Psychology 290-005: Social Neuroscience



PSYC 956-1000: Social Neuroscience

Omri Gillath, Fall 2016

Office Hours: by appt. Tuesday 11-1, 518 Fraser

W 2:00PM – 4:50PM in 327 Fraser

Class Overview

This course is designed to acquaint students with the Social Neuroscience approach as well as recent findings using this approach. The class will focus on particular social phenomena and (a) evaluate the utility of current social neuroscience research examining these phenomena and (b) consider future experimental designs using the Social Neuroscience approach to further inform our understanding of each phenomenon.

Social (cognitive, affective) neuroscience lies at the intersection of two major domains: social psychology and neuroscience. As such, it seeks to explain social and emotional behavior at three levels of analysis: (1) Social, which includes descriptions of experience, behavior, and context; (2) Cognitive, which specifies information processing mechanisms; and (3) Neural, which specifies neural systems or substrates that instantiate the cognitive processes and the related social and emotional responses. After being acquainted with foundational concepts (multilevel analyses of behavior, converging evidence, the interaction of controlled and automatic processes), students will analyze findings in a number of core content domains (including emotions, emotion regulation, self, stereotyping, attitudes and beliefs, social decision making, prosociality, close relationships and attraction), focusing on neuroscience’s contribution beyond traditional methods.

Course Structure

Each week we will read and discuss several articles and/or chapters related to one topic. Beyond the content topic, we will also highlight a specific method/technique and an area or system that are repeatedly referenced with regard to this content area. Each week you’ll be asked to select four readings from the list of readings I provided, and on top of this, add one recent paper (2015/16/in press). You will be asked to share summaries of the papers to the class (ahead of time as a written report, and in class as a part of the discussion), raise questions and concerns, and tie all of your readings together (e.g., compare methodology, highlight overlap, discrepancies, and build up in findings). The goal of the summaries is to generate a class discussion on the articles (i.e., more than a simple “book report”), specifically about the neural underlying mechanisms of the social behavior.

Each week one class member will lead the discussion, and open it up with a short presentation. It is highly recommended that when you prepare you presentation you go beyond the assigned articles/chapters (into the supplemental). As part of the presentation, you are responsible for gleaning the main points in the assigned readings and explaining how these readings are related to the material the class has read as a whole. Early in the quarter, I will present background material. Once everyone is familiar with social neuroscience and at least the outline of its origins and history, the other members of the seminar would take on increasingly active roles. I am hoping to learn a lot myself by thinking about class members’ questions and ideas. The readings for each week are under the week’s heading below. For example, for the second week the readings start with: “Gilbert’s (1999). What the mind's not” paper. Everyone needs to read four of the readings and one new paper.

Grading and Assignments

I would like you to submit, each week (by Tuesday at 5pm), through BlackBoard, a brief written summary of your reactions to that week's readings, including any important questions, observations, ideas, hypotheses, and connections with other literatures. Of course, class attendance, providing good reports, and contributing effectively to discussions will also be important. Additionally, students will have to submit a research paper and present its essence in the last class session.

Your reaction notes or papers should focus on insights, conceptual connections, criticisms, hypotheses, and questions stimulated by the readings and our discussions. Although I encourage you to raise any questions that arise for you, I'd prefer that you not just ask, "What does the author mean by X?" and more often ask, "What are the implications of Idea X for Idea Y, or “What are the implications of paper X for the arguments in paper Y, or of data in paper X for an issue we discussed with respect to paper Y?" from the week we’re discussing or other weeks. Is the paper you’re reading consistent/in-line with the other papers we read or arguments we made. Your reactions will be evaluated with respect to three factors: (a) whether they are generally submitted on time, (b) the quality of your writing (i.e., clarity, coherence, professionalism), and (c) the quality of your ideas (i.e., Do they reflect careful reading and thoughtful consideration of the issues? Do they have the potential to generate productive discussion? Do they suggest new directions for research that could actually be pursued?).

Because you will be exchanging ideas with other members of the seminar, I encourage you to read their comments (on BlackBoard) before coming to class. This will help you get a feel for what is likely to come up for discussion and perhaps allow you to formulate ideas, answers, further questions, etc. in response. This should make the quality of our discussions better.

