Psychology’s History and Approaches - Advanced Placement Psychology …bettsappsy.weebly.com/uploads/5/9/0/6/59064651/unit_… · · 2016-09-145) PsychSim 5: Psychology’s Timeline

Psychology’s History and Approaches

OUTLINE OF RESOURCES

I. IntroductionIntroductory Exercise: Fact or Falsehood? (p. 2)

II. What Is Psychology?

A. Psychology’s Roots Classroom Exercise: Eminent Psychologists (p. 5) PsychSim 5: Psychology’s Timeline (p. 6) Lecture/Discussion Topics: Aristotle’s Psychology (p. 2)

Psychology’s First Experiments (p. 3)History of Psychology (p. 3)William James—Founding Father of American Psychology (p. 4)

B. Psychological Science DevelopsClassroom Exercises: Psychologist as Scientist (p. 6)

Psychology as Science (PAS) Scale (p. 7)Student Project: Interviewing a Psychologist (p. 6) Student Project/Lecture/Discussion Topic: The Twentieth Century’s Most Eminent Psychologists (p. 6)

III. Contemporary Psychology Lecture/Discussion Topic: Challenges to Psychology’s International Development (p. 7)

A. Psychology’s Biggest Question Classroom Exercises: Self-Assessment on Some of Psychology’s Big Issues (p. 8)

Is Human Nature Fixed or Changeable? (p. 8)

B. Psychology’s Three Main Levels of AnalysisLecture/Discussion Topics: Illustrating Psychology’s Complementary Perspectives: The Case of Andrea Yates

(p. 9) The Biopsychosocial Approach and Obesity (p. 10)The Allure of the Neuroscience Perspective (p. 11) Complementary Perspectives (p. 12) Human Freedom and Choice (p. 12) Social Cognitive Neuroscience (p. 13)

Classroom Exercise: The Scientific Approach (p. 13)Classroom Exercise/Student Project: Applying Psychology’s Specific Theoretical Perspectives (p. 11) Psychology Video Tool Kit: Why Do People Help? Explaining Behavior*

Postpartum Psychosis: The Case of Andrea Yates*

*Video and Psychology Video Tool Kit titles followed by an asterisk are not repeated within the core resource unit.They are listed, with running times, in the Preface of this resource book and described in detail in their FacultyGuides, which are available at www.worthpublishers.com/mediaroom.

1

UNIT 1

C. Psychology’s Subfields Lecture/Discussion Topics: Psychology’s Important Role in Basic Scientific Research (p. 14)

Psychology’s Applied Research (p. 14) Videos: The Many Faces of Psychology*

Psychology: The Human Experience, Module 42: Psychological Principles in Everyday Life*

IV. (Close-Up) Tips for Studying PsychologyClassroom Exercise: Eliciting “Metaphors” for Learning and Teaching (p. 16)

2 Unit 1 Psychology’s History and Approaches

UNIT OUTLINE

I. Introduction (pp. 1–2)

Introductory Exercise: Fact or Falsehood?The Preface to this Teacher’s Resource Book includes aFact or Falsehood questionnaire (Handout P–1) thatcovers the entire text, with one item from each unit. Ifyou have not already used it, you may want to do sonow as part of your introduction to the discipline andthe text as a whole. The Preface also includes sugges-tions on how to use the Fact or Falsehood question-naires that are provided throughout these resources.Alternatively, you may use Handout 1–1, the Fact orFalsehood exercise that relates only to the material inthis unit.

The correct answers to Handout 1–1, as shownhere, can be confirmed on the listed text pages.

1. T (p. 2) 6. T (p. 8)2. F (p. 4) 7. T (pp. 8–9)3. T (p. 6) 8. F (p. 10)4. F (p. 7) 9. F (p. 10)5. T (p. 7) 10. F (p. 13)

II. What Is Psychology? (pp. 2–7)

A. Psychology’s Roots (pp. 2–6)

Lecture/Discussion Topic: Aristotle’s Psychology

You may want to extend the text’s brief discussion ofAristotle. Daniel Robinson stated that Aristotle gave“history’s first fully integrated and systematic account”of psychology. “Directly and indirectly,” continuesRobinson, “it has been among the most influential aswell. Within the surviving works can be found theoriesof learning and memory, perception, motivation andemotion, socialization, personality.”

Son of a court physician, Aristotle was affluent bybirth. Still, as Morton Hunt explains, he was an extraor-dinarily hard worker who spared nothing in his pursuitof knowledge. Because medical knowledge was tradi-tionally passed from father to son, Aristotle learnedmuch about biology. This likely fostered a strong scien-tific and empirical perspective.

Obviously, Aristotle was often wrong. For example,he claimed that mice die if they drink in summertime,

that eels are generated spontaneously, that humans haveonly eight ribs, and that men have more teeth thanwomen. He also thought that the mind must be in theheart because people can recover from head injuries,while wounds to the heart are always fatal. The brain’sfunction? For Aristotle, it was to cool the blood when itbecomes overly warm.

Nonetheless, Aristotle anticipated modern sciencein his insistence that sense perceptions are the essentialraw material of knowledge. Direct observation, heclaimed, is the foundation of understanding. In admit-ting that he did not know how bees procreate, he wrote:“The facts have not yet been sufficiently established. Ifever they are, then credit must be given to observationrather than to theories, and to theories only insofar asthey are confirmed by the observed facts.”

Aristotle valued not only deductive reasoning andformal logic but also inductive reasoning, that is, usingobserved cases or examples to arrive at generalizations.For Aristotle, neither the soul nor the psyche—thethinking part of the soul—can exist apart from thebody. Clearly, he was a monist. In describing how themind uses both inductive and deductive reasoning toarrive at knowledge, he provided, according to RobertWatson, “the first functional view of mental processes.”Our minds, argued Aristotle, note the similarities in aseries of objects and from those commonalities form a“universal,” a word or concept representing not an actu-al thing but a general principle. This provides theavenue to higher levels of knowledge and wisdom.Thus, reason is an active, organizing process that actsupon sense data. His description of thought, and espe-cially of the steps taken in thinking, claims MortonHunt, “sounds as if he based it on laboratory findings.He had none, of course, but being so diligent a collectorof biological specimens, he may well have done some-thing analogous, that is, scrutinized his own experiencesand those of others, treating them as specimens onwhich he based his generalizations.”

Aristotle also formulated a theory of motivation interms of pleasure and pain, described drives that pro-duce various kinds of behavior (e.g., courage, friend-ship, and temperance), and even outlined the theory ofcatharsis to explain our emotional experience of observing theatrical tragedy. Concludes Robert Watson,

the “study of Aristotle is rewarded by a feeling of wonder at the modernity of much of what he says aboutpsychological matters. . . . He was, of course, wrong inmany of his ‘facts’ and he omitted important topics, buthis overall framework of growing, sensing, remember-ing, desiring, reacting, and thinking, with but a fewchanges, bears more than a resemblance to modern psychology.”

Hunt, M. (2007). The story of psychology (Updated andRevised Ed.). New York: Doubleday.

Lecture/Discussion Topic: Psychology’s FirstExperiments

Morton Hunt’s The Story of Psychology is a wonderfulresource for teaching the history of psychology. Thissuperbly written account includes separate chapters onWilhelm Wundt, William James, and Sigmund Freud, aswell as chapters on major schools such as behaviorismand Gestalt psychology.

Hunt opens his book with an account of history’sfirst recorded psychological experiment. In the seventhcentury B.C., Psamtick I, king of Egypt, wanted to provethe long-held belief that the Egyptians were the mostancient race on earth. He posed the hypothesis that ifchildren had no opportunity to learn a language fromthe people around them, they would spontaneouslyspeak the primal, inborn language of humankind, thatis, the natural language of its most ancient people,which Psamtick presumed to be Egyptian. To test hishypothesis, Psamtick kidnapped two infants of a lower-class mother and ordered a herdsman in a remote areato raise them. The children were to be properly fed andcared for but were never to hear anyone speak a word.The experiment worked, although not with the resultexpected by Psamtick. One day, when the children werejust 2 years old, they ran up to the herdsman as hereturned to his cottage from work and cried out“Becos!” Although he did not understand them, whenthey continued to repeat the word, he reported back tothe king. The children were brought to the royal court.When the king also heard them say “Becos,” heinquired and learned that becos was the Phrygian wordfor bread. To his great disappointment, the king con-cluded that the Phrygians were an older race than theEgyptians.

Hunt also records the birth of contemporary psy-chology on a December day in 1879. Wilhelm Wundt, amiddle-aged professor at the University of Leipzig, andtwo young students, Max Friedrich, a German, and G.Stanley Hall, an American, set up the apparatus for anexperiment on the third floor of a shabby buildingcalled Konvikt (“hostel” or “retreat”). On a table theyplaced a chronoscope (a brass clocklike mechanismwith a hanging weight and two dials), a “sounder” (ametal stand with a raised arm from which a ball would

fall onto a platform), and a telegrapher’s key, battery,and rheostat. The various pieces were all wired togetherwith a circuitry as simple as the most basic electrictrain. The three men intended to collect data forFriedrich’s Ph.D. dissertation on “the duration of apper-ception”—the time lag between the participant’s recog-nition that he has heard the ball hit the platform and hispressing of the telegraph key. Hunt writes, “It is not onrecord who made the ball drop that day and who sat at the key, but with the first clack of the ball on theplatform, the click of the key, and the registration ofelapsed time on the chronoscope, the modern era ofpsychology had begun.”


