University of Oregon, Winter 2002
Professor: Gerard Saucier, Ph.D.
Office: 312 Straub
E-mail: gsaucier@oregon.uoregon.edu Phone: 346-4927 with voice mail
Web page: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~gsaucier/
Office Hours: Tuesdays 2-3:30 pm and Thursdays 1:30-2 pm, or flexibly by appointment
Texts: Funder, D. C. (2001). The personality puzzle (2nd ed.). New York: Norton
Funder, D. C., & Ozer, D. J. (2001). Pieces of the personality puzzle (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.
Welcome to Psychology 471: Personality. The study of personality concerns individuality in human behavior patterns, with behavior defined 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 helping to enhance your writing skills. Knowledge of personality psychology can aid one in thinking usefully and critically about human behavior patterns, which is useful not only in psychology and human services professions, but in many areas of human life.
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, because this area has seen the most progress and productive research over the last two decades. Biological and social antecedents of personality are emphasized about equally in this course.
The course format is primarily a series of talks (i.e., lecture), with some discussion, in-class exercises, and student presentations. You are expected to read everything that is assigned.
15% for short papers (4% each for the two IOQP papers, 7% for 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)
20% ...score on midterm exam
35% ...score on final exam
What follows in this section is more detail on each of these components.
IOQP papers are brief responses to readings. IOQP stands for "important or questionable points." Their purpose is to stimulate students to actively engage with readings and thus be earlier and better prepared for class (and exams). The minimum length for an IOQP paper is one (full, double-spaced) page of typed, machine-printed, or clearly handwritten text for each IOQP. Each IOQP paper must be based on the assigned readings corresponding to the due date for the IOQP paper. For each IOQP paper, you are to take two of the readings (i.e., two different chapters, or readings from two different authors) and, for each one, describe an idea or finding that you think is either (a) important or (b) questionable. If you write about an important idea or finding, you are to describe it and then give an explanation of why you think it is important. If you write about a questionable idea or finding, you are to describe it and then give an explanation of why you think it is questionable. Feel free to use personal anecdotes in IOQP papers, if they help you explain the importance or questionableness of an idea or finding. You are assigned to turn in two (2) IOQP papers. The due dates for these are provided in the syllabus (there are seven due dates -- you need only get in an IOQP paper in on time for two of these). These papers should be in complete sentences and have at least two paragraphs. IOQP papers are graded on a "pass versus no-pass" basis. Late IOQP papers are not accepted for credit, since a late paper would defeat part of the purpose of an IOQP paper as defined above.
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 (15-25% of the point total for the exam) concentrating on key concepts (definitions and examples of them), followed by a set of essay questions (75-85% 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 each question is framed so as to encourage concise, to-the-point answers.
For the midterm examination, the essay questions will be two of the first four "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 seven questions remaining (i.e., not included on the midterm); the 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. What's covered in multiple-choice items? These especially emphasize material covered both in the assigned readings and in class.
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. It is due on January 31.
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 six to nine different topics done by members of the whole class. Having a limited number of topics allows us to have panel presentations and to enable students to carry on dialogue about a topic and give each other useful feedback, encouraging greater depth of exploration.
Most 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. 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. At least two references must be from journals or else be chapters in edited books: Such references are distinguishable because they will be cited with a page number range (e.g., pp. 419-434) in on-line indexes. Internet sites (except for on-line journals) do not make reliable sources and do not count toward these minimum two references. 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 fair presentation of evidence and arguments about how to answer the question -- that is, to describe both the advantages and the disadvantages, both the strengths and the liabilities, of a 'yes' answer and of a 'no' answer.
In addition to these general desiderata, consider incorporating the following four sentences (directly or indirectly). These sentences will help you focus your paper. The sentences can easily be used separately as headings or with each sentence being the first sentence in a separate paragraph (though all the questions except the first question are likely to require more than one paragraph). Here are the four sentences:
Why is this question important?
What's the evidence (or reasons) indicating the answer should be 'yes'?