Completing all weekly posts will count as 25 points toward your final grade. Every missing post up to three, will result with deduction of five points, afterword, all 25 points will be deducted from the total grade. Class presentation(s) will count for another 25 points – presentations should include a review of the readings, AND, at least ONE additional paper you found that is relevant to the topic of that week and is from 2015 or newer. The final paper will account for the last 50 points.

The final paper will be a short proposal for a study that tests a social-neuroscience related question. The study will have to be original, advance knowledge in a clear way, feasible, and approved by me. You will be asked to come up with a topic, a research question, DV and IV, methods, and projected results. More information will be given as the semester progresses.

Late Policy:

The general class policy is that NO LATE PAPERS will be accepted. However, in extremely unusual circumstances, some arrangements may be possible for making up missed work. If circumstances can be foreseen, you should talk to me before an exam or assignment date to discuss arrangements. If you have a problem on submission day that prevents you from showing up or submitting, contact me IMMEDIATELY by e-mail, phone, etc. There is no excuse for not getting in touch right away about your absence!

Academic Misconduct:

As outlined in the University Senate Rules and Regulations: Academic misconduct by a student shall include, but not be limited to, disruptions of classes, giving or receiving unauthorized aid on examinations or in the preparation of reports or other assignments, or knowingly misrepresenting the source of any academic work, falsification of research results, plagiarizing of another's work, or otherwise acting dishonestly in class. Dr. Gillath takes cheating very seriously, as these practices diminish the integrity and standards of your education as well as the reputation of your university. Regular precautions will be taken to prevent cheating. If you are found guilty of any academic misconduct, you will receive a failing grade for this course, and you may be threatened with more severe treatment at the college level. Please don't put yourself or me in the position of dealing with such misconduct.

Students with Disabilities or Special Circumstances:

The Academic Achievement & Access Center (AAAC) coordinates accommodations and services for all KU students who are eligible. If you have a disability for which you wish to request accommodations and have not contacted the AAAC, please do so as soon as possible. Their office is located in 22 Strong Hall; their phone number is 785-864-4064 (V/TTY). Information about their services can be found at . Please contact me privately in regard to your needs in this course.

Please also see me privately in regard to this course so that we can discuss accommodations necessary to ensure full participation and to facilitate the educational experience. More generally, if you have any problems or concerns regarding this course, please contact me as soon as possible. Your feedback (both positive and negative) is integral to how well this course works! We should strive to respect and value the diversity that exists in KU classrooms (e.g., age, gender, ethnicity, national origin, disability, geographic backgrounds, political orientation, and sexual orientation). While we may sometimes disagree with each other on topics discussed in class, it’s important that we remember that appreciating diversity in perspectives is an important part of the learning process. If you ever feel that you are not being given the respect you deserve in class, please let me know.

Intellectual Property Issues:

Course materials prepared by the instructor together with the content of all lectures and review sessions presented by the instructor are the property of the instructor. Video and audio recording of lectures and review sessions without the consent of the instructor is prohibited. On request, the instructor will usually grant permission for students to audio tape lectures, on the condition that these audio tapes are only used as a study aid by the individual making the recording. Unless explicit permission is obtained from the instructor, recordings of lectures and review sessions may not be modified and must not be transferred or transmitted to any other person, whether or not that individual is enrolled in the course.

Writing Assistance:

Most colleges and universities have a writing center, a place for students to talk about their writing with trained peer consultants. At KU, we call our writing centers Writer's Roosts. When you visit, bring your work in progress and an idea of what you would like to work on; organization, support, documentation, editing, etc. The Roosts are open in several different locations across campus; please check the website at writing.ku.edu for current locations and hours. The Roosts welcome both drop-ins and appointments, and there is no charge for their services. For more information, please call 864-2399 or send an e-mail to writing@ku.edu.

Available on Blackboard:

Be sure to check the course website for announcements, reminders, lecture outlines, syllabus, schedule, response paper assignments, etc. Links to other websites of interest will also be found here, including links for extra required reading/exercises. The course documents section will also include brief lecture outlines, and study guides to guide you in the reading of each chapter. These study guides form the basis for all questions on the text that appear on tests (obviously other questions are based on lecture material). BE SURE TO CHECK BLACKBOARD REGULARLY!

Schedule of Classes

August 24th: What Social Neuroscience Is and What (if) Do We Need It For?

A brief overview by Gillath.

Readings (Week1):

1. Gilbert, D. (2002). Are psychology's tribes ready to form a nation? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 3.