Lecture/Discussion Topic: History of Psychology

The text account of psychology’s history can be readilyexpanded in class. A convenient way to organize thepresentation is in terms of the discipline’s early theoreti-cal schools, in which psychologists typically shared acommon theoretical and methodological orientation andworked on similar problems. The schools of structural-ism and functionalism are introduced in the text. Youcan extend these to a consideration of three otherschools: Gestalt psychology, psychoanalysis, and behav-iorism, which are covered in later text units. (Althoughbehaviorism is introduced in this unit, you may want toinclude in your discussion the additional informationprovided here.)

Gestalt Psychology. In Germany, Max Wertheimer,with assistance from Kurt Koffka and Wolfgang Köhler,founded Gestalt psychology in revolt against Wundt.Interestingly, it was Wertheimer’s simple and ingeniousexplanation of apparent movement, a phenomenon thestructuralists could not explain, that led to the develop-ment of this new psychological school. Wertheimerargued that apparent movement existed as a real phe-nomenon, irreducible to simpler sensations. Gestalt psy-chologists defined psychology as the study of theimmediate experience of the whole organism. Reactingto the structuralists’ analytical approach, they arguedthat the whole is different from the sum of its parts.Psychology should attend to the molar aspects of behav-ior and experience. Perception—in particular, the prin-ciples by which it is organized—received the mostattention from this group. Unit 4 discusses these group-ing rules. Gestaltists also initiated the study of insightand problem solving in animals and humans, issues thathad previously been ignored. Many trace contemporaryinterest in cognitive psychology and phenomenology tothe Gestalt movement. Part B of Unit 7 introduces someof this research.

Unit 1 Psychology’s History and Approaches 3

Psychoanalysis. Unlike the other schools, psycho-analysis developed outside a university setting. Itshowed little interest in most of the traditional subjectareas of psychology. Led by Sigmund Freud, anAustrian physician, it focused on the etiology, develop-ment, and treatment of abnormal behavior. From work-ing with troubled patients in his clinic, Freud concludedthat unconscious mental forces direct our everydaybehavior. Psychological maladjustment results fromunresolved conflicts of which a person is unaware. Freeassociation and dream analysis were among the impor-tant techniques Freud used in exploring the uncon-scious. He maintained that awareness of the uncon-scious forces should enable patients to lead more ration-al and satisfying lives. Unit 10 describes Freud’s theory of personality in depth, and Unit 13 explains hisapproach to therapy. Freud made just one trip to theUnited States. In 1909, he accepted G. Stanley Hall’sinvitation to speak at the twentieth anniversary celebra-tion of Clark University.

Behaviorism. In the United States, John Watson ledthe revolt against introspection that produced the mostinfluential school of psychology. Trained as a function-alist, Watson shifted attention from the functioning ofthe mind to behavior. He argued that psychology shouldstudy only what could be observed and measured objec-tively. Psychol ogy was redefined as the scientific studyof observable behavior. The study of consciousnessthrough the method of introspection (looking inward)was relegated to the trash heap. Watson’s ideas were soinfluential that two years after starting the revolt he waselected president of the American PsychologicalAssociation. Behaviorists focused on how behaviors arelearned and modified, and thus most of their influencehas come through their theories of learning.

Clearly, B. F. Skinner was modern behaviorism’smost important and controversial figure. Operant condi-tioning was the focus of much of his work and is dis-cussed in Unit 6. Skinner insisted that external influ-ences shaped behavior. He died in 1990, still resistingthe growing belief that cognitive processes have a placein the science of psychology. As the text notes, anincreasing number of psychologists in the 1960s beganto recognize that strict behaviorism had its limitations,and so the discipline began to recapture its initial inter-est in mental processes. Today, we define psychology asthe science of behavior and mental processes.

Lecture/Discussion Topic: William James—FoundingFather of American Psychology

William James is one of the most important and intrigu-ing figures in the history of American psychology. Onthe seventy-fifth anniversary of the American Psycho -logical Association, opening speaker David Krechdescribed James as “our father who begat us.” Morton

Hunt devotes a chapter to William James in The Storyof Psychology. It provides a rich resource for supple-menting text coverage of James.

James, the first psychology professor at anAmerican university (Harvard), began teaching the sub-ject in 1875. Within two decades, psychology wastaught at two dozen universities, three psychology jour-nals were being published, and a professional psycholo-gy society had been founded.

James introduced experimental psychology to theUnited States. In fact, he and his students started per-forming laboratory experiments about the same time asWundt and his students. Although James recognized thevalue of experimentation, he found it boring and spentno more than two days a week in the laboratory.Sometimes, he even disavowed the label of psycholo-gist. He told a friend, “I naturally hate experimentalwork.” Referring to Wundt’s laboratory work, helamented, “The thought of psychophysical experimenta-tion and altogether of brass-instrument and algebraicpsychology fills me with horror.” Nonetheless, heaccepted its value, and his students conducted a widevariety of experiments. Moreover, he forced himself todo it when he was convinced it was the best way toprove or disprove a theory. For example, he used him-self as a research participant in testing the ancient beliefthat memory, like a muscle, can be strengthenedthrough exercise. In a series of memory exercises, hefound that exercise actually diminished, at least tem-porarily, the strength of his memory.

As the text notes, it took James 12 years to com-plete the first textbook in psychology. The mammothwork of nearly 1400 pages in two volumes could hardlybe used in the classroom. James quickly turned out anabridged version. The full-length version was known as“James” and the abridgement was referred to as“Jimmy.” In 1894, James was the first American to callattention to Sigmund Freud, and in 1909 he met Freudat Clark University during the psychoanalyst’s only visitto the United States. In contrast to Freud, James avoidedcreating a theoretical system, founded no school,trained few graduate students, and had no school of fol-lowers. While he said something about every topic inpsychology, the following six ideas constituted his chiefinfluence.1. Functionalism: For James, the proper study of psy-

chology was the introspective analysis of the“states of mind” that we are conscious of in every-day life and of the functions they perform for us.He thought that the mind’s processes had evolvedbecause of their life-preserving functions. Thus, tounderstand these complex processes, we need toknow what functions they perform. Hunt suggeststhat we should not view functionalism as a system.Indeed, James deliberately avoided presenting his


ideas as a coherent whole because he thought itwas far too early in the history of the discipline forany grand theory.

2. The nature of mind: James examined every solutionto the mind-body problem and found none to besatisfactory. He thought psychologists should layaside the whole mind-body problem because thediscipline was not ready or able to articulate theconnection between physiological states and mentalstates. Rather, for the present, its proper concernshould be the description and explanation of suchprocesses as reasoning, attention, will, imagination,memory, and feelings. James’ suggestion wouldbecome the dominant view within many branchesof psychology.

3. The stream of thought: Using introspection (look-ing inward) as the major approach to the mind,James argued that his results pointed to an unbro-ken flow of complex conscious thought. Each per-son’s consciousness is a continuum, not a series oflinked experiences or thoughts. Although theobjects of our thoughts or perceptions may seemdistinct and separate, our awareness of them formsa “river” or “stream,” the best metaphor for ourconsciousness.

4. The self: James suggested that “the belief in a dis-tinct principle of selfhood” was an essential part ofthe “common sense of mankind.” Thoughts are notmerely thoughts; they are my or your thoughts. Theperception of personal identity arises from the con-tinuity of the stream of consciousness. Frommoment to moment and from day to day, I knowthat I am the same that I was a moment ago, a dayago, a decade ago. These feelings and the acts asso-ciated with them can be studied and thus they con-stitute the “empirical self.”

5. Will: Some observers suggest that James’ mostvaluable contribution to psychology was his theoryof will—the conscious process that directs volun-tary movements. Our vast supply of informationand experience in achieving desired ends is whatleads us to will an act in the first place. Sometimeswe act unhesitatingly. At other times, choosingwhich idea to ignore and which to attend tobecomes the act of willing. The choice can beinstantaneous or the result of long deliberation andreasoning. To believe in complete determination,thought James, would make us passive and power-less. The belief in free will allows us to consideralternatives, to plan, and, finally, to act on ourplans.

6. The unconscious: Although James was primarilyconcerned with conscious mental life, he carefullydistinguished between those acts that we performby consciously commanding muscular movements

and other acts that have been practiced and thushave become automatic. We walk, climb steps, anddress without thinking of the necessary movements.James wrote that “It is a general principle in psy-chology that consciousness deserts all processeswhere it can no longer be of use. We do betterwithout thinking of the movements required.” Inthis way, James anticipated contemporary researchin which complex voluntary movements such aspiano playing and driving become “overlearned”and are largely carried out unconsciously. In con-trast to Freud, James did not see the unconscious asthe mind’s way of banishing unacceptable sexualdrives from awareness.

