Course Syllabus – PSY 703: Social Psychology



Course Syllabus – PSYC892/592: Seminar in Diversity

Spring Semester 2008, Tuesdays 1:30-4:10, Fine Arts Building B212

Instructor: Eden King, Ph.D.

Email: eking6@gmu.edu Phone: 703-993-1620

Office: DK 3076 Office hours: Wednesdays from 10-11:30am and by appointment

Objectives

This course is a graduate seminar designed to provide an overview of contemporary theories and empirical research related to diversity. Course content will draw heavily from social psychology to address issues related to women, gay and lesbian individuals, and ethnic minorities in the context of school, work, and counseling settings. My goal is that each of you will develop: (1) familiarity with constructs central to understanding diversity and discrimination, (2) an understanding of the perspectives and experiences of actors and targets of prejudice, (3) an ability to utilize empirical research findings to answer diversity-related questions across the fields of psychology and in the real world, (4) a publishable and meaningful research project, (5) insight into your own background and how it affects your social and work life, and (6) critical thinking skills regarding research, theory, methods, and diversity.

Grading

Class participation (20%)

Discussion facilitation (15%)

Personal Identity Paper (5%)

Applied Project (20%)

Research Proposal (40%: Preliminary Proposal- 5%, Paper- 25%, Presentation- 5%, HSRB forms- 5%)

Class Participation & Discussion Facilitation Responsibilities

It is essential that you be present and participative in the class discussion. To improve class discussion, you will be responsible for helping to facilitate discussion on one occasion during the semester. You should try to choose the discussion topic that most closely relates to your interest. Working individually or as a pair (your choice), you will need to be able to summarize each article, indicating its strengths and weaknesses, but more importantly, you will need to bring questions and ideas that facilitate group discussion. Facilitators should identify the core issues and organize them into a logical sequence of topics for group discussion and debate. As discussion leaders, it is your job to provide some framework that seems sensible for discussing the topic. Perhaps you might present an initial framework at the beginning of class (on the board or via overhead) to highlight common (or divergent) themes that run throughout the readings. There are no right or wrong ways to do this. However, the discussion should cover both broad theoretical concerns as well as analysis of specific experiments. The final part of each discussion should focus on identifying issues for future research, including brainstorming about possible experiments that could be done to address these issues. The goal is to provide structure and direction for fellow students during discussion. These questions may assist you in preparing and presenting the research:

1) What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

2) Ask questions about the readings. For instance, if there was some aspect that was particularly difficult or confusing, ask questions about it to help clarify it for everyone.

3) How can these readings be applied to real life? Do they explain why a social phenomenon or problem exists?

4) What are the implications of this research -- for social interaction, for personal relationships, for public policy? Can the findings help us in some way?

5) Provide examples of how these results are seen in everyday life, in the media, in literature, or in film.

6) Provide counter-examples of how opposing results can be seen in everyday life, in the media, in literature, or in film. Suggest reasons why these situations may differ from those of the research. Are there conditions under which you would expect one result versus the other?

7) Suggest future research that could be conducted on this topic.

8) Discuss alternative explanations for the findings. Do the explanations provided by the researchers make sense to you? Are there other explanations that seem equally compelling?

9) Whatever seems important, interesting to you. The point of these questions or comments is to get people thinking about the topic in more depth.

Please note that this responsibility does not absolve you from having questions, ideas, and opinions about the other articles for which you are not responsible!

Your class participation grade will be based on (a) voicing your reflections on the readings (e.g., by noting positive contributions and constructive criticisms), (b) getting others in the class involved (e.g., by asking questions, having stimulating discussion/debate), (c) contributing information and experiences that supplement the readings, and obviously (d) attending class and being on time.

Personal Identity Paper

For this assignment, you will need to write a 2 - 4 page (informal) paper that represents your personal assessment of your ethnic and/or cultural heritage. Discuss your own cultural background by looking at behavior, expectations, and values you have regarding the following social systems variables: family values and behaviors both now and as you were growing up; nationality; ethnicity; religion; language; geographic region; gender; socioeconomic status; educational status; and political orientation. Share what insights you have gain as a result of this assignment. You will also be asked to discuss this paper in class on February 12th.