2. Klein, S. B., & Kihlstrom, J. F. (1998). On bridging the gap between social-personality psychology and neuropsychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 228-242.

3. Cacioppo, J., T., Berntson, G. G., Lorig, T. S., Norris, C. J., Rickett, E., & Nusbaum, H. (2003). Just because you're imaging the brain doesn't mean you can stop using your head: A primer and set of first principles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 650-661.

4. Harmon-Jones, E., & Beer, J. S. (2009). Introduction to social and personality neuroscience methods. In E. Harmon-Jones & J. S. Beer (Eds.), Methods in social neuroscience (pp. 1-9). Guilford Publications: New York.

5. Ochsner, K.N., & Lieberman, M. D. (2001). The emergence of social cognitive neuroscience. American Psychologist, 56, 717-734.

6. Ward, J. (2012). Introduction to social neuroscience. In J. Ward, The students guide to social neuroscience (3-10). Psychology Press: New York.

Supplemental:

7. Griffin, D. W. & Ross, L. (1991). Subjective construal, social inference, and human misunderstanding. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 319-359.

8. Wegner, D. M., & Gilbert, D. T. (2000). Social psychology – The science of human experience. In H. Bless & J. P. Forgas (Eds.), The message within: The role of subjective experience in social cognition and behavior. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

9. Decety, J. & Keenan, J. P. (2006). Social Neuroscience: A new journal. Social Neuroscience, 1, 1-4.

Aug 31st: Basic principles (Week 2)

1. Gilbert, D. T. (1999). What the mind's not. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 3-11). New York: Guilford.

2. Todorov, A., Harris, L.T., & Fiske, S.T. (2006). Toward socially inspired social neuroscience. Brain Research, 1079, 76-85.

3. Norman, G. J., Hawkley, L. C., Cole, S. W., Berntson, G. G., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2012): Social neuroscience: The social brain, oxytocin, and health. Social Neuroscience, 7, 18-29.

4. Lieberman, M. D. (2012). A geographical history of social cognitive neuroscience. NeuroImage, 61, 432-436.

5. Mather, M., Cacioppo, J. T., & Kanwisher, N. (2013) Introduction to the Special Section: 20 Years of fMRI — What Has It Done for Understanding Cognition? 1-3. (and 41-43)

6. Vul, E., Harris, C., Winkielman, P., & Pashler, H. (2009). Puzzlingly high correlations in fMRI studies of emotion, personality, and social cognition. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 274-290. ()

7. Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S., & Munafò, M. R. (2013). Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14(5), 365-376.

Supplemental:

8. Wegner, D. M., & Bargh, J. A. (1998). Control and automaticity in social life. In D. T. Gilbert & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, Vol. 1 (4th ed.) (pp. 446-496). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

9. Berntson, G. G., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2005). Multilevel analysis: Physiological and biochemical measures. In Eid, M. & Diener, E. (Eds.), Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology. (pp.157-172). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

10. Cacioppo J. T. & Berntson, G. G. (2006). A bridge linking social psychology and the neurosciences. In Lange, P.V. (Ed.) Bridging social psychology. (pp 91-96). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

11. Kihlstrom, J. F. (2007). Social Neuroscience: The Footprints of Phineas Gage (unpublished manuscript).

12. Cacioppo, J. T. & Berntson, G. G. (2005). Analysis of the social brain through the lens of human brain imaging. In Cacioppo, J. T. & Berntson, G. G. (eds.) Social Neuroscience (pp. 1-17). New York: Psychology Press.

Sept. 7th: Beliefs & Expectancies (Week3)

1. Gilbert, D. T. (1991). How mental systems believe. American Psychologist, 46, 107-119.

2. Lane, J. D., & Wegner, D. M. (1995). The cognitive consequences of secrecy. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 69, 237-253.

3. Lieberman, M. D., Ochsner, K. N., Gilbert, D. T., & Schacter, D. L. (2001). Do amnesics exhibit cognitive dissonance reduction? The role of explicit memory and attention in attitude change. Psychological Science, 12, 135-140.

4. Rainville, P., Carrier, B., Hofbauer, R. K., Bushnell, M. C., & Duncan, G. H. (1999). Dissociation of sensory and affective dimensions of pain using hypnotic modulation. Pain, 82, 159-171.

Supplemental:

5. Wager, T. D., Rilling, J. K., Smith, E. E., Sokolik, A., Casey, K. L., Davidson, R. J., et al. (2004). Placebo-induced changes in FMRI in the anticipation and experience of pain. Science, 303(5661), 1162-1167.