7. Emotion: James’ theory of emotion was revolution-ary and the James-Lange theory, discussed in textUnit 8B, is still highly regarded in psychology. This“minor” theory led to far more research than any ofJames’ other ideas. James argued that the emotionwe feel is not what causes bodily symptoms such asa racing heart or sweaty palms. Instead, the nervoussystem, reacting to an external stimulus, producesthose physical symptoms and our perception ofthem is what constitutes emotion.

With these ideas, James transformed an abstractscience into a discipline that spoke directly to personalinterests and concerns. James also influenced psycholo-gy in two other practical ways. His suggested applica-tions of psychological principles to teaching became thecore of educational psychology. In addition, James suc-ceeded in convincing the Rockefeller Foundation andother groups to allocate millions of dollars to the men-tal hygiene movement, the establishment of mental hos-pitals, and the training of mental health professionals.


Classroom Exercise: Eminent Psychologists

Marty Dennis of Augustana College passes along a sim-ple exercise for introducing psychology and its history.It can help correct students’ common misconceptionabout the discipline.

Ask students to write the name of “an eminent psy-chologist from the past” and “a living eminent psychol-ogist and the work for which he or she is known” onhalf a sheet of paper or an index card. Collect theresponses and read them in class. By the time you get tothe tenth or fifteenth “Freud,” the class will be chuck-ling. Most students will leave the second name blank.

Warn students that Freud may receive less coveragein the text and course than they might anticipatebecause psycholo gists certainly do not consider Freudto be the “father” of the discipline. In fact, most havereal concerns about the scientific validity of his theory


and method. Most important, the study of pschopathol-ogy, personality, and psychotherapy, for which Freud isbest known, represents only a small part of the disci-pline. Dennis reports that the exercise helps many stu-dents to realize that their view of the discipline is toonarrow. The exercise also sets the tone for a course ori-ented toward psychological science.

Dennis, M. (2005, January 20). Common myths aboutpsychology. Message posted to [email protected].

PsychSim 5: Psychology’s Timeline

This activity provides a comprehensive synopsis of theorigins of psychology, the early history of psychologyas a discipline, and the major themes in contemporarypsychology. On a tour of the history of psychology, thestudent is introduced to some of the pioneers of psy-chology as a scientific discipline.

B. Psychological Science Develops (pp. 6–7)

Student Project: Interviewing a Psychologist

Appendix A of this resource book includes a project forstudents to learn more about psychology’s subfields byinterviewing your colleagues. If you want to use it now,see Appendix A in this resource book.

Student Project/Lecture/Discussion Topic: The TwentiethCentury’s Most Eminent Psychologists

Steven J. Haggbloom and his colleagues have attemptedto identify the 100 most eminent psychologists of thetwentieth century. Eminence was assessed by scores onthree quantitative variables and three qualitative vari-ables. The quantitative variables were journal citationfrequency, introductory psychology textbook citationfrequency, and survey response frequency (an e-mailsurvey of 1725 members of the American PsychologicalSociety). The qualitative variables were NationalAcademy of Sciences membership, election asAmerican Psychological Association president orreceipt of the APA Distinguished Scientific Contribu -tion Award, and surname used as a eponym (i.e., a psy-chological term such as Pavlovian conditioning orSkinner box) to represent a theory, procedure, test, orapparatus.

The first 25 are listed here. (Many of these appearin Unit 1; others will be identified in later units.)

Rank Name1 B. F. Skinner2 Jean Piaget3 Sigmund Freud4 Albert Bandura5 Leon Festinger

Rank Name6 Carl Rogers7 Stanley Schachter8 Neal Miller9 Edward Thorndike10 Abraham Maslow11 Gordon Allport12 Erik Erikson13 Hans J. Eysenck14 William James15 David McClelland16 Raymond Cattell17 John B. Watson18 Kurt Lewin19 Donald O. Hebb20 George A. Miller21 Clark L. Hull22 Jerome Kagan23 Carl Jung24 Ivan Pavlov25 Walter Mischel

Haggbloom and colleagues suggest a number ofinteresting student projects that utilize the list. Eitherindividually or in small groups, students could (1) iden-tify the most important contributions of one or more ofthe psychologists on the list, (2) develop an argumentfor why a specific psychologist who is not on the mosteminent list should be (or vice versa), (3) debate the rel-ative rankings of two psychologists, or (4) prepare abiography of one of the psychologists.

Haggbloom, S. J., et al. (2002). The 100 most eminentpsychologists of the 20th century. Review of GeneralPsychology, 6, 139–152.

Classroom Exercise: Psychologist as Scientist

Many students view psychologists as strictly mentalhealth professionals. While they know that at least afew teach (after all, you’re there), most will be unawareof the large percentage who conduct research. GeneSmith suggests a simple exercise to highlight this clini-cal bias. Simply ask students to write on a piece ofpaper five adjectives that describe a typical scientist.Next ask them to write down five adjectives thatdescribe a typical psychologist.

When students are invited to present their adjec-tives to the class, it will be obvious that they perceive“psychologist” and “scientist” very differently. Smithreports that among the words students used to describe“psychologist” were accepting, caring, genuine, person-able, and attentive. Among the words used to describe“scientist” were methodical, analytical, resourceful,intelligent, and thorough. The exercise awakens studentsto their misconception of what a psychologist is and


provides you with the opportunity to introduce psychol-ogy as the science of behavior and mental processes.

Buddy Grah suggests an alternative for introducingpsychology as a science. Distribute to each student apiece of paper on which you have drawn a straight hori-zontal line and written “Physics and Chemistry” at oneendpoint and “Art and Philosophy” at the other. Suggestthat the line represents a continuum along which thevarious disciplines can be placed and that each studentshould place psychology on the continuum. You canobtain a class judgment by drawing a line on the chalk-board; then, starting at one end, have students raise theirhands when you reach the point where they have placedpsychology. Stop at the point where approximately halfthe class raise their hands and mark that location. Grahreports that his students tend to place psychology closerto art and philosophy than to physics and chemistry.Ask students why they have placed it where they have.

Grah, B. (1994, August). Student intuitions re science: Aclassroom exercise. Teaching in the PsychologicalSciences (TIPS—Online Discussion Group).

Smith, G. F. (1982). Introducing psychology majors toclinical bias through the adjective generation technique.Teaching of Psychology, 9(4), 238–239.

Classroom Exercise: Psychology as Science (PAS) Scale

James Friedrich’s Psychology as Science (PAS) Scale(Handout 1–2) can be used either before or after stu-dents have read Units 1 and 2 of the text. It is designedto measure the degree to which respondents view thediscipline of psychology as a science. Total scores areobtained by first reversing the numbers circled for items8, 9, 10, 14, 17, 19, and 20 (1 = 7, 2 = 6, 3 = 5, 4 = 4, 5 = 3, 6 = 2, 7 = 1) and then adding them with the actu-al numbers circled for items 3, 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 16, and18 (items 1, 2, 5, 11, and 15 are fillers). Scores canrange from 15 to 105, with higher scores reflecting agreater inclination to perceive psychology as a science.The scale may be useful in introducing the definition ofpsychology as a science as well as the specific method-ology of the discipline. You may also find it useful toknow your students’ perspective on this critical issue.

Using factor analysis, Friedrich has divided thescale into three subscales. If you choose to use only onerather than the entire scale, note that items 3, 4, 12, and13 primarily address respondents’ willingness to placepsychology in the same conceptual or functional frame-work as the hard sciences; items 10, 14, 17, 18, and 20address beliefs regarding the need for psychologicalresearch and the value of methodological training; anditems 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, and 19 tap views of determinismand belief in the predictability of behavior.

You may want to administer this scale at the begin-ning of the course and again at the end to see if stu-dents’ attitudes about psychology have changed.

Friedrich, J. (1996). Assessing students’ perceptions ofpsychology as a science: Validation of a self-report meas-ure. Teaching of Psychology, 23, 6–13.

III. Contemporary Psychology (pp. 8–13)

Lecture/Discussion Topic: Challenges to Psychology’sInternational Development

As the text indicates, psychology continues to grow andexpand around the world. The numbers of both psy-chologists and students studying psychology areincreasing rapidly. At the same time, notes MarkRosenzweig, psychology faces severe challenges to itsinternational development. Among them are the following.

First, psychology faces increased demands foraccountability. Sciences in general and psychology inparticular are called on to demonstrate their relevanceand thereby merit for continued financial and socialsupport. Proponents of particular methods of treatmentand prevention are being asked to demonstrate theireffectiveness. To answer this latter question, APA’sDivision of Clinical Psychology helped organize aseries of meetings that produced an excellent book, AGuide to Treatments That Work. The question of ethicsin the treatment of research participants and in thedelivery of psychological services is another dimensionof the accountability issue. Ethical standards vary wide-ly. Examination of the codes in different countries mayeventually help psychological organizations derive coreethical values that hold across the world.