Applied Project

As a whole, the graduate programs in the psychology department at GMU have a uniquely applied focus. To enhance your learning and to give you an opportunity to apply research findings to the real world, you will work in small groups to work toward reducing prejudice/discrimination in an area of importance to you. (The group composition is up to you, aim for 3-5 people).

The organization, group, or topic you target is up to you. The only limitation is that you must draw from the course material to develop your ideas and approach. As an example, you might examine children's books in a local school, bookstore, or public library to see whether the books contain stereotypes and/or exclude certain groups. You might instead decide to choose a particular organization and evaluate their diversity, diversity policies, and diversity initiatives in some way. You might gather information from websites, interview folks in human resources about their diversity issues, and/or speak with employees and management. If challenges are identified, you could develop a proposal for improvement and present the proposal to someone in a position of authority. Just pick something that is important to you.

You may use any approach (that’s legal and ethical, of course!) that you have sound theoretical reasons for believing may be effective. Try to think creatively about ways to address the problem. I’m willing to help you with this, but your group should brainstorm some ideas before coming to see me.

Before you implement your program, you’ll need to do two things. First, you MUST give me – and I must approve – a proposal with a summary of what you’ll do and where you’ll do it. This proposal is due February 26th. Second, you must discuss the logistics with “the powers that be.” Thus, you should talk to Housing and Residence Life if you plan to implement your project in the residence halls, the specific department head if you’re implementing it in an academic building, or whomever is “in charge;” this MUST be done before you begin the implementation of your intervention. Other than these two requirements, you will have a great deal of latitude in this project, so be creative!

The deliverable associated with this project will be a group paper somewhere between 3-5 pages in length that addresses the connections between the project in which you participated and the course topics, content, and objectives. You should describe the theoretical or empirical work on which your ideas were based, the intervention itself, and what new ideas might be taken from your experience. This paper is due April 22nd.

Grading criteria for the proposal are: adequacy of literature review, rationale for hypotheses, meaningfulness of research question, feasibility of the study (it should be something that can actually be done), soundness of proposed methodology and analysis, and clarity of presentation (including APA style). Presentations should outline the research question, briefly review the literature, and present the proposed study (e.g., methods). Grading criteria for the presentation are clarity of presentation and ability to answer questions from the audience. Class members are expected to provide feedback and to ask questions during the presentations. You should plan on approximately 5 minutes for the presentation.

Research Proposal

A central component of this course is the development of a research project in which you identify an unanswered research question based on a review of extant literature and design an experiment or survey study that tests that question. I want you (either individually or in groups with less than 4 people) to fully develop a research project, from generating the idea to constructing the materials. You will also need to submit (to me) a completed application for approval from the Human Subjects Review Board. (The purpose of this part of the assignment is to encourage you to actually do your projects!)

By March 4th, you will turn in a preliminary proposal of your research idea. Please note that many of the most interesting topics will not be discussed until later in the semester. This means that if you plan to study one of these topics, you will need to read ahead and go outside of the course syllabus in identifying and developing your idea.

In your proposal, you should be sure to address the following questions: What is the question I am interested in answering? What is (are) the relevant theoretical perspective(s)? What do we already know from past research (i.e., has your study idea already been done?) What would I manipulate (or measure) as independent variables? What would I measure as a dependent variable(s)? What are my hypotheses?

You will share your idea with the class on March 4th so that the class collectively can comment and improve upon your initial ideas. In addition, we will have on-going discussions about the projects throughout the semester.

The written proposal will be a completed write-up of the research idea that you have developed after getting feedback from me on your preliminary proposal. This paper should be about 15 pages double-spaced and should generally follow APA format. It should include both an introduction to the proposed study (in which you review past theory and research relevant to your questions), a method section (in which you describe in some detail the participants, design, measures, procedures, and hypotheses that pertain to your proposed study), a brief results section where you anticipate what you would find, and a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of your study. Of course, you will also have a title page and references.

In all group projects, you will be asked to evaluate yourselves and the members of your team to reduce social loafing and ensure that the experience is a positive one for all team members! Please let me know sooner rather than later if any problems arise.

Disabilities and special needs

If you are a student with a disability and you need academic accommodations, please see me and contact the Office of Disability Resources at 703.993.2474. All academic accommodations must be arranged through that office.