6. Kim, H., Somerville, L. H., Johnstone, T., Polis, S., Alexander, A. L., Shin, L. M., et al. (2004). Contextual Modulation of Amygdala Responsivity to Surprised Faces. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 1730-1745.

7. Kosslyn, S. M., Thompson, W. L., Costantini-Ferrando, M. F., Alpert, N. M., & Spiegel, D. (2000). Hypnotic visual illusion alters color processing in the brain. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 1279-1284.

8. Sawamoto, N., Honda, M., Okada, T., Hanakawa, T., Kanda, M., Fukuyama, H., et al. (2000). Expectation of pain enhances responses to nonpainful somatosensory stimulation in the anterior cingulate cortex and parietal operculum/posterior insula: an event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Journal of Neuroscience, 20, 7438-7445.

Sept. 14th: Self (Week4)

1. Baumeister, R. F. (1998). The self. In D. T. Gilbert & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, Vol. 2 (4th ed.) (pp. 680-740). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

2. Tse, P. U. (2014). Introduction: The mind-body problem will be solved by neuroscience. (chapters 1-2)

3. Decety, J., Chaminade, T., Grezes, J., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2002). A PET exploration of the neural mechanisms involved in reciprocal imitation. Neuroimage, 15, 265-272.

4. Farrer, C., Franck, N., Georgieff, N., Frith, C. D., Decety, J., & Jeannerod, M. (2003). Modulating the experience of agency: a positron emission tomography study. Neuroimage, 18, 324-333.

5. Feinberg, T. E., Schindler, R. J., Flanagan, N. G., & Haber, L. D. (1992). Two alien hand syndromes. Neurology, 42, 19-24.

6. Wegner, D. M. (2003). The mind's best trick: How we experience conscious will. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 65-69.

Supplemental:

7. Turk, D. J., Heatherton, T. F., Kelley, W. M., Funnell, M. G., Gazzaniga, M. S., & Macrae, C. N. (2002). Mike or me? Self-recognition in a split-brain patient. Nature Neuroscience, 5, 841-842.

8. Ramachandran, V. S. (1995). Anosognosia in parietal lobe syndrome. Consciousness & Cognition, 4, 22-51.

9. Kelley, W. M., Macrae, C. N., Wyland, C. L., Caglar, S., Inati, S., & Heatherton, T. F. (2002). Finding the self? An event-related fMRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 785-794.

10. Klein, S. B., Loftus, J., & Kihlstrom, J. F. (1996). Self-knowledge of an amnesic patient: Toward a neuropsychology of personality and social psychology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 250-260.

11. Ochsner, K.N., Beer, J.S., Robertson, E.A., Cooper, J., Gabrieli, J. D. E., Kihlstrom, J. F., & D’Esposito, M. (2005). The neural correlates of direct and reflected self-knowledge. Neuroimage, 28, 797-814.

12. Jacques, P. L., Conway, M. A., Lowder, M. W., & Cabeza, R. (2011). Watching my mind unfold versus yours: an fMRI study using a novel camera technology to examine neural differences in self-projection of self versus other perspectives. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 1275-1284.

Sept. 21st: Self-Control (Week5)

1. Arnsten, A. F. (1998). The biology of being frazzled. Science, 280(5370), 1711-1712.

2. Gehring, W. J., Himle, J., & Nisenson, L. G. (2000). Action-monitoring dysfunction in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Psychological Science, 11, 1-6.

3. Carter, C. S., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Botvinick, M. M., Noll, D., & Cohen, J. D. (1998). Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance. Science, 280(5364), 747-749.

4. Gehring, W. J., & Knight, R. T. (2000). Prefrontal-cingulate interactions in action monitoring. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 516-520.

5. McClure, S. M., Laibson, D. I., Loewenstein, G., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). Separate neural systems value immediate and delayed monetary rewards. Science, 306(5695), 503-507.

Supplemental:

6. Wegner, D. M., Broome, A., & Blumberg, S. J. (1997). Ironic effects of trying to relax under stress. Behavior Research & Therapy, 35, 11-21.

7. Botvinick, M. M., Cohen, J., & Carter, C.S. (2004). Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: An update. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 539-546.