Second, psychology must reach beyond laboratoriesand clinics in applying its science more broadly.Specifically, Rosenzweig suggests, psychological initia-tives are needed to aid expanding populations to live inharmony and thus avoid the ethnic conflicts that rage inmany parts of the world today. At present, the numberof psychologists involved in addressing such problemsis small. Establishing interdisciplinary teams, to whichpsychology makes its unique contribution, may be animportant first step. Clearly, the aspects of psychologythat apply to such social problems must be supportedand developed.

Third, psychology needs to gain an appropriateclassification among the disciplines. Presently, psychol-ogy is classified in a variety of ways, depending on thecountry, and even that classification varies among uni-versities within a given country. Psychology is most frequently classified as a social science. In some coun-tries, particularly in Europe, psychology is classified


in both the social sciences and the humanities. The classification as a humanity helps explain why someEuropean psychologists report difficulty in obtainingresearch funding and space. In the United States andCanada, psychology is often classified as a biologicaland a social science, or in a class of its own, but not inthe humanities. Classification is important for stablerelations with other sciences and for obtaining researchsupport both within universities and from externalsources.

Fourth, psychology must resolve how it will partic-ipate in and help meet the needs of the “knowledgesociety.” Psychology must take steps to participate fullyin the electronic communication channels that makepossible a new kind of world science. Other natural sci-ences seem to be ahead of psychology in terms oforganized data banking. Although psychologists inmany countries have gained access to the Internet, oth-ers find such access limited and expensive. In this way,technological advances are widening the gap betweenindustrial and developing countries. Rosenzweig con-cludes that finding ways to bridge this gap is essentialfor the full international development of psychology.

Rosenzweig, M. (1999). Continuity and change in thedevelopment of psychology around the world. AmericanPsychologist, 54, 252–259.

A. Psychology’s Biggest Question (pp. 8–9)

Classroom Exercise: Self-Assessment on Some of Psychology’s Big Issues

The text notes that during its history, psychology haswrestled with fundamental issues that will be discussedthroughout the text. In addition to the nature-nurtureissue, human rationality versus irrationality and stabili-ty versus change remain fundamental questions. Forexample, are we deserving of the name Homo sapiens—wise humans? In some ways, we are smarterthan the most powerful computers. In other ways, weare prone to systematic bias and error. In terms of sta-bility versus change, do our individual traits persist aswe age? Do our personalities change in different situa-tions?

Handout 1–3 can be used to introduce students tothe issues of stability versus change, human rationalityversus irrationality, and nature versus nurture. In addi-tion, the handout will help students to appreciate thatpsychological research often attempts to answer ques-tions we all ask about behavior and on which we have atleast tentatively formulated a position.

In scoring, emphasize that the test is primarilyintended to introduce and stimulate discussion of someof psychology’s important issues, not to provide anaccurate self-assessment. At best, the scores are sugges-tive of a person’s perspective on the issues. Items 1, 4,7, 10, and 13 represent the “rationality-irrationality”

scale; to calculate their total score, students shouldreverse the numbers before items 4 and 10 (0 = 5, 1 =4, 2 = 3, 3 = 2, 4 = 1, and 5 = 0) and then add the num-bers for all five items. Scores can range from 0 to 25,with higher scores suggesting a stronger belief inrationality. Items 2, 5, 8, 11, and 14 represent the “sta-bility versus change” scale; reverse the number placedbefore 11, and then add the numbers for all five items.Scores can range from 0 to 25, with higher scores indi-cating a stronger belief in stability of behavior acrosstime and situation. Items 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 representthe “nature-nurture” issue; reverse the numbers placedbefore 6 and 15, and then add all the numbers on thescale. Scores can again range from 0 to 25, with higherscores reflecting a stronger belief in the role of nature.

Students are typically eager to know how theycompare with their classmates on these issues. You canform small discussion groups or ask for volunteers toshare their positions as well as their rationale with thefull class. Collecting the data can provide some roughindication of your students’ initial leaning on issues thatwill reappear throughout the course.

Yet another alternative, suggested by James Waller,is to have students clarify their own philosophies ofpsychology by writing their personal position on one ormore of the polarities. Review briefly in class thesemajor issues in psychology and then have studentswrite, in a few paragraphs, their own opinion on theissue. The exercise will help them organize and clarifytheir thoughts and, most importantly, actively engagethem with psychology’s big issues from the beginning.

Waller, J. (1994). Philosophies of psychology: A discov-ery process for undergraduates. Teaching of Psychology,21, 33–35.

Classroom Exercise: Is Human Nature Fixed orChangeable?

Related to both the nature-nurture and stability-changeissues are questions regarding the fixed versus change-able character of people. Handout 1–4 is one of themany scales Carol Dweck has used to distinguishbetween entity and incremental theorists. Entity theo-rists tend to think traits are fixed, whereas incrementaltheorists see traits as changeable. To score the scale,students should first reverse the numbers they placed infront of items 3, 5, 7, and 8 (i.e., 1 = 6, 2 = 5, 3 = 4, 4 = 3, 5 = 2, 6 = 1). Then, they should add up the num-bers in front of all eight statements to obtain a totalscore. Scores can range from 8 to 48. Lower scoresreflect the belief that traits are fixed (entity theorists);higher scores indicate a belief that traits are changeable(incremental theorists).

In contrast to incremental theorists, entity theoristsare more likely to believe that a person’s underlyingcharacter can be revealed by a single behavior or per-formance. This difference is true for both positive and


negative acts. In other words, entity theorists tend tobelieve that what they see on the outside reflects whatpeople are like on the inside. This applies not only toother individuals and groups but also to themselves. Forexample, entity theorists experience setbacks in theiracademic performance as reflecting their lack of ability.They tend to become defensive and often feel helpless.In contrast, incremental theorists value learning andgrowth and respond to adversity with increased effortand strategies for change. They tend to be resilient.

Dweck and her colleagues have measured the brainwaves of students with these contrasting mindsets.Students took a test composed of very difficult ques-tions. Precisely 1.5 seconds after the students answereda question, the computer indicated whether theyresponded correctly or incorrectly. And exactly 1.5 seconds after that, the computer gave the rightanswer. To determine when the students’ attention wasmost focused, the investigators measured their brains’electrical activity. Students with an entity or fixedmindset stopped paying attention once they learned ifthey were right or wrong. Those with an incremental orgrowth mindset were more focused on learning the realanswer.

Dweck and her colleagues have shown how it ispossible to change people’s mindsets. Junior highschool students with low math scores were given eightsessions of training in study skills. Half the studentsalso received instruction in the malleability of intelli-gence. They were told that the brain is a muscle that canbe strengthened with hard work. Results indicated thatin contrast to those not given this instruction, those wholearned the malleable mindset rebounded with bettergrades. Their teachers also reported changes in theirmotivation. Dweck has now designed a computer soft-ware program of this strategy called “Brainology,”which is being tested in 20 New York City schools.

The contrasting mindsets also react differently inrelationships. In her book Mindset: The New Psych -ology of Success, Dweck describes how those withfixed and growth mindsets are likely to respond differ-ently to rejection in a love relationship. Those with afixed mindset feel judged and labeled by the rejection.They see themselves as branded as unlovable and arelikely to lash out. The number one goal is revenge.Conversely, those with a growth mindset are more likelyto respond to rejection with understanding and forgive-ness and a desire to move on. Although deeply hurt bywhat happened, they want to learn from it. One personwith such a growth mindset stated, “That relationshipand how it ended really taught me the importance ofcommunicating. I used to think love conquers all, but Inow know it needs a lot of help. I also learned some-thing about who’s right for me. I guess every relation-ship teaches you more about who’s right for you.”

Because of their growth mindset, they did not feel per-manently branded. They tried to learn something aboutthemselves and relationships that would be useful inhaving a better experience in the future.

In class you can relate Dweck’s research to thenature-nurture issue and its practical implications. Fromwhat is presented here, you can also challenge studentsto demonstrate how her work reflects the biopsychoso-cial approach. Most notably, Dweck’s work on contrast-ing mindsets reflects the important of the cognitive orpsychological approach. But clearly, her inclusion ofbrain scans demonstrates the potential insights thatcome from a biological approach. Efforts to changemindsets highlight the importance of the social or envi-ronmental perspective.

Dweck, C. S. (2007, May). Can personality be changed?Keynote address presented at the 19th AnnualConvention of the Association for Psychological Science,Washington, DC.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology ofsuccess. New York: Random House.

Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motiva-tion, personality, and development. Philadelphia:Psychology Press.

B. Psychology’s Three Main Levels of Analysis (pp. 9–11)

Lecture/Discussion Topic: Illustrating Psychology’sComplementary Perspectives: The Case of Andrea Yates

Presenting the case of Andrea Yates will not only stimu-late students’ interest but will also help you to intro-duce psychology’s complementary perspectives.Perhaps most importantly, it will help you demonstratethe complexity and multiple causes of behavior.

