University of Oregon, Winter 1999
Psychology 471: PERSONALITY
Professor: Gerard Saucier, Ph.D.
Office: 312 Straub
E-mail: gsaucier@oregon.uoregon.edu Phone: 346-4927 with voice mail
Web page: http://darkwing.oregon.edu/~gsaucier/
Office Hours: Tuesdays and Thursdays 2-4 pm, or flexibly by appointment
Teaching Assistant: Bernadette Bullock, 259 Straub, 346-4986,
bullock@darkwing.uoregon.edu
Texts: Funder, D. C. (1997). The personality puzzle. New York: Norton
Matthews, G., & Deary. I. J. (1998). Personality traits. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
There is also a readings packet containing 5 articles.
Course Objectives (or, what's the purpose of this course?)
Welcome to Psychology 471. The study of personality concerns individuality in human behavior patterns -- if we define behavior broadly to include thoughts, feelings, desires, intentions, and action tendencies. Personality concerns human behavioral tendencies at a rather broad level, and the purpose of this course is to help you learn ways of thinking usefully and critically (i.e., carefully) about human behavior, through the most important concepts and findings of personality psychology. The course has two interlinked goals: promoting knowledge of personality and sharpening thinking skills. Because it tends to facilitate enhanced thinking skills, there is also some emphasis on improving writing skills. Knowledge of personality psychology can aid one in thinking usefully and critically about human behavior patterns, and that is useful not only in psychology and human services professions, but in many areas of human life generally.
Personality psychology is one of those "crossroads" fields with links to many, many other disciplines. Moreover, personality has been reviewed and taught in a variety of ways, and this course presents a cross-section of these diverse approaches, but with prime emphasis on the study of personality characteristics, which has had the most progress and productive research over the last two decades. Biological and social antecedents of personality are emphasized about equally.
The course format is primarily a series of talks (i.e., lecture), with some discussion, in-class exercises, and student presentations. Readings are important: You are expected to read the assigned portions of the text.
Assignments and Grading
Your final course grade is based on the following:
10% for TRDQs (thoughtful reactions and discussion questions) on the readings
20% score on midterm exam
30% score on final exam
10% grade on exploratory paper
5% credit for turning in a suitable rough draft of research paper
20% grade on final version of research paper
5% for panel presentation (including posting summary for other panel members)
What follows in this section is more details on each of these components.
TRDQs are thoughtful reactions and discussion questions concerning the assigned readings. TRDQs are a critical (careful) thinking component: Their purpose is to stimulate students to actively engage with readings and thus be earlier and better prepared for class (and exams). Each student must turn in four (4) TRDQs. The due dates for these are provided in the syllabus. These should be in complete sentences and have at least two paragraphs (thus, containing two different kinds of thought, or two aspects of one thought, etc.); they do not have to be typed but should be legible. A good rule of thumb is to come up with questions the reading stimulated for you, but if questions don't come readily to mind, provide other reactions or comments. TRDQs are graded pass-fail, mostly: If what you turn in is marginal, you'll receive a note to that effect and be asked to say more. Late TRDQs are not accepted for credit, however, the last two TRDQ due dates are make-up dates in case you were not on time for one or two earlier.
The two exams are similar in format, primarily based on the "big questions" with which this course is concerned (see end of syllabus). Each exam consists of a short multiple choice section (15-20% of the point total for the exam) concentrating on key concepts (definitions and examples of them), followed by a set of essay questions (80-85% of the point total for the exam). The essay questions are drawn from among the nine "big questions." In fact, they are the exact questions, except that I frame each question so as to encourage concise, to-the-point answers.
For the midterm examination, the essay questions will be two of the first five "big questions" listed at the end of this syllabus; the short multiple-choice section will be based on readings up to the midterm exam. For the final examination, the essay questions will be three of the remaining seven questions; the short multiple-choice section will be based primarily on readings after the midterm exam. No dictionaries, thesauruses, calculators, or electronic devices can be used during the exams, except that translating dictionaries can be allowed for those with English fluency issues, conditional on instructor permission. Exam and quizzes tend especially to emphasize material covered both in the text and in class.