Academic Integrity

You are expected to follow the GMU Honor Code. Any form of scholastic dishonesty (e.g., plagiarism, cheating) can result in a variety of negative consequences (not the least of which is failing this course).

Course Schedule

Topics, readings, and assignments tentatively follow the schedule below. Due dates for class assignments will not change, but dates for seminar topics might. All assignments are due at the beginning of class on the due date. Extensions will not be granted. Five percent will be deducted for every day an assignment is late.

|Date |Topic |Readings |Assignments |

|1/22 |Syllabus | |Assign discussion dyads |

|Week 1 |Class overview | | |

|1/29 |What does “diversity” mean anyway? |Allport (1954). Ch. 4 | |

|Week 2 | |APA (2003) | |

| | |Crocker, Major, & Steele (1998) | |

| | |Goffman (1963) Ch. 2 | |

| | |Harrison & Klein (2007) | |

|2/5 |Historical perspective |Blackwell (1982) |Email Eden with group members |

|Week 3 | |Duckitt (1992) | |

| | |Feagin (1991) | |

|Last Day to Add | |Gaines (1995) | |

| | |Kurzban & Leary (2001) | |

|2/12 |Identity |Kleck & Strenta (1980) |PERSONAL IDENTITY PAPER DUE |

|Week 4 | |Phinney (1996) | |

| | |Pittinsky et al. (2006) | |

| | |Tajfel (1982) | |

| | |Sellers & Shelton (2003) | |

|2/19 |Dual Perspectives |Blascovich et al. (2001) | |

|Week 5 | |Clair et al. (2005) | |

| | |Macrae et al. (1994) | |

|2/22 | |Rothgerber & Worchel (1997) | |

|Last Day to Drop | |Shelton & Richeson (2006) | |

|2/26 |Gender Diversity and Sexism |Dozier (2005) |APPLIED PROJECT IDEA DUE |

|Week 6 | |Heilman & Okimoto (2007) | |

| | |Maccoby (1988) | |

| | |Swim et al. (2001) | |

| | |Vescio et al. (2005) | |

|3/4 |Race/Ethnic Diversity and Racial/Ethnic Discrimination|Dovidio et al. (2002) |PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL DUE |

|Week 7 | |Hughes et al. (2006) | |

| | |Moradi (2006) | |

| | |Shelton & Richeson (2005) | |

| | |Sommers (2006) | |

|3/11 |NO CLASS- SPRING BREAK! | | |

|3/18 |Sexual Orientation Diversity and Heterosexism |Balsam & Mohr (2007) | |

|Week 8 | |Carver et al. (2004) | |

| | |Croteau (in press) | |

| | |Meyer (2003) | |

| | |Herek (2004) | |

|3/25 |Experiences of other Stigmatized Individuals |Colella et al. (1998) | |

|Week 9 | |Hebl et al. (2007) | |

| | |Miller et al. (1995) | |

| | |Perry et al. (1996) | |

| | |Trinitapoli (2007) | |

|4/1 |Diversity Issues in Education |Chizhik (2005) | |

|Week 10 | |McDermott (1995) | |

| | |McKown (2008) | |

| | |Pigott & Cowen (2000) | |

| | |Zirkel et al. (2004) | |

|4/8 |Diversity Issues in Clinical Settings |Constantine et al. (2007) | |

|Week 11 | |Constantine (2002) | |

| | |Pederson & Vogel (2007) | |

| | |Vasquez (2007) | |

| | |Wong et al. (2007) | |

|4/15 |Diversity Issues in the Workplace |Brief et al. (2005) | |

|Week 12 | |Glick et al. (2005) | |

| | |Griffith & Hebl (2002) | |

| | |Martel et al. (1996) | |

| | |Sacco & Schmitt (2005) | |

|4/22 |Making Change |Allport (1954; Ch. 29) |APPLIED PROJECTS DUE |

|Week 13 | |Czopp, Monteith, & Mark (2006) | |

| | |Kalev, Dobbin, & Kelly (2006) | |

| | |Kaiser & Miller (2001) | |

| | |Pettigrew & Tropp (2006) | |

|4/29 |Presentations |RESEARCH PRESENTATIONS | |

|Week 14 |Wrap Up | | |

|5/13 |FINAL EXAM PERIOD | |RESEARCH PROPOSAL DUE |

| |1:30-4:15pm | | |

References

Allport, G.W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. New York: Addison Wesley.