8. Bush, G., Luu, P., & Posner, M.I. (2000). Cognitive and emotional influences in anterior cingulate cortex. Trends in Cognitive Science, 4, 215-222.

9. Brass, M., & Haggard, P. (2007). To Do or Not to Do: The Neural Signature of Self-Control. The Journal of Neuroscience, 27, 9141-9145.

Sept 28th: Emotions (Week6)

1. Levenson, R. W. (1999). The Intrapersonal Functions of Emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 13, 481-504.

2. Phan, K. L., Wager, T., Taylor, S. F., & Liberzon, I. (2002). Functional neuroanatomy of emotion: a meta-analysis of emotion activation studies in PET and fMRI. Neuroimage, 16, 331-348.

3. Baxter, M. G., & Murray, E. A. (2002). The amygdala and reward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3, 563-573.

4. Ochsner, K. N., Feldman Barrett, L. (2001). A multiprocess perspective on the neuroscience of emotion. In T. J. Mayne & G. A. Bonanno (Eds.), Emotions: Current issues and future directions (pp. 38-81). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Supplemental:

5. Anderson, A. K., & Phelps, E. A. (2002). Is the human amygdala critical for the subjective experience of emotion? Evidence of intact dispositional affect in patients with amygdala lesions. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 709-720.

6. Calder, A. J., Keane, J., Manes, F., Antoun, N., & Young, A. W. (2000). Impaired recognition and experience of disgust following brain injury. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 1077-1078.

7. Hamann, S. B., Ely, T. D., Hoffman, J. M., & Kilts, C. D. (2002). Ecstasy and agony: activation of the human amygdala in positive and negative emotion. Psychological Science, 13, 135-141.

8. Knutson, B., Adams, C. M., Fong, G. W., & Hommer, D. (2001). Anticipation of increasing monetary reward selectively recruits nucleus accumbens. Journal of Neuroscience, 21, RC159.

9. Sharot, T., Riccardi, A. M., Raio, C. M, & Phelps, E. A. (2007). Neural mechanisms mediating optimism bias. Nature, 450, 102-106.

Oct. 5th: Emotion Regulation (Week7)

1. Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271-299.

2. Ochsner, K. (2007). How thinking controls feeling: A social cognitive neuroscience approach. In P. Winkielman & E. Harmon-Jones (Eds.), Social Neuroscience (106-136). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

3. Beauregard, M., Levesque, J., & Bourgouin, P. (2001). Neural correlates of conscious self-regulation of emotion. Journal of Neuroscience, 21, 1-6.

4. Quirk, G. J., & Beer, J. S. (2006).  Prefrontal invovlement in the regulation of emotion: Convergence of rat and human studies. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 16, 723-727.

5. Gross, J. J. (1998). Antecedent- and response-focused emotion regulation: divergent consequences for experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 224-237.

Supplemental:

6. Wegner, D. M., & Gold, D. B. (1995). Fanning old flames: Emotional and cognitive effects of suppressing thoughts of a past relationship. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 68, 782-792.

7. Beer, J. S., Heerey, E. A., Keltner, D., Scabini, D., & Knight, R. T. (2003). The regulatory function of self-conscious emotion: insights from patients with orbitofrontal damage. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 594-604.

8. Ochsner, K. N., Ray, R. D., Cooper, J. C., Robertson, E. R., Chopra, S., Gabrieli, J. D. E., & Gross, J. J. (2004). For Better or for worse: Neural systems supporting the cognitive down- and up-regulation of negative emotion. Neuroimage, 23, 483-499.

9. Anderson, M. C., Ochsner, K. N., Kuhl, B., Cooper, J., Robertson, E., Gabrieli, S. W., et al. (2004). Neural systems underlying the suppression of unwanted memories. Science, 303(5655), 232-235.

10. Barrett, L. F., Gross, J., Christensen, T. C., & Benvenuto, M. (2001). Knowing what you're feeling and knowing what to do about it: Mapping the relation between emotion differentiation and emotion regulation. Cognition & Emotion, 15, 713-724.

11. Taylor, S. F., Phan, K. L., Decker, L. R., & Liberzon, I. (2003). Subjective rating of emotionally salient stimuli modulates neural activity. Neuroimage, 18, 650-659.

Oct. 12th: Personality & Individual Differences (Week 8)

1. Canli, T., Sivers, H., Whitfield, S. L., Gotlib, I. H., & Gabrieli, J. D. (2002). Amygdala response to happy faces as a function of extraversion. Science, 296(5576), 2191.