On June 20, 2001, after her husband had left forwork, Andrea Yates, a Houston mother, drowned herfive children in the family bathtub. She told police thatshe drowned the children to save them from burning inhell. A jury rejected her insanity defense, and she wassentenced to serve life at a psychiatric prison. InJanuary 2005, a Texas Appeals Court overturned herconviction because a psychiatrist for the prosecutionhad falsely testified that he had consulted for a Law andOrder episode, which the Texas court stated may havecontributed to the jury’s rejection of Yates’ insanitydefense. Retried in 2006, Yates again entered a plea ofnot guilty by reason of insanity, and the second juryacquitted her. Yates was sent to a hospital, not prison.She was committed by the court to a high-security men-tal health facility where she received medical treatment.In 2007, Yates was moved to a low-security state mentalhospital. Under Texas law, she is under the jurisdictionof U.S. District Judge Belinda Hill, who oversaw bothtrials, for the rest of her life. Yates could be released


only if Hill finds that she is mentally competent and nolonger a danger to herself or others.

Ask your class, “What do you believe to be thecauses of Andrea Yates’ murder of her children?” Youare sure to have a lively discussion in which studentswill provide diverse answers.

Do we find the cause in her private mental func-tioning (cognitive perspective)? Clearly, Andrea experi-enced low self-esteem. At the time she killed her chil-dren, she believed she was possessed and that the signof Satan (666) was marked on her scalp. She told thepolice that her children “weren’t developing correctly”and that drowning them was the only way to save them.

Do we find the cause in her mental disorder or ill-ness that may have a biological basis (neuroscience andbehavior genetics perspectives)? Mood disorders run infamilies, and Andrea’s was no exception. A sister andtwo brothers were also on antidepressants. Researchindicates that brain chemistry plays a role in psycholog-ical disorder. The neurotransmitter serotonin appearsscarce in depression. Diagnosed as suffering from post-partum depression with psychosis, she had been takenoff her antipsychotic medication about a month beforethe children’s deaths. Andrea’s husband, Russell,claimed he had been pleading with doctors to again pre-scribe Haldol, used in treating people who hear voicesor have delusional thoughts.

Do we find the cause in her social environment(behavioral and social-cultural perspectives)? Why didher doctor take her off her antipsychotic medication?More importantly, was this really a family affair?Andrea’s in-laws report that her husband was not social-ly supportive. He claimed he had never changed a dia-per. How could he leave her alone with the five childrenwhen she could barely care for herself? Why, after doc-tors had strongly recommended no more children, didhe impregnate her a fifth time? And where was herextended family when she needed help so desperately?Martin Seligman has effectively argued that the individ-ualism of American society (and most other Westernsocieties) plays a critical role in its accelerating rate ofdepression.

Finally, ask students what important principle thiscase might reveal. The class is likely to conclude thatthere are many factors that shape human behavior.

Lecture/Discussion Topic: The BiopsychosocialApproach and Obesity

Research on obesity effectively illustrates both theimportance and complementary nature of psychology’slevels of analysis. In class you might explain how bio-logical, psychological, and social-cultural factors allcontribute to understanding what has rapidly becomethe United States’ number one health threat. Two-thirdsof American adults are considered overweight andalmost half of them obese, double the rate 40 years ago.

Moreover, it is becoming a global problem. EconomistBarry Popkin states, “In a very short time many low-and middle-income countries have attained rates ofoverweight and obesity greater than or equal to those ofthe USA and Europe.”

The biology of obesity questions the notion thatbeing overweight is only a matter of a weak will.Evolutionary psychologists observe that getting fat is anevolutionary advantage. Early humans who could beststore energy when food was abundant for use in leantimes survived to pass down their genes. PsychologistPaul Rozin notes that “we’re hardwired to spend as littleenergy as possible. . . . [A] general rule that animalsfollow is to do as little as you can to do what you haveto do. They try to get more calories but use up thefewest calories getting them.” Studies of adoptees andtwins indicate a genetic influence on body weight.Identical twins have very similar weights even whenreared apart. Genetics influences the number and size offat cells that determine our body weight. Obese people’s“weight thermostats” are set higher; when their weightdrops below the set point, their hunger increases andmetabolism decreases.

A variety of psychological factors also contributeto obesity. Our eyes rule our bellies, suggests Barbara J.Rolls of Pennsylvania State University, partly becausewe were told to “clean our plate” when young. Three-year-olds, she reported, tend to stop eating when theyare full. However, when she served adults macaroni andcheese on four different days, the larger the portions,the more they ate, despite the fact that they all reportedsimilar levels of satiety. Similarly, she reported, adultsate twice as many M&M’s from a jumbo package thanfrom a small one as well as more potato chips from abigger bag than from a smaller one. It is also clear thatwhen people are given more variety, they eat more. Ourfeelings, too, lead to overeating. For those who are con-sciously restraining their eating, feeling anxious ordepressed can unleash the urge to eat. And once a dietis broken, the person often concludes, “what the heck”and binges.

Finally, social-cultural factors contribute toovereating. Paul Rozin notes that America is a cultureof bigness: “When someone comes to your house, theworst thing you can do is not give them enough food.The French would be more concerned about givingthem food of high quality.” Compared with the French,Americans eat more but enjoy it less, usually hurryingthrough meals. Even in fast-food outlets, the French eatmore slowly. Kelly D. Brownell of Yale Universitylabels our current social setting a “toxic environment”of food: “Unhealthy food is highly accessible, it’s con-venient, it’s engineered to taste good, it’s heavily pro-moted, and it’s inexpensive. If you wanted to engineer agood food environment, you’d have the reverse of allthat.” Brownell notes that both the politics and econom-


ics of agriculture encourage overproduction of food,which then has to be marketed. “You sell the food bysweetening it, by offering it in larger portions, and bypromoting it very heavily.”

Clearly, biological, psychological, and social-cultural influences are all important to understandingthis major health threat. They supplement one another,with each shedding important light on obesity. The dif-ferent levels of analysis are not competing but comple-mentary, because, as quoted in the text, “everything isrelated to everything else.”

Hebert, R. (2005, January). The weight is over. APSObserver, 20–24.

Classroom Exercise/Student Project: ApplyingPsychology’s Specific Theoretical Perspectives

To foster students’ understanding of psychology’s cur-rent perspectives, provide them some practice in apply-ing them to a behavior other than anger (described inthe text). In small groups of, say, four or five studentseach, have them identify a behavior pattern they findinteresting. Randy Larsen and David Buss suggest usingpersonality characteristics such as procrastination, nar-cissism, and perfectionism, although any behavior pat-tern that catches the group’s interest will work. Havethem prepare seven sentences about the characteristic,one to represent each of psychology’s current perspec-tives: neuroscience, evolutionary, behavior genetics,psychodynamic, behavioral, cognitive, and social-cultural. Each sentence should make a statement orraise a question about the behavior pattern from a givenperspective. Give the groups 15 or 20 minutes for thetask and then have them describe their chosen behaviorpattern and list their statements for the full class.

Alternatively, or in addition, distribute Handout1–5 to each student or to each small group. It providesseven sentences regarding prosocial or helping behavior.Each statement represents one of psychology’s currentperspectives. Give students 5 or 10 minutes to link eachstatement to its appropriate perspective. The correctanswers follow: 1. Evolutionary 2. Biological 3. Psychodynamic 4. Cognitive 5. Humanistic 6. Social-cultural 7. Behavioral

Larsen, R. J., & Buss, D. M. (2008). Personality psychol-ogy: Domains of knowledge about human nature (3rded.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Lecture/Discussion Topic: The Allure of theNeuroscience Perspective

Psychological explanations of behavior often seem toattract greater public interest when they include neuro-science information. Moreover, the popular media regu-larly reports new neuroscience discoveries and newapplications of neuroscience findings to our physicaland psychological well-being as well as to politics, eco-

nomics, and the law. Recently, Deena SkolnickWeisberg and her colleagues questioned whether ourfascination with the neuroscience perspective may inter-fere with our ability to consider critically the underlyinglogic of a psychological explanation. Other lines ofresearch have suggested that people may believe expla-nations because they find them intuitively satisfying,not because they are accurate. As Unit 2 reveals, humanintuition is vulnerable to error.

Weisberg’s team of investigators tested theirhypothesis by giving naive adults, students in a neuro-science course, and neuroscience experts brief descrip-tions of behavioral phenomena followed by one of fourtypes of explanations, according to a 2 (good explana-tion versus bad explanation) × 2 (without neuroscienceversus with neuroscience) design. Importantly, the neu-roscience information was in all cases irrelevant (asconfirmed by the neuroscientists) to the logic of theexplanation.

For example, the research team described the well-established false consensus effect as one of the 18behavioral phenomena. (Unit 2 defines the false con-sensus effect as the tendency to overestimate the extentto which others share our beliefs and behaviors.) Morespecifically, the researchers cited our tendency toassume that others know what we know, sometimescalled the curse of knowledge. They then offered fourexplanations following the experimental designdescribed previously.

The good explanation (based on careful research)without neuroscience: “Researchers claim that thiscurse happens because subjects have trouble switchingtheir point of view to consider what someone else mightknow, mistakenly projecting their own knowledge untoothers.”