There are two papers assigned, an exploratory paper and a research paper. The exploratory paper is intended to help you develop a more personal connection to the subject matter. You are free to choose any one from a menu of small projects or learning activities (see end of syllabus); your exploratory paper is a write-up of your experiences. It should have complete sentences, good grammar, reasonable organization, and at least 2 complete double-spaced pages of text.
The research paper is designed to improve on features of traditional term papers in advancing student learning. I have found that students learn more from the writing experience when they have the opportunity (a) to make use of feedback and (b) to present or at least be part of a presentation to an "audience." Moreover, 'feedback loops' and presentations are closer to what students encounter later in real work settings. The topic for the paper is chosen by you, within the constraints that you must choose a topic from a limited "menu", and there will be no more than about eight different topics done by members of the whole class. Having about eight topics allows us to have panel presentations and to enable students to dialogue about a topic and give each other useful feedback, encouraging greater depth of exploration.
All the research-paper topics are in the form of a question. Based on your interest-survey responses, you will be assigned to one of these topics. Choosing topics (from a menu of topic areas) will be done in the first two weeks of the term. There is no joint or group product and no group grade either for papers or presentations; you write your own paper. Indeed, because papers on one topic are evaluated simultaneously you ought to make certain that, if you are influenced by the thoughts of other students, you acknowledge that contribution accurately and openly (see note on "plagiarism" below).
Gracián wrote in 1647 that "good things, when short, are twice as good." The aim is to create (gradually, through careful revision) a paper that packs a lot of valuable thinking into a relatively brief space. The final version of the research paper must be at least three full double-spaced pages in length (filling a third page completely, no fonts over 12 point), not counting your reference list. At a maximum, it should not exceed seven full double-spaced pages in length, not counting reference list. In other words, four to five pages of text is usually about right. The citations and reference list should be in APA style; there should be a minimum of two references (not including the course texts) consulted; for most topics it is helpful to consult far more than two references. Journal articles are typically the best source of evidence. The paper should be typed, readable, free of gross spelling and typographic errors, well-organized and focused. It will help your paper if you avoid overgeneralizing and oversimplifying, and consider that research evidence can have alternative interpretations. The main point of the paper is to provide a convincing presentation of the position at which you arrive on the topic question -- convincing to your peers, i.e., an average group of well-schooled upper division undergraduates.
In addition to these general desiderata, consider incorporating the following seven sentences (directly or indirectly). These sentences will help you focus your paper as an argument using evidence. The sentences can easily be used separately as headings or with each sentence being the first sentence in a separate paragraph (though some of the questions, particularly the "what evidence supports" question, will probably require more than one paragraph). How well the questions in these careful-thinking sentences are answered, thus how well-formulated and thoughtful is the argument -- this is a major element in how the paper is evaluated. Here are the seven sentences.
Why is this question important?
Based on evidence I reviewed, how would I answer the question?
What definitions does my position depend upon?
What evidence supports the position I have stated?
What would be the best counter-arguments to this position?
What assumptions could a critic most usefully question?
What overall conclusions can be drawn?
In order to give you more useful and specific feedback on your project, your thinking, and your writing, you are expected to turn in a rough draft of this paper, due February 18. Turn in two copies of the rough draft. The rough draft does not have to be at least 3 pages in length, and can even be in outline form; it must however use complete sentences, for the sake of clarity. However, I strongly encourage you to write up a full draft of over 3 pages in length as the rough draft: The more complete the draft, the more useful feedback I can give you, and that helps you do a better final version (which is bound to affect your grade on it).
On the research paper, as well as responses to exam essays, there is not "just one right answer." Indeed, I like to hear creative and novel arguments when they are made plausible, sensible, and even convincing. On the more mundane side, do not include binders or covers on the papers when you turn them in, and no title page is necessary. The title can be simply the assigned topic question, though you're free to invent another title.
Versions of the research paper (whether rough draft or final version) turned in late lose 10% of their points for each weekday they are not turned in (starting with the due date). Exploratory papers turned in late lose 5% for each weekday. With some course requirements, alternative arrangements may be possible with an authoritative excuse if presented in advance of an absence.