2. Canli, T., Desmond, J. E., Zhao, Z., & Gabrieli, J. D. (2002). Sex differences in the neural basis of emotional memories. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science U S A, 99, 10789-10794.

3. Davidson, R. J. (2000). Affective style, psychopathology, and resilience: brain mechanisms and plasticity. American Psychologist, 55, 1196-1214.

4. Knutson, B., Momenan, R., Rawlings, R. R., Fong, G. W., & Hommer, D. (2001). Negative association of neuroticism with brain volume ratio in healthy humans. Biological Psychiatry, 50, 685-690.

5. DeYoung, C. G., & Gray, J. R. (2009). Personality Neuroscience: Explaining Individual Differences in Affect, Behavior, and Cognition. In P. J., Corr, & G. Matthews, (Eds.) The Cambridge handbook of personality psychology (pp. 323-346). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Supplemental:

6. Knutson, B., Wolkowitz, O. M., Cole, S. W., Chan, T., Moore, E. A., Johnson, R. C., Terpstra, J., Turner, R. A., & Reus, V. I. (1998). Selective alteration of personality and social behavior by serotonergic intervention. American Journal of Psychiatry, 155, 373-379.

7. Luu, P., Collins, P., & Tucker, D. M. (2000). Mood, personality, and self-monitoring: negative affect and emotionality in relation to frontal lobe mechanisms of error monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 129, 43-60.

8. Mather, M., Canli, T., English, T., Whitfield, S., Wais, P., Ochsner, K., Gabrieli, J., & Cartensen, L. (2004). Amygdala responses to Emotionally Valenced Stimuli in Older and Younger adults. Psychological Science, 15, 259-263.

9. Sheline, Y. I., Barch, D. M., Donnelly, J. M., Ollinger, J. M., Snyder, A. Z., & Mintun, M. A. (2001). Increased amygdala response to masked emotional faces in depressed subjects resolves with antidepressant treatment: an fMRI study. Biological Psychiatry, 50, 651-658.

10. Ochsner, K. N., Ludlow, D., Knierim, K., Hanelin, J., Ramachandran, T., & Mackey, S. (2006). Neural correlates of individual differences in pain related fear and anxiety. Pain, 129, 69-77.

Oct 19th: Interpersonal Relationships (Week9)

1. Gillath, O., Bunge, S. A., Shaver P. R., Wendelken, C., & Mikulincer, M. (2005). Attachment-style differences in the ability to suppress negative thoughts: Exploring the neural correlates. Neuroimage (Special Issue - Social Cognitive Neuroscience), 28, 835-847.

2. Carter, C. S. (2004). Oxytocin and the Prairie Vole: A love story. In J. T. Cacioppo, & G. C. Berntson (Eds.), Essays in social Neuroscience. (pp 53-64). Boston: MIT Press.

3. Meaney, M. J. (2004). The nature of Nurture: Maternal Effects and Chromatin Remodeling. In J. T. Cacioppo, & G. C. Berntson (Eds.), Essays in social Neuroscience. (pp 1-14). Boston: MIT Press.

4. Eisenberger, N. I, Lieberman, M. D., & Williams, K. D. (2003). Does Rejection Hurt? An fMRI Study of Social Exclusion. Science, 302, 290-292.

5. Gillath, O., (2015). The neuroscience of attachment: Using new methods to answer old (and new) questions. In J. A. Simpson, & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and research: New directions and emerging themes (pp. 39-67). New York: Guilford Press.

Supplemental:

6. Goodall, J. (1986). Social rejection, exclusion, and shunning among the Gombe chimpanzees. Ethology and Sociobiology, 7, 227-236.

7. Singer, T., Seymour, B., O’Doherty, J. P., Stephan, K. E., Dolan, R. J., & Frith, C. D. (2006). Empathic neural responses are modulated by the perceived fairness of others. Nature, 439, 466-469.

8. Bartels, A., & Zeki, S. (2000). The neural basis of romantic love. NeuroReport, 11, 3829-3834.

9. Lemche, E., Giampietro, V. P., Surguladze, S. A., Amaro, E. J., Andrew, C. M., Williams, S. C. R., et al. (2006). Human attachment security is mediated by the amygdala: Evidence from combined fMRI and psychophysiological measures. Human Brain Mapping, 27, 623-635.