What's the evidence (or reasons) indicating the answer should be 'no'?
Based on the preceding evidence (or reasons) 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 21. Turn in a second copy of the rough draft along with your original. The rough draft can be of any length, and can even be in outline form.. However, it must use complete sentences, for the sake of clarity, and 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, there is not likely to be "just one right answer." You are encouraged to think complexly about the topic, employing multiple perspectives, developing some of these perspectives by creative processes. It may be important to pay attention to assumptions you (or others) make, or to how terms are defined. 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 list (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 points (going both ways, yes and no) in 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 their paper lasting about a minute (in the range of 30 to 90 seconds). In order to get full credit for the panel presentation, you need only (a) post your summary to other members, (b) do your 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. An award-winning job includes both (a) communicating clearly and (b) making it easy for other members of the panel to have their say and communicate clearly (of course this is not the same as merely being entertaining, loud, verbose, or dominating the presentation). See the extra sheet (after the syllabus) for suggestions concerning these one-minute presentations.
Your final grade in the course will be based on the total of your points from IOQPs, exams, papers, presentation participation, and exams. 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 if they fall in the top 1/3 or bottom 1/3, respectively, of A, B, C, and D range.
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 (typically in about the third week of the term).
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. "Plagiarism" 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.).
________________________________________________________________________
January 8 Syllabus; overview of the course; preparatory activities
Assignment: Funder chs. 1-3; Funder & Ozer (F/O) pp. 3-14 (McAdams)...some of this material may be familiar to you from Psychology 302 and 303,but some will be new
January 10 Research methods in the study of personality
Assignment: Funder chs. 4-6; F/O pp. 54-67 (Gosling et al.)
January 15** Issues in assessing personality dispositions
January 17 Issues in assessing personality dispositions (continued)
Assignment: F/O pp. pp. 73-76 (Allport); Funder ch. 7; F/O pp. 120-131(Costa & McCrae), F/O pp. 272-276 (Jung)
January 22** Personality dispositions, structure and assessment
January 24-29 Personality dispositions, structure and assessment, and relation to psychopathology
EXPLORATORY PAPER is due January 31
Assignment: Funder ch. 9; F/O pp. 162-166 (Bouchard) and pp. 167-170 (Plomin)
Jan. 31** Genetic and environmental influences on personality
Feb. 5 Genetic and environmental influences on personality (continued)
Assignment: Funder ch. 8; F/O pp. 142-148 (Dabbs)
February 7** Molecular genetics of personality; personality, physiology, and the brain
February 12 Molecular genetics of personality; personality, physiology, and the brain (continued)
February 14 MID-TERM EXAMINATION
Assignment: Funder ch. 10 - 12; F/O pp. 227-235 (Freud); TBA: reading on implicit motives
February 19** Motives and goals
February 21 Motives and goals (continued)
ROUGH DRAFT of research paper due February 21 (turn in original plus one copy)
Assignment: Funder ch. 14; F/O pp. 365-377 (Markus & Kitayama) and pp. 378-393 (Triandis);
February 26 Personality and culture
Assignment: Funder, ch. 15 and ch. 16; F/O pp. 439-447 (Rotter)
February 28** Behaviorism, social learning, and personality change (perhaps a panel presentation)
March 5 Behaviorism, social learning, and personality change (and some panel presentations)
Assignment: Funder ch. 18 (pp. 481-494) and ch. 17
March 7** Cognitive approaches, with some panel presentations
March 12 Cognitive approaches (continued) with some panel presentations
March 14 Applications: health, work, other topics; some panel presentations
FINAL VERSION of research paper is due March 14 at beginning of class period
(except that those presenting on 3/14 have alternate due date of 4 pm on 3/15/2001)
March 21, Thursday, 8:00 am ....FINAL EXAM
** Indicates days on which IOQP papers due (seven due dates - you need only turn paper in on two dates)
Some big questions: The pool of potential essay questions for the midterm and the final
1. What are the best indicators of (or ways of measuring) personality characteristics? Taking into account the advantages and disadvantages of different types of data, which do you believe to be the best kind of data for assessing personality? When do judgments (or ascriptions) of personality characteristics tend to be most and least accurate?