The panel presentation is a chance for you to demonstrate what you've learned and accomplished, and to learn from your classmates. Panel presentations will be scheduled in the last three weeks of the term (they will be mixed with instructor presentations on each of these dates). The panel presentation (typically 10 to 15 minutes) can be organized in any way panel members choose. After the rough drafts are turned in, an e-mail listserv (or equivalent) will be set up for each panel, and members of the panel will be expected to post one message to it containing a summary of the main argument of their paper. How much dialogue (electronically or in person) panel members want to engage in after that point is up to them. As for the presentation itself, the only expectation for each participant is to give a kind of "sound bite" summary of the main argument of their paper lasting not more than 60 seconds. Beyond that, it may be useful for panel members to summarize divergences among the group in conclusions, points of view, assumptions, kinds of evidence, positions, etc., and for the group to attempt to come to some conclusion about what these divergences mean. The audience often has questions you can endeavor to answer. In order to get full credit for the panel presentation, you need only (a) post your summary to other members, (b) do your half-minute-or-so summary as part of the presentation. I do give award-winner extra credit to several (usually about 3) class members who, in my view, do the best job of making the panel presentations more educational, edifying, and enlightening for the audience in the classroom. This is not a matter of merely being entertaining, loud, verbose, or dominating the presentation. Rather, an award-winning job includes both communicating clearly and making it easy for other members of the panel to have their say and communicate clearly.
Additional extra credit (1.5 % added onto final grade average) will be available for either (A) completing a survey form whose results will be discussed later in the class, (B) participating in another experiment in the psychology "subject pool" for which you are eligible and which has roughly the same time requirement of one hour, or (C) contacting the instructor and arranging to read and write a one-page reaction to an assigned research journal article relevant to this course. The survey form (option A) is part of the instructor's ongoing research. In it, you indicate your beliefs, convictions, and opinions on various issues. Completing the survey is likely to require about one hour of your time, and can be done on your own. Completed surveys will be turned in at either of two pre-designated class sessions announced in class (Jan. 14 and 19). When you turn in your survey (which does not have your name on it), you will also turn in separately a slip with your own name on it, which will be used to assign you the credit. Your responses are provided anonymously -- you will not provide your name on any materials. Slips identifying you as one who completed the survey will be collected separately from the surveys themselves. Results from the surveys you complete will be discussed during the 9th or 10th week of the term and related to the subject matter of the course.
Your final grade in the course will be based on the total of your points from TRDQs, exams, papers, and presentation participation, plus any extra credit. A range is 90% or better, B range is 80% to 90%, C range 70% to 80%, D range 60% to 70%, Fs are less than 60%. ‘+' and ‘-" are added to grades according to whether they fall in the top 1/3 or bottom 1/3, respectively, of a grade range.
Special Requirements for Graduate Students (Psychology 571)
There will be special requirements for graduate students taking the course as Psychology 571. 571 students will meet at additional times outside the class time, either in-person or electronically. 571 students are expected to attend an in-person graduate student meeting with the instructor early in the quarter (before the third week of class) to help define how graduate students can get the most out of the course.
Academic Integrity
I take academic integrity seriously. Insuring the "validity" of grades requires seeing that they reflect honest work and learning rather than cheating. Cheating is defined as providing or accepting information on an exam, plagiarism or copying anyone's written work. Students caught cheating will be given an "F" for the course, and UO's student conduct coordinator will be informed. The instructor retains the right to assign seats for tests, to change individual's seating for test security purposes, to require and check ID for admission to tests. As for "plagiarism" it is basically a form of theft: putting your name on work that is (in any part) not yours, where you have not fully identified the source from which you borrowed. Even taking someone else's ideas or paraphrasing their expression, without acknowledgment, is plagiarism. "Your responsibility, when you put your name on a piece of work, is simply to distinguish between what is yours and what is not, and to credit those who in any way have contributed" (quote is from Nancy Cotton of Wake Forest U.).