10. Gillath, O., Shaver, P. R., Baek J. M., & Chun, S. D. (2008). Genetic correlates of adult attachment style. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1396-1405.

11. Edelstein, R. S., Kean, E. L., & Chopik, W. J. (2012). Women with an avoidant attachment style show attenuated estradiol responses to emotionally intimate stimuli. Hormones and behavior, 61, 167-175.

Oct. 26th: Sex (Week 10)

1. Everitt, B. J. (1990). Sexual motivation: a neural and behavioural analysis of the mechanisms underlying appetitive and copulatory responses of male rats. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 14, 217-232.

2. Harden, K. P. (2014). Genetic influences on adolescent sexual behavior: Why genes matter for environmentally oriented researchers. Psychological bulletin, 140, 434.

3. Oei, N. Y., Rombouts, S. A., Soeter, R. P., van Gerven, J. M., & Both, S. (2012). Dopamine modulates reward system activity during subconscious processing of sexual stimuli. Neuropsychopharmacology, 37, 1729-1737.

4. Gillath, O., & Canterberry, M. (2012). Neural correlates of exposure to subliminal and supraliminal sexual cues. SCAN, 65, 1-13.

Supplemental:

5. Stoléru, S. (2014). Reading the Freudian theory of sexual drives from a functional neuroimaging perspective. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 8, 1-15.

6. Cacioppo, S., Bianchi-Demicheli, F., Frum, C., Pfaus, J. G. and Lewis, J. W. (2012), The Common Neural Bases Between Sexual Desire and Love: A Multilevel Kernel Density fMRI Analysis. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 9, 1048-1054.

7. Cyders, M. A., Dzemidzic, M., Eiler, W. J., & Kareken, D. A. (2016). An fMRI Study of Responses to Sexual Stimuli as a Function of Gender and Sensation Seeking: A Preliminary Analysis. The Journal of Sex Research, 1-7.

8. Jordan, K., Fromberger, P., Laubinger, H., Dechent, P., & Müller, J. L. (2014). Changed processing of visual sexual stimuli under GnRH-therapy–a single case study in pedophilia using eye tracking and fMRI. BMC psychiatry, 14, 142-155.

Nov. 2nd: Stereotyping/Evaluative Categorization (Week11)

1. Amodio, D. M., Harmon-Jones, E., & Devine, P. G. (2003). Individual differences in the activation and control of affective race bias as assessed by startle eyeblink response and self-report. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 738-753.

2. Golby, A. J., Gabrieli, J. D. E., Chiao, J. Y., & Eberhardt, J. L. (2001). Differential Fusiform Responses to Same- and Other-Race Faces. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 845-850.

3. McClelland, J. L., McNaughton, B. L., & O'Reilly, R. C. (1995). Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory. Psychological Review, 102, 419-457.

4. Milne, E., & Grafman, J. (2001). Ventromedial prefrontal cortex lesions in humans eliminate implicit gender stereotyping. Journal of Neuroscience, 21, RC150:1-6.

Supplemental:

5. Phelps, E. A., Cannistraci, C. J., & Cunningham, W. A. (2003). Intact performance on an indirect measure of race bias following amygdala damage. Neuropsychologia, 41, 203-208.

6. Phelps, E. A., O'Connor, K. J., Cunningham, W. A., Funayama, E. S., Gatenby, J. C., Gore, J. C., & Banaji, M. R. (2000). Performance on indirect measures of race evaluation predicts amygdala activation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 729-738.

7. Winston, J. S., Strange, B. A., O'Doherty, J., & Dolan, R. J. (2002). Automatic and intentional brain responses during evaluation of trustworthiness of faces. Nature Neuroscience, 5, 277-283.

8. Amodio, D. M. (2008). The social neuroscience of intergroup relations. European Review of Social Psychology, 19, 1-54.

Nov. 9th: Moral/Social Decision-Making (Week12)

1. Monin, B., Pizarro, D. A., & Beer, J.S. (2007). Reason and emotion in moral judgment and decision-making: Different prototypes lead to different theories. In K. Vohs, R. Baumeister, & G. Lowenstein (Eds). Do emotions hurt or help decisions (pp.219-244)? New York: Russell Sage Foundation Publications.

2. Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J .D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293, 2105-2108.

