out of you in this course.  The percentage of your grade that each portion accounts for is indicated in parentheses: A. Reading/Class Participation (50%) Class participation contains several elements: 1. Be in class.  Class attendance is mandatory.  Every person is allowed 1 week worth of “skips.”  (This will be two class periods if we meet twice a week or one class period if we meet once a week).  Beyond that one skip, you must clear it with me beforehand (at my discretion) and turn in a short critique of the articles you were assigned.  Failure to do so will lead to an automatic reduction in your grade.   2. Do the readings.  We will spend some portion of class time discussing the articles we read.  Thus, I expect each of you to read every assigned article prior to the class period for which it is assigned.  If I am not satisfied that this is occurring, I reserve the right to make the entire class write thought papers over the articles each week.  The readings in this class are intentionally light so that you can have plenty of time to focus on them.   3. Have stuff to say about the readings.  I will supplement the readings with additional information, but I don’t want to talk too much.  So: You should make notes as you read the articles so that you will have lots of things to say about them during class.  (If I perceive that you aren’t making many comments, I will assume you have not read the articles critically – and your grade will reflect that.)   4. Be alert and prepared to interact with others during class.  Think about what others are saying, and be prepared to add to (or respond to) their comments in an orderly fashion. 5. Be extremely nice…but say what you think!  When others are making their comments, be quiet and polite. Don’t interrupt (unruly behavior, talking while others are talking, or being rude to others will not be tolerated), but when it is your turn – say what you think!  Do not be afraid of disagreements, as long as they are within the bounds of good taste (e.g., I won’t tolerate racist comments in any degree, but we can have disagreements about “culture” and what that means, etc.).   6. Learn from what others say.  When I or others give summaries of theory and research, you are expected to learn something.  To ensure that you do, I’ll be expecting you to incorporate some of what you’ve learned into your paper (discussed below).  It would probably be a good idea to take notes, but I’m not going to check up on your method – just the result.   B. Paper (50%) You will be required to write one paper on a topic of your choice.  The paper will be due during finals week.  The paper can take two different forms: • A mini Psychology Review-style theoretical paper that proposes a particular novel theoretical perspective and defends it, or tackles a novel question. • A research proposal relevant to political psychology; this proposal should also include a review of the relevant research/theory.  I do not want research proposals that you have already worked on for another class or these/dissertations.  I want something novel that pertains directly to political psychology in some way!  There will be no specific word minimum/maximum on the two papers, but they will probably be around 8-15 pages of text each.  They should be written in APA format.  Regardless of which of the options you choose for each paper, the purpose of the assignment is the same:  You should think broadly and integratively, you should draw upon as much relevant research as you can, and you should write a paper that is thought-provoking and logically sound.  In marking the paper, I'll be looking for evidence of (a) comprehension of the empirical and conceptual material that we've covered; (b) effective and thoughtful use of that material in defending the statement/position/proposal you are choosing to defend; and (c) careful, integrative, and creative thought.  Some more specific guidelines in order to facilitate each of these goals: You must cite at least 10 articles/chapters in your paper, according to the following breakdown (4+4+2 = 10): (1) cite at least 4 of the papers that you have been assigned to read for class (2) cite at least 4 papers that I presented during the course of our presentations and discussions (3) cite at least 2 papers that we did not read or did not discuss in class at all, e.g., by looking for papers on psychinfo.  Good sources include: Handbook of Political Psychology (for background), Political Psychology, Journal of Social Issues, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, and specialized journals for specific topics.   These specific requirements are intended to force you to think broadly and integratively about the topic you choose, as well as to ensure that you are learning (and are able to apply) something from our class discussions. Course Grading Grades will be based on the usual norms that decide such things: Letter Grade Percentage Letter Grade Percentage A 90% or higher B+ 85 – 89% B 80 – 84% C+ 75 – 79% C 70 – 74% D+ 65 – 69% D 60 – 64% F 59% and below  Course Calendar and Reading List Note I:  These articles can be obtained on e-reserve. (http://eres.lib.umt.edu) The password is “PSY594.”  Note II:  Below the readings are organized by week.  If we meet once a week, then read both papers before that class period.  If we meet twice a week, then read the first paper listed for the first day (e.g., Tuesday) and the second paper for the second day (e.g., Thursday). Week 1 (January 26).  Methods/Overview Tuesday:  (No readings for Tuesday on Week 1)  NOTE: Luke is out of town on Thursday, February 13, so there will be NO CLASS Week 2 (Feb. 1). History and Systems: Politicizing Political Psychology Tetlock, P. E. (1994). Political psychology or politicized psychology: Is the road to scientific hell paved with good moral intentions?  Political Psychology, 15, 509-529.   Arkes, H. R. (2003).  