|
|
JOHN CABOT UNIVERSITY
COURSE CODE: "PS 335"
COURSE NAME: "Theories of Personality"
SEMESTER & YEAR:
Summer Session II 2014
|
SYLLABUS
INSTRUCTOR:
Karla Murdock
EMAIL: [email protected]
HOURS:
MTWTH 9:00 AM 10:45 AM
TOTAL NO. OF CONTACT HOURS:
45
CREDITS:
3
PREREQUISITES:
Prerequisite: PS 101
OFFICE HOURS:
|
|
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
This
course will introduce you to some of the major theories of personality and the
research methods used to test these theories. Several perspectives on
personality will be introduced and critical evaluation of these alternative
perspectives will be encouraged. From each theoretical perspective we will
address questions such as: What is personality? What are the similarities and differences
among individuals’ personalities? What factors influence the development of
personality? How can we investigate the nature and cause of personality? What
are the implications and consequences of our theories of personality?
I
will ask you to be active learners in this class – to go beyond rote
memorization of theories, concepts, and terms. Our class meetings will consist
of a combination of discussions, activities, lectures, films, and writing
exercises, all of which will encourage and require you to think critically about how we conceptualize
and assess personality.
|
SUMMARY OF COURSE CONTENT:
This course will cover foundational psychoanalytic (Freud & Jung), psychoanalytic-social (Adler & Erikson), trait (Allport, Catell, Kagan, Eyesenck, Gray), learning (Skinner), cognitive social learning (Mischel & Bandura), and humanistic (Rogers & Maslow) theoretical perspectives. These theories will be linked with contemporary psychology research articles that reflect the evolution of the field. Finally, the modern theoretical perspectives underlying positive psychology and contemplative science will be discussed.
|
LEARNING OUTCOMES:
Students will know the fundamental aspects of several foundational theories in the field of personality psychology.
Students will gain a historical perspective of this field and understand how the theories evolved from and informed one another.
Students will be able to identify and understand links between personality theories and modern research in the field of psychology.
Students will be able to integrate and apply their knowledge to develop their own well-informed theory of personality.
|
TEXTBOOK:
| Book Title | Author | Publisher | ISBN number | Library Call Number | Comments | Format | Local Bookstore | Online Purchase |
| Theories of Personality: Understanding Persons (5th Edition). (2008) | Cloninger, S. | Prentice-Hall | 0132434091 | | PDF versions of additional journal articles will be made available via email. | | | |
|
REQUIRED RESERVED READING:
RECOMMENDED RESERVED READING:
|
GRADING POLICY
-ASSESSMENT METHODS:
| Assignment | Guidelines | Weight |
| CLASS PARTICIPATION | Your class participation grade will be generated on the basis of your attendance record, full engagement in each class meeting, and contributions to small- and large-group discussions. Much of what you learn from this course will come from the materials that are presented and discussed in class. | 15% |
| EXAMS |
There will be three exams in this course, all of which will include objective items as well as essay questions. Each is worth 20%, including the final exam.
| 60% |
| PAPER | In this paper you will propose your own theory of personality. Develop a title for your theory. In writing about it, you may consider any or all of the following issues:
• How would you characterize the theoretical basis or overarching perspective of your theory (e.g., psychoanalytic, trait, cognitive, behavioral…..)?
• How does your theory address core issues of personality (i.e., description, dynamics, development)?
• What are the two or three cornerstone ideas of your theory?
• What, if any, are the assumptions your theory makes about psychological health?
• What are the limits to how your theory should be applied?
This paper should be 6 double-spaced pages long in 12-point font with 1-inch margins. Formatting counts. Thus, this is a relatively brief paper that will require concise communication of ideas.
| 25% |
-ASSESSMENT CRITERIA:
AWork of this quality directly addresses the question or problem raised and provides a coherent argument displaying an extensive knowledge of relevant information or content. This type of work demonstrates the ability to critically evaluate concepts and theory and has an element of novelty and originality. There is clear evidence of a significant amount of reading beyond that required for the course.
BThis is highly competent level of performance and directly addresses the question or problem raised.There is a demonstration of some ability to critically evaluatetheory and concepts and relate them to practice. Discussions reflect the student’s own arguments and are not simply a repetition of standard lecture andreference material. The work does not suffer from any major errors or omissions and provides evidence of reading beyond the required assignments.
CThis is an acceptable level of performance and provides answers that are clear but limited, reflecting the information offered in the lectures and reference readings.
DThis level of performances demonstrates that the student lacks a coherent grasp of the material.Important information is omitted and irrelevant points included.In effect, the student has barely done enough to persuade the instructor that s/he should not fail.