PSYCHOLOGY 471 SCHEDULE: What's Happening When
January 5 Syllabus; overview of the course; preparatory activities
Assignment: Funder chs. 1-3
January 7 Research methods in the study of personality
Assignment: Funder chs. 4-6; Matthews/Deary [M/D] chs. 1-2
January 12** Personality dispositions, their structure and assessment
January 14-21 Personality dispositions, structure and assessment (continued)
Assignment: M/D ch. 9
January 26 Relating psychopathology to personality
EXPLORATORY PAPER is due January 26
Assignment: Funder ch. 9 (pp. 179-187 only); M/D ch. 5; first three articles in
packet (by Plomin, Plomin, and Hamer)
January 28** Genetic and environmental influences on personality
February 2 Genetic and environmental influences (continued)
February 4 MID-TERM EXAMINATION
Assignment: Funder ch. 8; M/D ch. 6; article by Bernhardt in packet
February 9** Personality, physiology, and the brain
February 11 Personality, physiology, and the brain (continued)
Assignment: Funder chs. 17 and 18; M/D ch. 4 (pp. 97-101 only) and ch. 7; article
by Carver and Scheier in reading packet
February 16** Personality, social cognition, and the self
February 18 Personality, social cognition, and the self (continued)
ROUGH DRAFT of research paper due February 18 (turn in two copies)
Assignment: McAdams reading (on reserve); Funder ch. 10, ch. 11 (pp. 231-239 only)
February 23** Motives and goals
February 25 Motives and goals (continued)
Assignment: Funder ch. 12 (pp. 240-250 only); M/D ch. 8, ch. 10 (pp. 238-242 only)
March 2** Applications: health, work, defenses, other topics; some panel presentations today
March 4-11 Applications (continued), with some panel presentations each day
FINAL VERSION of research paper is due March 11 at beginning of class period
(except that those presenting on 3/11 have alternate due date of 4:30 pm 3/12/99)
March 15, Monday, 8 am ....FINAL EXAM
** Indicates days on which TRDQs are due
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some big questions: The pool of potential essay questions for the midterm and the final
1. Under what conditions are personality characteristics most likely and least likely to be influential over human behavior? What are the implications for personality assessment?
2. What are the best indicators of personality characteristics? Given the advantages and disadvantages of different types of data, which is the best kind of data for assessing personality?
3. When do judgments (or ascriptions) of personality characteristics tend to be most and least accurate? Knowing this, how could you maximize accuracy and minimize error -- getting the most accurate possible characterization of a person?
4. Which traits are worth measuring -- what are the most important traits? What is the best classification for the wide range of traits, and how is this classification related to classifications of aspects of psychopathology?
5. Does personality have a genetic basis, and if so, to what degree and by what means do differences in genes affect differences in personality characteristics?
6. What specific biological variables most affect personality characteristics? In what ways do personality characteristics reflect individual differences in brain function?
7. Which cognitive variables are most crucial in relation to personality, and what makes them important? What is the self and how is it related to personality?
8. What are the major motives on which people differ, are they conscious or unconscious, and how can they best be measured? What affects how much effort one puts into a conscious goal, and what do goals have to do with mood and emotions?
9. What makes the understanding and measurement of personality useful? What do personality characteristics (or features of personality functioning) best predict, and how might finding out about them improve human life?
Note: The two midterm essays will be taken from 1 through 5 above. The three final-exam essays will be drawn from the seven that remain.
Further note: The questions above are subject to change and revision, with the class being informed immediately of any changes or revisions..
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHOICES FOR THE EXPLORATORY PAPER (due January 26)
Your paper is a basically a report of what happened when you did one of the following exercises, and what thoughts and feelings ensued. Note: Many of these exercises involve consulting other people; it's generally a good idea to take some notes on how they respond. Other people you personally consult for your paper should generally be kept anonymous in your write-up.
1. Describe how you would define the word "virtue." Then describe what kinds of traits might be related to virtue, and how you think people actually develop these traits, or otherwise become virtuous. Then find two other people and ask each of them the same questions: "What is virtue? What traits are related to virtue? How do people become virtuous?" Report briefly on their responses, and compare their responses with yours. What do you make of the similarities and differences? (Note: Dictionaries give rather vague and thus useless definitions of the term "virtue", and you are counseled to not rely on them for this assignment.)
