PSY 307 Text Reading Guide: Main Text
The textbook is an excellent and useful one. While lecture material remains primary as far as exams are concerned, do not make the mistake of neglecting the text. Significant portions of the exam questions as well as other class exercises will be based on text readings. The information below should help you in the challenge of integrating text with lecture.
Chapter One
What do you think of the Emerson quote that heads this chapter (p. 3)? What means might be utilized to identify the "word or act" that is the "key to the man... [or] woman"? Is Emerson's idea a scientifically testable hypothesis? Why or why not? Since both the humanities (including philosophy, literature, history) and the social sciences claim to be able to provide important insights into these "keys", how might these two general approaches differ?
What thoughts do you have about the author's notion of the "psychological triad" (p. 3), which also underlies his definition of personality itself (p. 5)? Can you think of any aspects or components of the human personality that might not fit neatly within one of these three categories?
On page 6, the author uses the term "paradigm" rather differently from the way that Thomas Kuhn (and, following his lead, your instructor) does. Since I am defining the term psychology is a nonparadigmatic discipline, I use terms like "key ideas" to refer to the governing constructs that underlie a given school of thought. I also identify schools of thought in a slightly different way than does the text author (p. 6), but we'll be able to find a high degree of commonality between his structure and mine.
Pages 7-11 are extremely important and should be reviewed very carefully. What connections do you see between the "OBT problem" (pp. 8-9) and the nonparadigmatic nature of psychology?
What about the author's idea (pp. 9-11) that strengths and weaknesses are organically linked, both within individuals and within theories? Can you think of a counterexample?
Chapter Two
The author's notion that "data are clues" suggests the distinction, discussed in lecture, between conceptual variables and operational variables. Do you see the relationship?
I use a different nomenclature than does the author to refer to the four types of data. In lecture, we discussed L-, O-, T-, and S-data rather than (the text equivalent) L-, I-, B-, and S-data. After all, LOTS is a memorable acronym; LIBS is ambiguous at best, and SILB (as used in the text) is even worse.
The discussion on pp. 22-49 (with an emphasis on advantages and disadvantages of each of the four data types) is excellent and merits close study. We may have time to cover this material in detail during lecture, but as with all text information specifically noted in this reading guide, it is fair game for exams.
Chapter Three
In the interest of time and the avoidance of unnecessary redundancy (particularly in the eyes of students who have taken multiple courses with me), I am not going to cover standard material on alternative research designs. I will assume a basic knowledge of relevant concepts such as the difference between independent and dependent variables, the contrast between experimental and correlational research, the interpretation of correlation coefficients, the nature of confounds and how they can be addressed, and the like. If this is a giant void for you, consider reviewing the online lecture notes from PSY 202, Unit 2, as well as reading all of chapter 3 very carefully.
In class, our major concern will be with issues of reliability and validity, and other related psychometric issues (see text pp. 54-64).
Note the connection between the discussion on pp. 51-52 and the nonparadigmatic nature of psychology -- do you see it?
Chapter Four
What the author calls "the trait approach" I call the "dispositional school of thought". Whether the terms "trait" and "disposition" are precisely equivalent is a matter of some modest dispute, but we won't concern ourselves with it in this course.
Page 91, "as a result, personality psychology and everyday human observation are in some ways not so very different." Can you identify some similarities and some differences? To what extent might the similarities be a strength... or a weakness... of the dispositional approach?
How is the fact that dispositional research is largely correlational a problem?
Note, on page 92, a discussion of issues related to the idiographic-nomothetic distinction. The comment that the dispositional approach "by its very nature, is prone to neglect those aspects of human psychology that are common to all people"; when we discuss the Five-Factor Model, we'll see why I think this is a bit of an overstatement.
The anecdotal research on pages 94-95 is fascinating and mirrors my own experience to a considerable extent. To what extent do you think the dispositional model presumes the notion of a coherent "self" and has thus neglected the developmental component? (Jungian theory, as we'll see, is a notable exception.)
The material on the situationist debate (pp. 99-111) is extremely important and merits careful study. See especially page 101. My own real-world consulting work over the years has generally confirmed the "70% rule" on p. 102.
Chapter Five
This chapter closely parallels lecture material on psychometrics.
Page 117 suggests some fascinating implications: that "controlled" aspects of a trait are best measured by conventional self-report measures, while "noncontrolled" aspects are best measured by newer methods such as implicit association tests.
The problem outlined on page 129 is very real and is the bane of factor analytic research.
Chapter Six
In the interests of time (one cannot cover everything), we will probably not cover the material in this chapter, which addresses research that is traditionally presented in a class on social psychology, not personality psychology. However, I may briefly present some research findings related to "implicit personality theory". The notion of "moderator variables" (p. 149) is very important in actual practice, i.e., in real-world predictive uses of dispositional measures. My own current research is presenting some complex issues along those lines.