FThis work fails to show any knowledge or understanding of the issues raised in the question. Most of the material in the answer is irrelevant.
-ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS:
Attendance will be recorded and included in class participation grade.
|
|
|
ACADEMIC HONESTY
As stated in the university catalog, any student who commits an act of academic
dishonesty will receive a failing grade on the work in which the dishonesty occurred.
In addition, acts of academic dishonesty, irrespective of the weight of the assignment,
may result in the student receiving a failing grade in the course. Instances of
academic dishonesty will be reported to the Dean of Academic Affairs. A student
who is reported twice for academic dishonesty is subject to summary dismissal from
the University. In such a case, the Academic Council will then make a recommendation
to the President, who will make the final decision.
|
STUDENTS WITH LEARNING OR OTHER DISABILITIES
John Cabot University does not discriminate on the basis of disability or handicap.
Students with approved accommodations must inform their professors at the beginning
of the term. Please see the website for the complete policy.
|
|
|
SCHEDULE
|
|
|
CLASS MEETING
|
Class meeting
|
TOPIC
|
READING /
PAGES
|
|
Mon June 30
|
|
Introduction
to Personality Theory
|
Chapter 1
|
|
Tues July 1
|
|
Psychoanalytic
Perspective:
Classic Psychoanalysis (Freud)
|
Chapter 2
|
|
Wed July 2
|
|
Psychoanalytic
Perspective:
Analytical
Psychology (Jung)
|
Chapter 3
|
|
Thurs July 3
|
|
Psychoanalytic-Social
Perspective:
Individual Psychology (Adler)
Siblings and Personality Development
|
Chapter 4
Brody, G.
(2005). Siblings’ direct and indirect contributions to child development. In
C. Morf and O. Ayduk (Eds.), Current
Directions in Personality Psychology, pp. 143-148. Washington, D.C.:
American Psychological Society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mon July 7
|
|
Psychoanalytic-Social Perspective:
Psychosocial
Development (Erikson)
|
Chapter 5
|
|
Tues July 8
|
Exam 1
|
|
|
|
Wed July 9
|
|
Trait Perspective:
Personological
Trait Theory (Allport)
|
Chapter 7
|
|
Thurs July 10
|
|
Trait Perspective:
Big Five:
Factor Analytical Trait Theory (Cattell)
|
Chapter 8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mon July 14
|
|
Trait Perspective:
Biological
Theories (Kagan, Eysenck, Gray)
|
Chapter 9
|
|
Tues July 15
|
|
Biological
Perspectives
|
Dabbs, J.
Hargrove, M., & Heusel, C. (1996). Testosterone differences among college
fraternities: Well-behaved vs. rambunctious. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 157-161.
Farah, M.
(2005). Neuroethics: The practical and the philosophical. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 34-30.
|
|
Wed
July 16
|
|
Positive Emotion
|
Fredrickson,
B. L. (2003). The value of positive emotions. American Scientist, 91,
330-335.
Folkman, S.
& Moskowitz, J.T. (2005). Stress, positive emotion, and coping. In C.
Morf and O. Ayduk (Eds.), Current
Directions in Personality Psychology, pp. 181-186. Washington, D.C.:
American Psychological Society.
|
|
Thurs July 17
|
Exam 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mon July 21
|
|
Learning Perspective:
Behaviorism
(Skinner)
|
Chapter 10
|
|
Tues July 22
|
|
Cognitive Social Learning Perspective:
Mischel
|
Chapter 12
|
|
Wed July 23
|
Take the VIA
Strengths Survey Online;
Print out
results
|
Cognitive Social Learning Perspective:
Bandura
|
|
|
Thurs July 24
|
Bring VIA
Survey results to class
|
Positive Psychology
Strengths Assessment Interpretation
|
Csikszentmihalyi,
M. (1999). If we are so rich, why aren’t we happy? American Psychologist, 54,
821-827.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mon July 28
|
|
Contemplative Science
|
Davidson, R.,
Dunne, J., Eccles, J., et al. (2012). Contemplative practices and mental
training: Prospects for American education. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 146-153.
|
|
Tues July 29
|
|
Humanistic Perspective:
Person-Centered
Theory (Rogers)
|
Chapter 14
|
|
Wed July 30
|
|
Humanistic Perspective:
Need Hierarchy
Theory (Maslow)
|
Chapter 15
|
|
Thurs July 31
|
Paper Due
|
Wrap Up
|
|
|
Fri Aug 1
|
Final Exam
|
|
|
|
|
|