2. Out of all the characteristics on which individuals differ from one another, that someone might notice, which are the most important (or, the most worth measuring)? What would be the best way of classifying those characteristics deemed to be most important, and how might this classification be related to classifications of aspects of psychopathology? What are advantages and disadvantages of the 'Big Five' as a model for personality attributes?
3. Does personality have a genetic basis or an environmental basis? To what extent does the answer to this question depend on how you define "personality"? What is heritability, and in what ways can apparent environmental differences be due to the covert influence of genes?
4. What specific biological variables most affect personality characteristics? In what ways do personality characteristics reflect individual differences in nervous-system function? How would differences in genes cause differences in nervous-system function? 5. What are the major values and limitations of Freud's psychoanalytic approach? Which of these limitations are less present in the approach of any of the neo-Freudian theorists? (Identify specifically the neo-Freudian theorist whose approach lacks the limitation.) 6. Out of all the major motives on which people differ, which are the most important, are these conscious or unconscious motives, and how can they best be measured? How do the social learning theories differ from each other and from psychoanalytic theories, in terms of which motives they emphasize? 7. What is culture, and why are cross-cultural differences important for understanding personality differences? In what kinds of ways does behavior, cognition, and emotion differ between cultures?
8. How do people who differ in their personality characteristics differ in their cognitive processing of information? How is personality related to how one thinks, values, and believes? 9. Based on readings and content from this course, what is the likelihood of personality change occurring? What conditions (or what kind of intervention) would make a change in some personality characteristic more likely? Note: The two midterm essays will be taken from 1 through 4 above. The three final-exam essays will be drawn from the six that remain. The questions above are subject to change and revision, with the class being informed immediately of any changes or revisions.\ SUGGESTIONS FOR YOUR ONE-MINUTE PART OF THE PANEL PRESENTATION
These are suggestions, not requirements (the requirements are covered on the syllabus)
This is a summary, not a speech. Using another analogy, it is more like an abstract than a full description of a study. Do not go overtime, as this is not respectful to others in the panel, or to the audience who usually wants some time to ask questions. One minute is about right (30 seconds is fine), and over 90 seconds is too much.
Keep it simple. Use short sentences as much as possible. Give a quick, clear, easy-to-understand summary of the one, two, or three biggest points of your paper. Don't try to include everything, just the biggest points stated concisely. Then, if you haven't already, identify something that apparently makes your paper distinct from those of others in the panel. Here are some signs that you are preparing too long a panel summary: (a) when you put it on paper, it's more than 150 words or can't be fit on one side of one sheet of paper in double-spaced print, (b) you're trying to convey more than three points, (c) you will be reading from your paper in any way, (d) you have to talk fast or there's no time for pauses if you're going to squeeze what you're prepared to say into 60 seconds. Ways of presenting something in under a minute: * Imagine you are raising a question or making a brief statement in the discussion period at some meeting (that's the best analogy)
* Plan on making two points (one is enough, and you might have time for three if they are explained briefly) about the topic. If your topic question can have a "yes"or "no" answer, one of your points might be favoring yes, one favoring no. Or both might be yes. Or both no. Or one or both could be about why the topic is important. Points might be things you discovered, your overall synthesis or conclusion, reasons why the topic is important, a perspective on this issue that people usually do not think of.
* Don't try to summarize your whole paper, just extract a couple of things that (a) the audience might find important or interesting or (b) are the core ideas in your paper. * Another possible rule of thumb: Include one point that was common to multiple group members and another point that seems distinct to your paper. You can get an idea about what is in common and what is different by reading over the e-mail postings from other panel members.
Remember that the goal of these presentations is to get the audience thinking usefully about the topic. (The goal is not to dutifully, faithfully repeat as much of your paper as possible.)