2. Abraham Maslow defined a "peak experience" as the best moments of the human being, moments in which one feels especially whole, integrated, and aware of both self and world, thinks more clearly, is more accepting and loving, has less anxiety, and is more able to put energies to constructive use. Write a brief description of the three to five events or experiences you've had in your life that best qualify as peak experiences. On a separate sheet, make a note of whatever themes that you see running through the 3-5 events/experiences, in terms of what brought it on or what the effect was. Then find two other people, show each of them your brief descriptions and ask each what themes seem to run through these events/experiences. Compare their responses to what you wrote on the separate sheet. Comment on what you think any of this suggests about your personality or what happens when we try to communicate the nature of peak experiences.
3. Alfred Adler believed that which of one's many early childhood experiences become one's earliest memories is no accident, but reveals something about the emphases within a personality. Write a brief description of the five events/experiences you can remember that were the earliest in your life (it may help you to give yourself a week or so to gradually accumulate these recollections, and/or to write descriptions of them when you are alone). On a separate sheet, make a note of whatever themes you see running through the five events/experiences. Then find two other people, show each of them your brief description and ask each what themes seem to run through these events/experiences. Compare their responses to what you wrote on the separate sheet. Comment on what you think any of this suggests about your personality.
4. After some thought, complete this sentence: There are basically three types of people: The ones who are _____, the ones who are _____, and the ones who are _____. You might come up with more than three, which is fine. Write out a description of each of the three (or more) types. Then compare your "classification" with one developed over 2000 years ago in ancient Greece: Consult Characters by Theophrastus (it's on reserve for this class), and describe which of the types described by Theophrastus most resemble each of yours. Comment on similarities and differences between your original classification and that of Theophrastus.
5. Conduct a simple empirical test of the "astrological" theory of personality. First, find a description of what traits are supposed to go with each of the 12 "sun signs" (cite whatever source you use). Type up a list of 12 descriptions, but take the name of the sun sign (and its birthdates) away, and mix up the order in which they are presented. Next, show the list to a person without explaining where you got the descriptions. Ask the person first to identify which three (of 12) descriptions are closest to a good description of themselves, and which three descriptions fit most poorly. Make a note of which choices the person made. Then ask two further questions: "What is your birthdate?" and "Do you know your astrological sun-sign and the characteristics that are supposed to be associated with it?" Repeat this procedure with several other people (the more the better, but try to get at least five in total). How often did people's choices for a "good description" or a "poor description" turn out to be the one for their actual sun sign? Is this more or less than would be expected by chance? (Just at random, the real sun sign's description should be chosen as a good description 1/4 of the time, and a poor description 1/4 of the time.) Can you explain results based on whether the person knew about the characteristics of their sun sign?
6. Write out a description of the personality characteristics you associate with each of five professors or instructors you have had since you have been in college before the present term. Consider also which one of these five would probably score highest or lowest on each of the Big Five dimensions (see Matthews and Deary page 27, or notes from class sessions). Put this aside for a couple of days. Then, before re-reading your descriptions, rank the five on how good you think they were as teachers. Now re-read your descriptions, in order from the best teacher to the worst. Based on this, can you draw any conclusions about what personality characteristics help a person be a good teacher, and which do not? (In your paper, do not identify any of the professors/instructors by name. Note: You can do more than five if you like.)
7. Based on what you have read and heard (you may want to find out more first), write a brief but thoughtful description of the distinctive personality traits of five prominent people -- Bill Clinton, Hilary Rodham Clinton, Monica Lewinsky, Linda Tripp, and Kenneth Starr -- one sheet of paper for each of the five, with no name on the description. (It might be useful to you to ask for ideas about this from acquaintances.) Then, on five separate sheets, assign a label for the role each was playing in events leading up to the 1998 drama/scandal (e.g., President, intern, independent counsel); write the name next to the role. Now shuffle the sheets with the personality descriptions, and the sheets with the roles listed, and reassign personalities to each role. Write up a summary of what you originally wrote, and how things got reshuffled. Then describe how you think events would have been different if these individuals had this other set of (randomly reassigned) traits (e.g., if President Bill Clinton had personality traits X, Y, and Z instead of A, B, and C, etc.)? What can you conclude from this?