The bad explanation (circular restatement of thephenomenon and thus not explanatory) without neuro-science: “Researchers claim that this curse happensbecause subjects make more mistakes when they haveto judge the knowledge of others. People are better atjudging what they themselves know.”

The neuroscience statement added to each of theabove explanations consisted of the following: “Brainscans indicate that this curse happens because of frontallobe brain circuitry known to be involved in self-knowledge.”

The results indicated that research participants inall three groups (naive adults, students in a neuro-science course, and neuroscience experts) reported thatgood explanations were more satisfying than bad ones.However, those in the two nonexpert groups also judgedthat explanations with logically irrelevant neuroscienceinformation were more satisfying than explanationswithout. The neuroscience statements had a particularlysignificant effect on nonexperts’ judgments of bad


explanations, apparently masking otherwise salientproblems in these explanations.

Weisberg, D. S., Keil, F. C., Goodstein, J., Rawson, E., &Gray, J. R. (2008). The seductive allure of neuro-science explanations. Journal of Cognitive Neuro -science, 20, 470–477.

Lecture/Discussion Topic: Complementary Perspectives

The notion that different perspectives are not necessari-ly contradictory but can in fact complement one anotheris important and can be further developed in class. Asimple illustration suggested by Stephan Evans, aphilosopher who has written much on the philosophy ofscience in psychology, may be helpful.

Have students imagine a poem that has been hand-written with a pen. It is possible to describe the poem instrictly physical terms as a set of ink marks on paper.This description could be made even more basic by pro-viding a chemical analysis of the ink and paper. Such adescription could be very useful if someone wished toknow whether the poem is likely to fade and becomeillegible over the years. A third level of descriptionwould be to view the poem as a collection of letters ofthe English alphabet. A fourth would be to view thepoem as a collection of English words. Finally, someonemight describe the poem as a literary creation.

In analyzing these different descriptions, should weask, “Which one is true?” Of course not. While theystate very different things, they are complementary.Each account is accurate and potentially useful. Theyare simply different ways of looking at the same event.

Similarly, the different perspectives in psychologyare not necessarily contradictory. They are often differ-ent ways of looking at the same behavior. The variousacademic disciplines, too, offer complementary per-spectives on human experience. Which one is most rele-vant depends on your major interest. For example, loveis described in innumerable ways. A physiologist mightdescribe love as a state of arousal. A psychologist mightexamine how the emotion of love is influenced by suchfactors as belief similarity or physical attractiveness. Apoet might extol the sublime experience that love cansometimes be. A theologian might describe love as thegoal, the God-given epitome of human relationships.Successful explanations of human functioning at onelevel need not invalidate explanations at other levels.

Evans, C. S. (1982). Preserving the person. GrandRapids, MI: Baker Book House.

Lecture/Discussion Topic: Human Freedom and Choice

Does the biopsychosocial approach that incorporatesthe three main levels of analysis allow for human free-dom and choice? Or, are we totally shaped by our biol-ogy and past and present environment?

Clearly, the belief that we cannot affect our ownbehavior can produce disastrous results. Psychologist

Janice Hastrup cites the intriguing case of MickeyMantle, star centerfielder for the New York Yankees,whose belief in genetic determinism probably cost himyears. Mantle’s father died at age 40 from Hodgkin’sdisease; several uncles also died before age 40.According to Hastrup, Mantle started thinking, “I prob-ably am going to die young, so I might as well enjoymyself.” A 46-year-old Mantle lamented, “If I knew Iwas going to live this long I would have taken bettercare of myself.” A person with an alcohol dependencywhose hedonistic behavior caused irreparable liver dam-age, the Hall-of-Famer died in 1995 at the relativelyyoung age of 63. Hastrup suggests that it was Mantle’sbelief and not necessarily any genetic predispositionthat caused his early demise. Today about one-third ofthe population shares Mantle’s narrow outlook regard-ing family history of disease. It is sometimes called“one-factor health reasoning.”

Morton Hunt suggests that mainstream modernpsychology that includes terms such as “purposivebehavior,” “intentionality,” “decision making,” “self-control,” “choices,” and “self-efficacy” leaves room fora psychology of will. Social cognitive theorist AlbertBandura proposes a psychology of agency in which heargues that we act as agents who intentionally regulateour own behavior and life circumstances. In a 2004address to the American Psychological Society, he stat-ed that humans are “producers of their life circum-stances not just products of them.” For Bandura, thearrows in text Figure 1.1 clearly go both ways. Forexample, he notes that research on brain developmentunderscores the influential role that agentic action playsin shaping the function and structure of the brain. Hestates, “It is not mere exposure to stimulation but agen-tic action in exploring, manipulating, and influencingthe environment that counts. By regulating their motiva-tion and activities, people produce the experiences thatform the functional neurobiological substrate of sym-bolic, social, psychomotor, and other skills.”

Bandura identifies four key properties of humanagency. The first is intentionality. Human intentionsinclude action plans and strategies for carrying themout to reach a goal. A second property of agency isforethought, which involves the temporal extension ofagency. Through cognitive representation, visualizedfutures are brought into the present to guide and moti-vate our behavior. Self-reactiveness is a third agenticproperty. Not only do we have the capacity to makechoices and action plans, we also have the ability toexecute them, that is, to link our thoughts with actions.The fourth property of agency, argues Bandura, is self-reflectiveness. We are self-examiners of our own func-tioning. We reflect on our personal efficacy, the sound-ness of our thoughts and actions, and the meaning ofour pursuits. We make adjustments, if necessary.


Bandura also argues that people do not simply reactto changes in evolution. Rather, “they are prime moversin the coevolution process. . . . [T]he uniqueness ofhumans resides in these self-directing and self-transforming capacities.” As agents of their own devel-opment, people have “devised ways of adapting flexiblyto remarkably diverse geographic, climatic, and socialenvironments.” Many psychologists would agree. Weare both creators and creatures of our personal andsocial worlds.

Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of humanagency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1,164–180.

Jaffe, E. (2004, September). Mickey Mantle’s greatesterror. APS Observer, 37.

Volpe, K. (2004, September). Toward a psychology ofagency. APS Observer, 13–14.

Lecture/Discussion Topic: Social CognitiveNeuroscience

The emergence of the interdisciplinary field of socialcognitive neuroscience demonstrates not only the com-plementary nature of psychology’s perspectives but alsohow some scientists are trying to integrate them. AsKevin Ochsner and Matthew Lieberman report, the firstmeeting devoted to social cognitive neuroscience, heldin April 2001, was attended by social psychologists andcognitive neuroscientists as well as clinical psycholo-gists, sociologists, anthropologists, economists, andpolitical scientists.

Social cognitive neuroscience attempts to under-stand phenomena in terms of interactions among threelevels of analysis: the social level, which deals with thesocial and environmental factors that influence behaviorand experience; the cognitive level, which is concernedwith the information-processing mechanisms that giverise to social-level phenomena; and the neural level,which is concerned with the brain mechanisms thatunderlie cognitive-level processes. The social cognitiveneuroscience approach involves conducting studies andconstructing theories that make reference to all threelevels. One of the field’s important assumptions is thatthe different questions asked at varying levels of analy-sis are not independent or mutually exclusive but canserve to enrich one another.

Studies of stereotyping demonstrate this approach.Stereotypes involve categorical judgments about asocial group. They influence people’s beliefs and expec-tations about group members which in turn bias personperception processes. For example, if a White man pos-sesses negative stereotypes toward Blacks, he is likelyto automatically perceive ambiguous signals from aBlack man as being more dangerous, less friendly, orless competent. Neuroimaging can provide importantinsights into the processes by which stereotyping occurs

by revealing whether the same brain regions areinvolved in the affective, cognitive, and behavioral com-ponents of stereotyping. There may be as many kinds ofstereotypes as there are kinds of knowledge systems inthe brain.

In one of the first studies of stereotyping and thebrain, researchers examined how perception of out-group members differs from perception of in-groupmembers. The study used functional magnetic reso-nance imaging to compare amygdala activation in bothWhite and Black participants exposed to unfamiliarWhite and Black faces. In the first block of trials, par-ticipants judged the gender of each face. Theresearchers found amygdala activation to both in-groupand out-group faces among both White and Black par-ticipants. In the second block of trials, however, theamygdala response to in-group faces habituated, where-as the response to out-group faces did not. One inter-pretation is that unfamiliar faces, whatever their grouprelation, are ambiguous and potentially threateningwhen first seen. Presumably, this threat response to in-group faces habituates because of extensive prior expe-rience with members of the in-group.

In an extension of this study, researchers found asignificant correlation between amygdala activity inresponse to Black faces and the amount of implicit anti-Black racial bias shown on a reaction time measureadministered a few days before. However, this correla-tion was not found for famous and therefore familiarBlack faces such as that of Michael Jordan. This resultfits the claim that Whites automatically perceive unfa-miliar Black faces as potentially threatening and fear-relevant. Consistent with this notion was the findingthat amygdala activation to famous Black faces did notcorrelate with an explicit measure of racial prejudice.

Ochsner, K. N., & Lieberman, M. D. (2001). The emer-gence of social cognitive neuroscience. AmericanPsychologist, 56, 717–734.