CHOICES FOR THE EXPLORATORY PAPER (due January 31) 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: Most of these exercises involve consulting other people; it's generally a good idea to take some notes on how they respond. These other people you personally consult (or look up on the internet for #4) for your paper should generally be kept anonymous in your write-up. 1. 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 another person, show him/her your brief descriptions and ask him/her what themes seem to run through these events/experiences. Compare this to what you wrote on the separate sheet. Next, read M. Csikszentmihalyi's piece in Pieces of the Personality Puzzle (pp. 338-348) and note whatever seems similar between your experience and what Csikszentmihalyi is describing. Describe in writing (as your paper) the results of the whole process, and comment on what you think any of this suggests about your personality, your life, or peak experiences for people in general. 2. 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. 3. 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?" Do not mention astrology at all until this point! Repeat this procedure with several other people (the more the better, but 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 - for those who already knew their sun-sign and for those who did not (report the number separately)? 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. Did your results differ much from this?) Can you explain results based on whether the person knew about the characteristics of their sun sign? (Put your e-mail address on your paper if you'd like a summary of what other students found.) 4. Investigate gender and culture differences in desired characteristics of a partner by examining ads in an international on-line introductions service at the address *** contact instructor (gsaucier@oregon.uoregon.edu) to get address or refer to it on print copy*** Examine the ads provided by 20 women from one nation (your choice of which nation) and take notes on the characteristics that each one uses to describe herself. Then examine the ads provided by 20 men from the same country and take notes on the characteristics each one uses to describe himself. Next, choose another nation - one that you think might be very different culturally from the first nation you chose. Repeat the procedure you used on people from the first nation with people from this second nation: examine ads of 20 women and take notes on how they describe themselves, then examine ads of 20 men and take notes on how they describe themselves. For each nation and each gender, construct a "most typical" list of characteristics used to describe oneself. Compare the genders and compare the nations - describe what tends to be different and what tends to be the same. How might you account for these differences and similarities? Note: One hazard is that you could choose a nation that has too few men or too few women with ads; to avoid this problem, make sure your numbers will be large enough for each gender before you finalize your choice of nations. Another thing to be careful about: Keep track of the ages of the people in the ads, so that you can make sure the average ages of all four categories is not very different. If you find that you can't reach this website, you should choose another topic. 5. Describe how you would define "an evil person." Then describe what kinds of traits might be related to being an evil person, and how you think people actually develop these traits, or otherwise become an evil person. Then find two other people and ask each of them the same questions: "What is an evil person? What traits are related to being an evil person? How does a person become an evil person?" 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, definitions of the term "evil", and you are counseled to not rely on them for this assignment.) 6. Describe how you would define "a good person." Then describe what kinds of traits might be related to being a good person, and how you think people actually develop these traits, or otherwise become a good person. Then find two other people and ask each of them the same questions: "What is a good person? What traits are related to being a good person? How does a person become a good person?" Report briefly on their responses, and compare their responses with yours. What do you make of the similarities and differences? (Note: Dictionaries give very many, and often rather vague, definitions of the term "good", and you are counseled to not rely on them for this assignment.)
7. What makes a person attractive? Sit down (one-on-one) with each of at least six people, and ask each of them this question, after assuring them that their name will not be identified with their responses. After making a note of their initial responses to the question "what makes a person attractive?", keep prompting the person to come up with "anything else?" that s/he can think of. Once they seem to have no further responses to this question, ask the follow-up question "What makes a person unattractive?" and follow the same procedure. When you are finished interviewing people and taking notes on their individual responses, categorize each person's responses into (a) those that clearly refer to personality traits, (b) those that might have something to do with personality, (c) those that have to do with style of behavior, or (d) style of dress or adorning or making oneself up, (e) those that have to do with purely physical features, and (f) those that don't fit into any of the previous five categories. In your write-up of this experience, report the gist of what each person said and try to make some overall generalizations about what makes a person attractive (at least based on the data you have) or unattractive. It doesn't matter whether you interview are men or women, but you may find it easier to compare responses if you stick to interviewing persons of a single gender. Do report the gender (but not the name) of each person you interview.