Chapter Seven
The distinction presented on p. 166 is very useful and important.
Note that this chapter presents the original versions of some historically important personality inventories. Don't miss the chance to measure yourself on such traits as authoritarianism and self-monitoring! (But keep a little emotional distance and perhaps place your tongue firmly in your cheek before taking these inventories... that may be the author's purpose.)
Pages 194-197 represent an annoyingly brief treatment in my view of some very important and influential models. But not to worry... I'll be making up for that deficit in lecture!
Pages 201-204 bear close scrutiny, addressing an often-neglected but important question.
Chapter Eight
Note that from this point on, my ordering of the course units differs from the ordering of material in the textbook, so there will be some "shuffling" of reading assignments. See the syllabus for more details.
Very useful, though in some respects slightly more technical than required in a course like this. In my own, somewhat different way, I'll be covering the same material with a particular emphasis on topics addressed on pages 214-216; 217-219 (a very useful summary is found on these text pages); 220-222; and 228-236.
Do you share some of the concerns presented by the author about the overapplication of psychotropic medications (pages 235-236)? Why or why not?
Page 236 offers an intriguing possible link between dispositional and biomedical views of personality.
Pages 241-242 offer some helpful, though unfortunately insufficiently technical (in my view), comments about the impact of the biomedical school on the classic mind-brain or mind-body problem. (Reading ahead, see what another school has to say about the same set of issues on pages 399-400. Can you link the difference in these two kinds of perspectives to the issue of reductionism?)
Chapter Nine
Due to time limitations, we will likely cover only the first portion of this chapter (pp. 246-258), though sociobiological approaches are becoming increasingly influential in psychology, and the author's question on page 271 is a significant one these days.
Chapter Ten
Pages 283-288 and 309-313 parallel lecture material rather closely. Due t6 time limitations, some other elements of the classic Freudian model will receive a more superficial treatment.
Chapter Eleven
Pages 315-331 closely parallel lecture material, though I'll be presenting a different and somewhat more elaborated model of the defense mechanisms.
Criticisms of psychoanalysis (pages 338-343) are cogent and worth debating in class.
Chapter Twelve
Due to time limitations, we will take a very selective survey of material in this chapter, though it is interesting in its own right. However, pages 361-368 (examining links between modern information processing theory and classic psychoanalysis) are fascinating and provide, as the text suggests, a helpful way to render psychoanalytic hypotheses more testable than ever before. Review these pages carefully.
Chapter Thirteen
Page 375, "Psychology is a funny kind of science, because the object of its scrutiny is the one doing the scrutinizing." What implications do you think this has? The discussion on pages 375-376 is excellent and parallels lecture material on the emic-etic distinction.
Do what extent do you think that the notion that "we do not see things as they are; we see them as we are" (p. 376) is overstated? Why or why not? What does this suggest about the possibility or impossibility of (even partial) human objectivity? Do you agree that the existence of phenomenology is an adequate philosophical basis for believing in human freedom? Why or why not? Is there an infinite regress involved in "construing our construals"?
I disagree that phenomenological psychology necessarily has to buy into all of the philosophical presuppositions presented on pages 380-385, but historically these ideas have influenced phenomenology. (For whatever reason, the author largely ignores the role of theistic existentialists like Kierkegaard, even though many historians regard him as the "father of existentialism".)
Pages 391-396 are very important.
Note that I present material on positive psychology (pp. 398-399) in a different portion of the course, and do not regard this school-in-the-making as so linked to classic phenomenology as the text author suggests.
Chapter Fourteen
This is the most cutting-edge chapter in the entire text. Yet for that same reason I am currently struggling with the question of how to incorporate it into the course without cutting out other, more traditional material. Stay tuned to learn how I make that decision. Topics like cross-cultural generalizability, deconstructionism (a hot-button topic these days, though taken to extremes it is self-referentially absurd), semiotics, and ethnocentrism plunge us headlong into a brave new world that psychologists weren't really addressing 15 or so years ago. I suggest careful attention to pages 408-426. The question, "Is the self a cultural artifact?" is a particularly intriguing one. See also pages 429-430.
Chapter Fifteen
The chapter title, "how the world creates who you are", is a good description of the behaviorist idea.
Pages 443-452 are especially relevant.
Can you identify some problems with the idea of reciprocal determinism (pp. 470-471)?
Chapter Sixteen
We won't be covering this chapter due to time limitations.
Chapter Seventeen
We won't be covering this chapter due to time limitations.
Chapter Eighteen
How can this chapter help you with the intellectual goal of deciding which schools of thought best represent your own thinking at this point? We'll be covering the same material in a different way toward the end of the course.