Classroom Exercise: The Scientific Approach

The text notes that psychology helps us understand whypeople think, feel, and act as they do. As such, it is bothfascinating and useful. However, it is not equipped toanswer questions of ultimate meaning.

David Anderson describes a classroom exercise thatwill effectively demonstrate that science is equipped toanswer some questions but not others. Science is not theonly way to approach life. To help students understandwhere science fits into the larger picture, place the fol-lowing series of statements on the chalkboard beforeclass begins.

1. God is dead.2. The best things in life are free.3. Shakespeare’s Richard III is a better play than

Romeo and Juliet.


4. Abortion is wrong.5. There is a genetic predisposition to schizophrenia.6. The mind is just like a computer.7. Attitudes affect cancer.8. Pornography is harmful.9. 2 + 2 = 4.

Ask students how they would establish the validityof each statement. To get them thinking, ask them aboutthe courses they have had that might have addressedthese issues. Who on the faculty might be interested inthese issues, or which department might discuss them?Clearly, there is more than one approach to “truth.”Note that each perspective has its questions and limits. Conclude that the various disciplines and per-spectives need not be viewed as competing but as complementary.

Anderson, D. (1997, January). First day: Experimentalpsychology. Teaching in the Psychological Sciences(TIPS—Online Discussion Group).

C. Psychology’s Subfields (pp. 11–13)

Lecture/Discussion Topic: Psychology’s Important Rolein Basic Scientific ResearchWhat is psychology’s role in answering important scien-tific questions? To illustrate both the broad range ofpsychology and its centrality as a scientific discipline,use the New York Times’ twenty-fifth anniversary cele-bration of its weekly section “Science Times.” When theTimes listed “25 of the most provocative questions fac-ing science” on November 10, 2003, psychologistDonald McBurney astutely noted that at least 9 of the25 questions are issues on which psychology has some-thing important to say. These include the following:

Is war our biological destiny?How does the brain work?What should we eat?Are men necessary? women?Can robots become conscious?Why do we sleep?How smart are animals?Can drugs make us smart?Does the paranormal exist?

Lecture/Discussion Topic: Psychology’s AppliedResearchTo illustrate psychology’s relevance for our everydaylives, take examples from www.PsychologyMatters.org,a Web-based compendium of research that demon-strates the important role of psychological science inaddressing societal and human needs. Some of theseissues will be discussed in more detail later in the text,

but mentioning them now will give students a previewof how psychology applies to real life.

1. Suicide is now the third leading cause of death(after homicide and accidents) for young peopleages 15 to 24. Psychological research indicates thatpsychological, environmental, and social factorscontribute to suicide risk. Warning signs includetalking about dying; recent loss (through death,divorce, separation); changes in sleep patterns, eat-ing habits, and the capacity to concentrate; fear oflosing control; and no hope for the future. Pro -grams that have proven helpful in preventing sui-cide include The Teen Screen Program and Stop aSuicide Today!The Teen Screen Program identifies youth who

are suffering from a psychological disorder, espe-cially depression. Parents are notified of their chil-dren’s problems and given help in connecting themto local mental health services. There, the childrencan obtain further evaluation and interventionbefore falling behind in school and ending up inserious trouble, or worst of all, ending their lives. Stop a Suicide Today! is a school-based preven-

tion program with documented success in reducingsuicide attempts. The program teaches participantsto recognize the signs of suicide in family mem-bers, friends, and co-workers and empowers themto make a difference in the lives of their lovedones. The program teaches the relationship betweenpsychological disorder and suicide and supportsparticipants in getting those that they recognize tobe in need into psychotherapy.

Berman, A., Jobes, D., & Silverman, M., (2006).Adolescent suicide: Assessment and intervention (2nded.). Washington, DC: American PsychologicalAssociation.

Beautrais, A. (2005). National strategies for the reductionand prevention of suicide. Crisis: The Journal of CrisisIntervention and Suicide Prevention,.26(1), 1–3.

2. Psychologists have shown how the pursuit of mate-rial wealth and the pursuit of happiness are not thesame. Psychologists Edward Diener and DavidMyers have clearly documented that once individu-als have enough money to pay for their basic needsof food, shelter, and so on, money does relativelylittle to improve happiness. More recently, psychol-ogist Tim Kasser showed that people who buy intothe messages of consumer culture actually reportlower personal well-being. He found that individu-als who say that money, image, and popularity arerelatively important to them report less satisfactionin life as well as more depression and anxiety. A


movement known as Voluntary Simplicity aims tohelp people live outside the consumer mainstream.Many in this movement try to maximize their “timeaffluence” rather than their material affluence,because they recognize that increased free time willbring them a greater sense of well-being.

Kasser, T. (2002). The high price of materialism.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Myers, D. (2000). The funds, friends, and faith of happypeople. American Psychologist, 55, 56–67.

3. Researchers are discovering the types of messagesthat shape pro-environment behaviors. RobertCialdini and two graduate students worked with alocal hotel on a program to encourage lodgers toreuse bath towels. They tried the following mes-sages: Help the hotel save energy; Help save theenvironment; Partner with us to help save the envi-ronment; Help save resources for future genera-tions; and Join your fellow citizens in helping tosave the environment.The last message, which described a social

norm, was the most successful: 41 percent ofguests who got that message recycled their towels.The least successful message was the one thatemphasized the benefit to the hotel (Help the hotelsave energy): only 20 percent of the guests reusedtheir towels. The findings are consistent with socialpsychological theory suggestng that people in anew situation take their cues from others.Descriptive norms that say, “Everybody’s doing it!”seem to promote conservation-minded behaviors.In related research on situations requiring people

not to do something, some investigators have foundthat injunctive-proscriptive messages (Don’t go offthe trail, or Don’t take the petrified wood) may bethe most effective and direct route to gaining com-pliance.Still other research finds that the typical “save

the planet” awareness campaigns are ineffectivedue to their lack of specificity. Specific messagesare much more likely than abstract messages toshape behavior.

Cialdini, R. B. (2003). Crafting normative messages toprotect the environment. Current Directions inPsychological Science, 12, 105–109.

Cialdini, R. B., Barrett, D. W., Bator, R., Demaine, L.,Sagarin, B. J., Rhoads, K. V. L., & Winter, P. L.(2006).Managing social norms for persuasive impact. SocialInfluence, 1, 3-15.

4. Writing about difficult, even traumatic, experiencesappears to be good for health. In one study, 50

healthy undergraduates were assigned to writeabout either traumatic experiences or superficialtopics for four days in a row. Six weeks after thewriting sessions, students in the trauma groupreported more positive moods and fewer illnessesthan those writing about everyday experiences. Inanother study, researchers assigned patients withasthma and rheumatoid arthritis either to writeabout the most stressful events of their lives or towrite about a neutral topic. Four months later, asth-ma patients in the experimental group showedimprovements in lung function; arthritis patients inthe experimental group showed a reduction in dis-ease severity. Writing seems to be one importantway for people to resist the mental and physicalravages of stress and disease. Therapists increasing-ly encourage patients to undertake writing exercisesoutside the clinical setting.

Pennebaker, J. W. (1997). Opening up: The healing powerof expressing emotion. New York: Guilford Press.

Smyth, J. M., Stone, A. A., Hurewitz, A., & Kaell, A.(1999). Effects of writing about stressful experiences onsymptom reduction in patients with asthma or rheuma-toid arthritis. Journal of the American MedicalAssociation, 281, 1304–1309.

5. Psychological research indicates that violent videogames can increase children’s aggression (see textUnit 14). Studies indicate that it is likely that vio-lent video games may have even stronger effects onchildren’s aggression than television or moviesbecause (1) the games are highly engaging andinteractive, (2) the games reward violent behavior,and (3) children repeat these behaviors over andover as they play. Researchers have shown thatplaying a lot of violent video games is related tohaving more aggressive thoughts, feelings, andbehaviors. When parents limit the amount of timeas well as the types of games their children play,children are less likely to show aggressive behav-iors. Some researchers have created school curricu-la to help teach children to reduce their totalamount of screen time and/or the types of programsand games watched/played.

Gentile, D. A., & Anderson, C. A. (2003). Violent videogames: The newest media violence hazard. In D. A.Gentile (Ed.), Media violence and children. Westport,CT: Praeger.

Gentile, D. A., Lynch, P. J., Linder, J. R., & Walsh, D. A.(2004). The effects of violent video game habits on ado-lescent aggressive attitudes and behaviors. Journal ofAdolescence, 27, 5–22.


6. Most psychologists agree that polygraph tests can-not accurately detect lies (see Unit 8B). Indeed,research cannot find any pattern of physiologicalreactions that is unique to deception. An honestperson may be nervous when answering truthfullyand a dishonest person may be calm. A particularproblem is that polygraph research has not separat-ed placebolike effects (the individual’s belief in theefficacy of the procedure) from the actual relation-ship between deception and a person’s physiologi-cal responses. One reason that polygraph tests mayappear to be accurate is that people who believethe test works may confess or become very anxiouswhen questioned. If this view is correct, the liedetector might be better called a “fear” detector.Courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, haverepeatedly rejected the use of polygraph evidencebecause of its inherent unreliability. Nevertheless,polygraph testing continues to be used in nonjudi-cial settings, often to screen personnel but some-times to try to assess the veracity of suspects andwitnesses, and to monitor criminal offenders onprobation.