American Psychological Association (2003). Guidelines on multicultural education, training, research, practice and organizational change for psychologists. American Psychologist, 58, 377-402.

Balsam, K. F., & Mohr, J. J. (2007). Adaptation to sexual orientation stigma: A comparison of bisexual and lesbian/gay adults. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 306-319.

Blackwell, J. E. (1982). Persistence and change in intergroup relations: The crisis upon us. Social Problems, 29, 325-346.

Blascovich, J., Mendes,W.B., Hunter, S.B., Lickel, B., & Kowai-Bell, N. (2001). Perceiver threat in social interactions with stigmatized others. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 80, 253-267.

Brief, A., Umphress, E. E., & Dietz, J. (2005). Community matters: Realistic group conflict theory and the impact of diversity. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 830-844.

Carver, P. R., Egan, S. K., Perry, D. G. (2004). Children who question their heterosexuality. Developmental Psychology, 40, 43-53.

Chizhik, E. W., & Chizhik, A. W. (2005). Are you privileged or oppressed? Students’ conceptions of themselves and others. Urban Education, 40, 116-145.

Clair, J., Beatty, J., & MacLean, T. (2005). Out of sight but not out of mind: Managing invisible social identities in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 30, 78-95.

Colella, A., DeNisi, A. S., & Varma, A. (1998). Impact of ratee’s disability on performance judgments and choice as partner: The role of disability-job fit stereotypes and interdependence of rewards. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 102-111.

Constantine, M. G. (2007). Racial microaggressions against African American clients in cross-racial counseling relationships. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 1-16.

Constantine, M.G. (2002). Predictors of satisfaction with counseling: Racial and ethnic minority clients' attitudes toward counseling and ratings of their counselors' general and multicultural counseling competence. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49(2), 255-263.

Croteau, J. M., Anderson, M. Z., & Vanderwal, B. L. (2008). Models of workplace sexual identity disclosure and management: Reviewing and extending concepts. Group and Organization Management.

Crocker, J., Major, B., & Steele, C. (1998). Social stigmas. In D. T. Gilbert, S.T. Fiske & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, (pp. 504-553). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.

Czopp, A. M., Monteith, M. J., & Mark, A. Y. (2006). Standing up for a change: Reducing bias through interpersonal confrontation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 784-803.

Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., & Gaertner, S. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 62-68.

Dozier, R. (2005). Beards, breasts, and bodies: Doing sex in a gendered world. Gender and Society, 19, 297-217.

Duckitt, J. (1992). Psychology and prejudice: A historical analysis and integrative framework. American Psychologist, 47, 1182-1193.

Feagin, J. R. (1991). The continuing significance of race: Anti-black discrimination in public places. American Sociological Review, 56, 101-116.

Gaines, S. O, & Reed, E. S. (1995). Prejudice: From Allport to DuBois. American Psychologist, 50, 96-103.

Glick, P. Larsen, S., Johnson, C., & Branstiter, H. (2005). Evaluations of sexy women in low- and high-status jobs. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 389-395.

Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. New York: Prentice Hall. Chapter 2 (pp. 41-104).

Griffith, K. H., & Hebl, M. R. (2002). The disclosure dilemma for gay men and lesbians: “Coming out” at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1191-1199.

Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. (2007). What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1199-1228.

Hebl, M. R., King, E. B., Glick, P., Singletary, S. L., & Kazama, S. (2007). Hostile and benevolent reactions toward pregnant women: Complementary interpersonal punishments and rewards that maintain traditional roles. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92. 1499-1511.

Heilman, M. E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2007). Why are women penalized for success at male tasks? The implied communality deficit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 81-92.

Herek, G. M. (2004). Beyond “homophobia”: Thinking about sexual stigma and prejudice in the twenty-first century. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 1, 6-24.

Hughes, D., Rodriguez, J. Smith, E. P. Johnson, D. J., Stevenson, H. C., & Spicer, P. (2006). Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for future study. Developmental Psychology, 42, 747-770.

Kaiser, C. R.  & Miller, C.T.   (2001).  Stop Complaining!:  The Social Costs of Making Attributions to Discrimination.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 

Kalev, A., Dobbin, F., & Kelly, E. (2006). Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. American Sociological Review, 589-617.

