Shackman Psyc210 Module01 Overview

Slide 1

PSYC 210: Temperament and PersonalityDevelopmental Origins,Biological Bases,and Implications for Psychopathology

Dr. Alex ShackmanUniversity of MarylandSpring 2015

Plan for TodayRound table discussion of T&Pfundamental questions (go to document)

Expert perspectives on T&P with short discussion

Review syllabusCourse mechanics and grading

Round TableWhat are the fundamental questions that define the scientific study of temperament and personality (T&P)?

What are your intuitions, based on your experiences, your prior coursework, and our shared cultural understanding?

What do the so-calledexperts have to say?Expert perspectives on T&PTemperament in Children: Behavior and Biology (5:16)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGjO1KwltOw

Animal Models of T&P (~5min; Start @ 2:28)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URee25502aU

T&P Across the Lifespan (16:21)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzgHhhU-GQY6Welcome to Psychology 210!

Four Course ObjectivesCourse Objectives, 1 of 4A major goal of this course is to give you a broad, interdisciplinary scientific background in T&P so that you can:Be a critical consumer and reviewer of this literature, especially when it appears in the mass media, or is a part of conversations about public policy (education, business, or healthcare)

Understand the strengths and weaknesses of a broad spectrum of biological, behavioral, and statistical tools

Broaden the way you think about connections between the mind, brain, behavior

Note: This is an introductory course and an extensive background in biology, genetics, neuroscience, statistics, or other STEM fields is not assumed.Course Objectives, 2 of 4Become experts on how T&P influence our daily lives and the mechanisms that link T&P to positive and negative outcomesCourse Objectives, 3 of 4Develop a working knowledge of the neurobiology and genetics of T&PCourse Objectives, 4 of 4Know and be able to address the fundamental questions, based on the current state of the scienceIn other words, this is a science class

Not a history class, or whats been termed The Graveyard Tour approach to teaching T&PWhadya mean, Graveyard Tour?The Graveyard TourPersonality psychology has long been identified in the minds of many people with the first (and perhaps only) course in the subject that they took in college. Too often, this was (and sometimes still is) the classic tour of the graveyard that focuses on brilliant but long-deceased theorists and leads students to end the semester thinking the burning concern of the field is the disagreement between Freud and JungA course that is restricted to theorists like these is an unforgivable misrepresentation of the field, a failure in ones duty to educate students, and a slap in the face to every contemporary personality researcher

It is unacceptable that personality psychology remains, generally, a side trip through the history of psychology while the rest of the science of psychology is presented to students through the lens of the most cutting-edge research.

Benet-Martnez et al., APA Handbook of Personality & Social Psychol, 2015The Graveyard TourPersonality psychology has long been identified in the minds of many people with the first (and perhaps only) course in the subject that they took in college. Too often, this was (and sometimes still is) the classic tour of the graveyard that focuses on brilliant but long-deceased theorists and leads students to end the semester thinking the burning concern of the field is the disagreement between Freud and JungA course that is restricted to theorists like these is an unforgivable misrepresentation of the field, a failure in ones duty to educate students, and a slap in the face to every contemporary personality researcher

It is unacceptable that personality psychology remains, generally, a side trip throughhistorywhile the rest ofpsychology is presented to students through the lens of the most cutting-edge research.

Benet-Martnez et al., APA Handbook of Personality & Social Psychol, 2015The Graveyard TourPersonality psychology has long been identified in the minds of many people with the first (and perhaps only) course in the subject that they took in college. Too often, this was (and sometimes still is) the classic tour of the graveyard that focuses on brilliant but long-deceased theorists and leads students to end the semester thinking the burning concern of the field is the disagreement between Freud and JungA course that is restricted to theorists like these is an unforgivable misrepresentation of the field, a failure in ones duty to educate students, and a slap in the face to every contemporary personality researcher

It is unacceptable that personality psychology remains, generally, a side trip through the history of psychology while the rest of the science of psychology is presented to students through the lens of the most cutting-edge research.

Benet-Martnez et al., APA Handbook of Personality & Social Psychol, 2015Syllabus: The nitty gritty detailsGo to documentThe EndExtra SlidesThe T&P Hall of FameConsider as a typical textbookIt lists 22 theorists putting forth 20 major theories and faithfullychronicles their extremely divergent views.

There is no agreement on definitions, models, methods, results or indeed anything whatever; all is confusion, with no effort used to sort the chaff from the grain.

No criteria are offered for judging the truth-value of given statements, no attempt is made to eliminate theories which definitely contradict established facts. and there is no effort at integration

As an example I would class among the inadmissible theories those of Freud, Adler, Jung, Binswanger, Horney, Sullivan, Fromm, Erikson and Maslou.

They fail essentially because for the most part they do not generate testable deductions; because where they do so the deductions have most frequently been falsified; and because they fail to include practically all the experimental and empirical studies which have been done over the past 50 years. Historically these theorists have had some influence, but their theorizing and their mode of working has not been in the tradition of natural science, and they have not been found responsive to adversecriticism or empirical disproof. Hans J. Eysenck Personality & Indiv Diffs 1991