Psychology in Washington: The nonuse of psychological research at two federal agencies.  Psychological Science, 14, 1-6.  Week 3 (Feb 8).  Stereotyping and Prejudice Arkes, H. R., & Tetlock, P. E. (2004). Attributions of implicit prejudice, or “Would Jesse Jackson ‘fail’ the implicit association test?” Psychological Inquiry, 15, 257-278.   Federico, C. M., Holmes, J. W. (2005).  Education and the interface between racial perceptions and criminal justice attitudes.  Political Psychology, 26, 47-75.  Week 4 (Feb 15)  Stereotyping and Prejudice II **Levin, S., Henry, P. J., Pratto, F., & Sidanius, J. (2003).  Social dominance and social identity in Lebanon: Implications for support of violence against the West.  Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 6, 353-368.  Schaller, M., & Abeysinghe, A. M. N. D. (2006). Geographical frame of reference and dangerous intergroup attitudes: A double-minority study in Sri Lanka. Political Psychology, 27, 615-631.   Week 5 (Feb 22).  Political Cognition I Maio, G. R., & Esses, V. M. (1998).  The social consequences of Affirmative Action:  Deleterious effects on perceptions of groups.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 65-74.  Reyna, C., Tucker, A., Korfmacher, W., & Henry, P. J. (2005).  Searching for common ground between supporters and opponents of affirmative action.  Political Psychology, 26, 667-682.  Week 6 (Mar. 1): Political Cognition II Brewer, P. R., & Gross, K. (2005).  Values, framing, and citizens’ thoughts about policy issues: Effects on content and quantity. Political Psychology, 26, 929-948.  Wetherell, G., Reyna, C. and Sadler, M. (2013), Public Option Versus the Market: Perceived Value Violations Drive Opposition to Healthcare Reform. Political Psychology, 34: 43–66. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00923.x Week 7 (March 8). Gender and Politics Issues Bongiorno, R., Bain, P. G., & David, B. (2014). If you're going to be a leader, at least act like it! prejudice towards women who are tentative in leader roles. British Journal of Social Psychology, 53(2), 217-234. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12032   Smith, J. L, Lewis, K. L., Hawthorne, L., & Hodges, S. D. (2013). When Trying Hard Isn’t Natural: Women’s Belonging with and Motivation for Male-Dominated STEM Fields as a Function of Effort Expenditure Concerns. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 3-15. doi: 10.1177/0146167212468332 Week 8 (March 15). Culture and Politics Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (1997). Influences of adaptation to communist rule on value priorities in  Eastern Europe.  Political Psychology, 18, 385-410.  Funk, C. L., Smith, K. B., Alford, J. R., Hibbing, M. V., Eaton, N. R., Krueger, R. F., Eaves, L. J. and Hibbing, J. R. (2013), Genetic and Environmental Transmission of Political Orientations. Political Psychology, 34: 805–819. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00915.x Week 9 (March 22). The Psychology of Public Opinion (Mass Movements, Elections) **Simpson, J. (1987).  Pollstruck.  Policy Options, 8, 3-7.   **Adams, M. (1987).  Pro Polling.  Policy Options, 8, 28-30.   NOTE: The Simpson and Adams articles count for one day – they are short complimentary pieces.  So read both of them for Day 1 this week, and read the Voeten & Brewer article for Day 2.  Fausey, C. M. and Matlock, T. (2011), Can Grammar Win Elections?. Political Psychology, 32: 563–574. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00802.x Week 10 (March 29).  Dictatorships Post, J. M. (1991). Saddam Hussein of Iraq: A political psychology profile.  Political Psychology, 12, 279-289.  Glad, B. (2002). Why tyrants go too far: Malignant narcissism and absolute power.  Political   Psychology, 23, 1-37. Week 11 (April 4). SPRING BREAK – NO CLASS Week 12 (April 11).  Authoritarianism Peterson, B. E., & Gerstein, E. D.(2005).  Fighting and flying: Archival analysis of threat, authoritarianism, and the North American comic book. Political Psychology, 26, 887-904.   Son Hing, L. S., Bobocel, D. R., Zanna, M. P., McBride, M. V. (2007). Authoritarian dynamics and unethical decision making: High social dominance orientation leaders and high right-wing authoritarian followers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 67-81.   Week 13 (April 18).  Political Decision-Making: War and Peace **Conway, L. G., III, Suedfeld, P., & Tetlock, P. E. (2001).  Integrative complexity and political decisions that lead to war or peace. In D. J. Christie, R. V. Wagner, & D. Winter (Eds.), Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology for the 21st century (pp. 66-75). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.  Winter, D. (1993).  Power, affiliation, and war: Three tests of a motivational model.  Journal of  Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 532-545. Week 14 (April 25).  Terrorism/Political Violence Kruglanski, A. W., Chen, Xiaoyan, Dechesne, M., Fishman, S., & Orehek, E. (2009). Fully committed: Suicide bombers’ motivation and the quest for personal significance.  Political Psychology, 30, 331-357.  Post, J. (2005).  When hatred is bred in the bone: Psycho-cultural foundations of contemporary terrorism.  Political Psychology, 26, 615-636. Week 15 (May 2). Personality and Political Leadership Simonton, D. K. (1986).  Presidential personality: Biographical use of the Gough Adjective Check List.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 149-160.  Suedfeld, P., Cross, R. W. and Brcic, J. (2011), Two Years of Ups and Downs: Barack Obama's Patterns of Integrative Complexity, Motive Imagery, and Values. Political Psychology, 32: 1007–1033. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2011.00850.   

PSYX 594.01: Political Psychology Seminar

https://scholarworks.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5002&amp;context=syllabi

PSYX 594.01: Political Psychology Seminar

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Montana