Kozel, F. A., Padgett, T. M., & George, M. S. (2004). Areplication study of the neural correlates of deception.Behavioral Neuroscience, 118(4), 852–856.

Lykken, D. (1998). A tremor in the blood: Uses andabuses of the lie detector (2nd ed.). New York: Perseus.

National Academy of Sciences (2002). The polygraphand lie detection. Washington, DC: National AcademyPress.

IV. (Close-Up) Tips for Studying Psychology (pp. 15–16)

Classroom Exercise: Eliciting “Metaphors” forLearning and Teaching

To set the tone for active learning and critical thinkingin the course, you might use a simple classroom exer-

cise suggested by Carole Wade. Begin by asking stu-dents why they are in school instead of at work or evenat home on the computer. Precisely what do they hopeto gain, aside from the ultimate goal of earning a highschool diploma? Explain to your class that they willhave the opportunity to explore their ideas about learn-ing by writing similes or providing an analogy. (Youmay need to explain that a simile is a figure of speechin which a concept is applied to something else to sug-gest a fundamental similarity, such as “My love is like ared, red rose.”) Have students write on a piece of papera way to complete the phrase, “Learning is like . . .” or“A learner is like . . . .” After a few minutes, have themdo the same thing for “teaching” and “teacher.” (Notethat Carole Wade, in her presentation, refers to these asmetaphors, but, in fact, they are similes.)

To ensure anonymity, collect, shuffle, and redistrib-ute the responses. Ask for volunteers to read the simileson their sheet and then use them as the basis for class-room discussion. What do the answers suggest aboutstudents’ concepts of learning and teaching? Are theyactive or passive? Do not be too harsh with similes sug-gesting that learning is passive (for example, “A learneris like a sponge”), but do emphasize that active process-ing is necessary to master any subject. To borrow thetext’s simile: “Your mind is not like your stomach,something to be filled passively; it is more like a mus-cle, which grows stronger with exercise.” Conclude bynoting that teachers are also learners and that learnerscan also be teachers.

Wade, C. (1992, August). Metaphors for learning andteaching. Paper presented at the Annual Convention ofthe American Psychological Association, Washington,DC.


Name Period Date

HANDOUT 1–1

Fact or Falsehood?

T F 1. Questions about human nature date back to the speculations of the ancient philosopher Aristotle.

T F 2. Sigmund Freud established the first psychology laboratory at the University ofVienna, Austria.

T F 3. The science of psychology developed from the more established fields of biology and philosophy.

T F 4. Psychology is best defined today as the study of mental life.

T F 5. Psychology is a way of asking and answering questions.

T F 6. The biggest and most persistent issue in psychology concerns the nature-nurturecontroversy—that is, the relative contributions of biology and experience to psychological traits and behavior.

T F 7. Evolution has become an important principle for psychology.

T F 8. In contrast to sociology and anthropology, contemporary psychology has little interest in how behavior varies across cultures.

T F 9. Psychology’s different perspectives contradict each other.

T F 10. Psychiatry is a branch of psychology that involves the assessment and treatment ofpsychological disorders.


Name Period Date

HANDOUT 1–2

Listed below are a number of statements. Each represents an opinion regarding some aspect of psychology. You willprobably agree with some of these statements and disagree with others; there are no correct or incorrect answers.Read each statement carefully and indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree by circling the appropriate num-ber below each statement. For example:

Psychology should be a required course for high school students.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7strongly disagree strongly agree

If you disagreed slightly with the above statement, you would circle the number 3. If you agreed strongly with thestatement, you would circle the number 7. Be sure to give your opinion on every statement.

1. A psychology course is an important part of any person’s education.1 2 3 4 5 6 7

strongly disagree strongly agree

2. The different areas within psychology seem very unrelated to each other.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


3. An undergraduate degree in psychology should be a Bachelor of Science rather than a Bachelor of Arts degree.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


4. It’s just as important for psychology students to do experiments as it is for students in chemistry and biology.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


5. An introductory psychology course should cover as broad a range of topics as possible.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


6. Research conducted in controlled laboratory settings is essential for understanding everyday behavior.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


7. Even though each person is unique, it is possible for science to find general laws explaining human behavior.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


8. Carefully controlled research is not likely to be useful in solving psychological problems.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


9. Our ability as humans to behave in any way we choose makes our attempts to predict behavior ineffective.1 2 3 4 5 6 7



HANDOUT 1–2 (continued)

10. Psychological advice given in popular books and magazines is often as useful as more research-based claims.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


11. Studying specific examples of how psychology is used is the most interesting part of a psychology course.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


12. Government funding of experimentation is as necessary for expanding what we know about psychology as it isfor gaining knowledge in areas like chemistry and physics.


13. The study of psychology should be seen primarily as a science.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


14. Courses in psychology place too much emphasis on research and experimentation.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


15. Psychology courses should spend time covering various job possibilities for people with psychology degrees.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


16. Psychological research can enable us to anticipate people’s behavior with a high degree of accuracy.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


17. Psychologists working as counseling professionals don’t need to be so concerned with research findings.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


18. Psychological theories presented in the media should not be trusted unless they are supported by experiments.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


19. Psychology will never be a true science because its predictions of individual behavior are seldom exact or certain.


20. Students get little benefit from learning about procedures for conducting psychology experiments.1 2 3 4 5 6 7


Source: TEACHING OF PSYCHOLOGY by Friedrich. Copyright 1996 by Taylor & Francis Informa UK Ltd. - Journals.Reproduced by permission of Taylor & Francis Informa UK Ltd. Journals in the format Other Book via Copyright ClearanceCenter.


Name Period Date

HANDOUT 1–3

Each of the following statements represents a commonly held opinion. You will probably agree with some and dis-agree with others. Read each statement carefully; then, using the scale below, please indicate the extent to which youagree or disagree with the statements by writing the number that corresponds to your opinion in the space next toeach statement.

0 = disagree strongly1 = disagree somewhat2 = disagree slightly3 = agree slightly4 = agree somewhat5 = agree strongly

1. Most people have an accurate understanding of the reasons for their own behavior.2. Most people are consistent from situation to situation in the way they react to things.3. Heredity plays the major role in determining IQ.4. Great accomplishments in life, like those of great authors and painters, are usually motivated by

unconscious forces.5. A person who was shy as a child will also tend to be shy as an adult.6. Differences in male and female behavior are more the result of socialization than biology.7. People typically have a good sense of their own strengths and weaknesses.8. People’s values and attitudes remain pretty much the same throughout their lives.9. Psychological disorders are primarily the result of biological factors, such as brain abnormality or

genetic predisposition.10. Most people have an inaccurate self-concept, tending to see themselves either too favorably or too

unfavorably.11. Knowing that a person behaved honestly in one situation tells you little about whether he or she will

behave honestly in a different situation.12. Aggression is part of human nature and thus will always be part of social life.13. Most people make major life decisions logically and rationally.14. A troubled adolescent is likely to be a troubled adult.15. The basic causes of people’s behavior can be traced to their past experiences.


Name Period Date

HANDOUT 1–4

Using the scale below, please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statementsby writing the number that corresponds to your opinion in the space next to each statement.

1 = strongly agree 2 = agree3 = mostly agree 4 = mostly disagree 5 = disagree 6 = strongly disagree

1. The kind of person someone is, is something very basic and can’t be changed very much.

2. People can do things differently, but the important parts of who they are can’t really be changed.3. Everyone, no matter who the person is, can significantly change his or her basic characteristics.4. As much as I hate to admit it, you can’t teach an old dog new tricks. People can’t really change their

deepest attributes.5. People can substantially change who they are.6. Everyone is a certain kind of person, and there is not much that can be done to really change that.7. No matter what kind of person someone is, he or she can always change significantly.8. All people can change their most basic qualities.

Source: Adapted from Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development.Philadelphia: Psychology Press, pp. 179–180.


Name Period Date

HANDOUT 1–5

Link each of the statements regarding prosocial, or helping, behavior to the appropriate psychological perspective.

1. By helping each other, we are more likely to survive and reproduce.

______________________ 2. A specific brain region underlies our experience of empathy for persons in distress.

______________________ 3. Unconscious sexual motivation prompts our willingness to help others.

______________________ 4. We are most likely to help those we perceive as similar to ourselves and whom webelieve deserve our assistance.

______________________ 5. By helping others, we achieve a better sense of self-fulfillment.

______________________ 6. The willingness of people to help varies greatly across the world’s societies.

______________________ 7. Children who have been rewarded for helpful behavior are more likely to be helpfulin future interpersonal interactions.


Documents

Psychology’s History and Approaches - Advanced Placement Psychology …bettsappsy.weebly.com/uploads/5/9/0/6/59064651/unit_… · · 2016-09-145) PsychSim 5: Psychology’s Timeline