3. Moll, J., de Oliveira-Souza, R., Eslinger, P. J., Bramati, I. E., Mourao-Miranda, J., Andreiuolo, P. A., & Pessoa, L. (2002). The neural correlates of moral sensitivity: A functional magnetic resonance imaging investigation of basic and moral emotions. Journal of Neuroscience, 22, 2730-2736.

4. Anderson, S. W., Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (1999). Impairment of social and moral behavior related to early damage in human prefrontal cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 1032-1037.

Supplemental:

5. Blair, R. J., & Cipolotti, L. (2000). Impaired social response reversal. A case of 'acquired sociopathy'. Brain, 123, 1122-1141.

6. Rilling, J., Gutman, D., Zeh, T., Pagnoni, G., Berns, G., & Kilts, C. (2002). A neural basis for social cooperation. Neuron, 35, 395.

7. Sanfey, A. G., Rilling, J. K., Aronson, J. A., Nystrom, L. E., & Cohen, J. D. (2003). The neural basis of economic decision-making in the Ultimatum Game. Science, 300(5626), 1755-1758.

8. Adolphs, R., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (1998). The human amygdala in social judgment. Nature, 393, 417-418.

Nov. 16th: Intentions and Attributions (Week13)

1. Lieberman, M. D., Gaunt, R., Gilbert, D. T., & Trope, Y. (2002). Reflection and reflexion: A social cognitive neuroscience approach to attributional inference. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 199-249. [pp. 12-24].

2. Blakemore, S. J., & Decety, J. (2001). From the perception of action to the understanding of intention. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 561-567.

3. Carr, L., Iacoboni, M., Dubeau, M. C., Mazziotta, J. C., & Lenzi, G. L. (2003). Neural mechanisms of empathy in humans: a relay from neural systems for imitation to limbic areas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science U S A, 100, 5497-5502.

4. Gallagher, H. L., & Frith, C. D. (2003). Functional imaging of 'theory of mind'. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 77-83.

Supplemental:

5. Gallagher, H. L., Jack, A. I., Roepstorff, A., & Frith, C. D. (2002). Imaging the intentional stance in a competitive game. Neuroimage, 16, 814-821.

6. Meltzoff, A. N., & Decety, J. (2003). What imitation tells us about social cognition: a rapprochement between developmental psychology and cognitive neuroscience. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 358(1431), 491-500.

7. Mitchell, J. P., Heatherton, T. F., & Macrae, C. N. (2002). Distinct neural systems subserve person and object knowledge. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science U S A, 99, 15238-15243.

Thanks Giving

Nov. 30th: Motivation (Week14)

1. Higgins, E. T., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2000). Motivational science: The nature and functions of wanting. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglarnski (Eds.), Motivational science: Social and personality perspectives (pp. 1–20). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

2. Fishbach, A., & Ferguson, M. J. (2007). The goal construct in social psychology. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins & (Eds.). Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 490-515). Volume II. New York: Guilford Press.

3. Schultheiss, O. C., Wirth, M. M., Waugh, C. E., Stanton, S. J., Meier, E. A. & Reuter-Lorenz, P. (2008). Exploring the motivational brain: effects of implicit power motivation on brain activation in response to facial expressions of emotion. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 3, 333-343.

4. Pessiglione et al. (2007). How the brain translates money into force: a neuroimaging study of subliminal motivation. Science, 316, 904.

Supplemental:

5. Dunning, D. (2001). On the motives underlying social cognition. In N. Schwarz & A. Tesser (Eds.) Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Volume 1: Intraindividual processes (pp. 348-374). New York: Blackwell.

6. Pyszcznski, T., Greenberg, J., & Goldenberg, J. L. (2003). Freedom versus fear: On the defense, growth and expansion of the self. In M. Leary & J. Tangney (eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 314-343). New York: Guilford Press.

7. Kuhl, J. & Kazén, M. (2008). Motivation, affect, and hemispheric asymmetry: Power versus affiliation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 456-469.

8. Cain, C. K. & LeDoux, J. (2008). Emotional processing and motivation: In search of brain mechanisms. In A. J. Elliot (Ed.). Handbook of approach and avoidance motivation. (pp. 17-34). New York: Psychology Press.

9. Robinson, T. E. & Berridge, K. C. (2001). Incentive-sensitization and addiction. Addiction (Abingdon, England), 96, 103-114.

Dec. 7th

Presentation of students’ studies, a final wrap up, and goodbyes.

The instructor reserves the right to modify the syllabus.

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

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

Google Online Preview   Download