Kleck, R.E., & Strenta, A. (1980). Perceptions of the impact of negatively valued physical characteristics on social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 398, 861-873.

Kurzban, R., & Leary, M. (2001). Evolutionary origins of stigmatization: The functions of social exclusion. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 187-208.

Martell, R. F., Lane, D. M., & Emrich, C. (1996). Male-female differences: A computer simulation. American Psychologist, 157-158.

Maccoby, E. E. (1988). Gender as a social category. Developmental Psychology, 24, 755-765.

Macrae, C. N., Bodenhausen, G. V., Milne, A. B., & Jetten, J. (1994). Out of mind but back in sight: Stereotypes on the rebound. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 808-817.

Major, B., Spencer, S., Schmader, T., Wolfe, C., & Crocker, J. (1996). Coping with negative stereotypes about intellectual performance: The role of psychological disengagement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 34-50.

McDermott, P. A. (1995). Sex, race, class, and other demographics as explanations for children’s ability and adjustment: A national appraisal. Journal of School Psychology, 33, 75-91.

McKown, C., & Weinstein, R. S. (2008). Teacher expectations, classroom context, and the achievement gap. Journal of School Psychology.

Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 674–697.

Miller, C.T., Rothblum, E.D., Felicio, D., & Brand, P. (1995). Compensating for stigma: Obese and nonobese women's reactions to being visible. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 1093-1106.

Pederson, E. L., & Vogel, D. L. (2007). Male gender role conflict and willingness to seek counseling: Testing a mediation model on college-aged men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 373-384.

Perry, E. L., Kulik, C. T., & Bourhis, A. C. (1996). Moderating effects of personal and contextual factors in age discrimination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 628-647.

Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751-783.

Phinney, J.S. (1996). Understanding ethnic diversity: The role of ethnic identity. American Behavioral Scientist, 40, 143-152.

Pigott, R. L., & Cowen, E. L. (2000). Teacher race, child race, racial congruence, and teacher ratings of children’s school adjustment. Journal of School Psychology, 38, 177-196.

Pittinsky, T. L., Shih, M. J., & Trahan, A. (2006). Identity cues: Evidence from and for intra-individual perspectives on positive and negative stereotyping. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 2215-2239.

Rothgerber, H., & Worchel, S. (1997). The view from below: Intergroup relations from the perspective of the disadvantaged group. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1191-1205.

Sacco, J. M., & Schmitt, N. (2005). A dynamic multilevel model of demographic diversity and misfit effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 203-231.

Sellers, R. M., & Shelton, J. N. (2003). The role of racial identity in perceived racial discrimination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1079-1092.

Shelton, J. N., & Richeson, J. A. (2005). Intergroup contact and pluralistic ignorance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 91-107.

Shelton, J.N., & Richeson, J.A. (2006). Interracial interactions: A relational approach. In. M.P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 38, pp. 121–181). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Sommers, S. R. (2006). On racial diversity and group decision making: Identifying multiple effects of racial composition on jury deliberations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 597-612.

Steele, C.M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797-811.

Swim, J.K., Hyers, L.L, Cohen, L.L, & Ferguson, M.J. (2001).  Everyday sexism: Evidence for its incidence, nature, and psychological impact from three daily diary studies. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 31-53.

Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1-39.

Trinitapoli, J. (2007). “I know this isn’t PC, but…”: Religious exclusivism among U.S. adolescents. Sociological Quarterly, 48, 451-483.

Vasquez, J. J. T. (2007). Cultural difference and the therapeutic alliance: An evidence-based analysis. American Psychologist, 878-885.

Vescio, T., Gervais, S. J., Snyder, M., & Hoover, A. (2005). Power and the creation of patronizing environments: Stereotype-based behaviors of the powerful and their effects on female performance in masculine domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 658-672.

Wong, E. C., Beutler, L. E., & Zane, N. W. (2007). Using mediators and moderators to test assumptions underlying culturally sensitive therapies: An exploratory example. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 169-177.

Zirkel, S., & Cantor, N. (2004). 50 years after Brown v. Board of Education: The promise and challenge of multicultural education. Journal of Social Issues, 60, 1-15.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download