OSCI 8130Social PsychologySpring 2009Tuesdays
Professor Lisa Slattery Rashotte9:00-11:45
Office: Fretwell, Room 476F
Office Phone: 704-687-2288office hours
E-mail: 12-2
This syllabus contains the policies and expectations I have established for Social Psychology. Please read the entire syllabus carefully before continuing in this course. These policies and expectations are intended to create a productive learning atmosphere for all students. Unless you are prepared to abide by these policies and expectations, you risk losing the opportunity to participate further in the course. The standards and requirements set forth in this syllabus may be modified at any time by the course instructor. Notice of changes will be made by announcement in class.
Course Description: This course is about social psychology, which traditionally has been an area of both sociology and psychology. This branch of social science systematically examines how the actual, imagined or the implied presence of other people influences a person’s thoughts, feelings and behavior. Social psychology examines social interaction - human behavior and cognitive processes occurring when people are in groups. This course will touch upon several topics in social psychology within organizations including: theories in social psychology;decision making; negotiation and social dilemmas; groups and teams; procedural justice; emotions, relationships and trust; and values and norms.
Course Philosophy: This course introduces the student to social psychology. After a brief introduction to the content and methods of the course and the subject, we will turn to a survey of the important research areas of the discipline. This course will be run as a seminar. That means that I am here as a facilitator. I expect you to do much learning on your own and in discussion with one another both in class and outside of class.
Course themes: 1)How do sociologists understand the roles of individuals in organizations? What methods do they use to investigate these roles?
2)How do individuals become members of an organization? What problems do organizations encounter in socialization?
3)What are the important dynamics that occur in social interaction? What
guides interaction between individuals in various contexts?
Texts:--Thompson, Leigh L. (Ed.) 2003. The Social Psychology of Organizational Behavior.
Psychology Press. ISBN: 1-84169-084-8.
--Lovaglia, Michael. 2007. Knowing People: The Personal Use of Social Psychology,
2nd ed.. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN: 978-0-7425-4772-8.
--Articles hyperlinked through this syllabus or available (pdf) from the instructor.
Grading: Your final grade in the course will be based on the total accumulation of points earned on a paper and class participation. The total number of points possible is 400. The breakdown of points is as follows:
Paper200 points
Class participation/Memos200 points
Paper: The primary written requirement of the course is a research paper that integrates social psychological theory and research in some way. This paper should have relevance to the issues we have discussed in class and to your own interests. This paper may take one of several forms: a critical review of literature, a research proposal, a theoretical reformulation or integration, or a theory-based empirical paper.
Use ASA guidelines for technical matters. If you do not already own an ASA Manual, you should obtain one. Your paper should include an ASA-style abstract and cover page. Your references should appear both in the text and on the reference page in ASA style. (Look carefully at the examples in the ASA manual; it is easy to make mistakes). Pay close attention to professional grammatical style and spelling. Be sure that the paper reads clearly with appropriate transitions between sections.
This assignment is graded in portions handed in throughout the course of the semester. The schedule includes a mandatory revision of the paper. The due dates, the maximum points available for each section, and the grading criteria are indicated below.
Due on February 17: The first section of the project, which will not be part of the final report, is a brief (about two pages) paper describing the problem you wish to address, including relevant theory and methods. This “prospectus” should be developed through discussion with the instructor. This section of the project is worth 30 points out the total of 200 points for the entire project.
Due on March 24:
INTRODUCTION. Introduce your paper by succinctly summarizing its purpose and include a brief critical review of published research articles (in which key components of the problem and theory are discussed). You will be graded on how well your introduction "makes a case" for the project that you have undertaken. The introduction is worth 20 points.
BODY. The body of your paper will take different formats depending on the type of paper you are writing. For proposals and empirical papers, this section should include methods and analysis. For critiques, integrations and reformulations, you will need an expanded theory review section and a section for your own contributions. In both cases, the body of the paper is worth 40 points.
Due on April 14:
ABSTRACT. The abstract is a very brief paragraph describing the problem, approach, methods, results/findings and conclusions. (Hint: usually each of these topics is addressed in a single sentence.) Crafting an acceptable abstract is difficult, and may best be done after the rest of the paper/article is written. Review abstracts from several ASA-style journals to get an appreciation for the terseness of the prose. The abstract is worth 20 points.
DISCUSSION. The discussion section is worth 30 points. In this section you summarize your paper in terms of implications. You should consider and discuss any alternative explanations. You should also discuss the generalizability of your findings or any limitations thereto and validity issues.
Due on May 5: A complete, revised version of the paper. Worth 60 points.
Participation: The grade for class participation will be based on a combination of formal and informal opportunities for contribution. The formal opportunities will take the form of memos to be written and turned in each week. Each student will write brief (2-3 page) reaction memos to each week’s readings. The informal opportunities take the form of contributions to the class discussions.
General Policies:
Students in this course seeking accommodations to disabilities must first consult with the Office of Disability Services and follow the instructions of that office for obtaining accommodations.
All students are required to read and abide by the Code of Student Academic Integrity. Violations of the Code of Student Academic Integrity, including plagiarism, will result in disciplinary action as provided in the Code. Definitions and examples of plagiarism are set forth in the Code. The Code is available from the Dean of Students Office or online at:
The use of cell phones, beepers, or other communication devices is disruptive, and is therefore prohibited during class. Except in pre-approved situations, those using such devices must leave the classroom for the remainder of the class period.
Schedule of topics/reading assignments:
1/13Introduction to social psychology
1/20Snow Day
1/27Theories/perspectives in social psychology
House, James. 1977. “The Three Faces of Social Psychology,” Sociometry 40: 161-177.
Staw, B. M. 1991. “Dressing Up Like an Organization: When Psychological Theories Can Explain Organizational Action,” Journal of Management 17:805-819.(SPOB)
Sutton, R. I. and B. M. Shaw. 1995. “What Theory is Not,” Administrative Science Quarterly 40:371-384.(SPOB)
Webster, Murray Jr. and Jane Sell. 2007. “Why Do Experiments?” In Laboratory Experiments in the Social Sciences, Murray Webster, Jr. and Jane Sell, editors. New York: Elsevier.(pdf)
Lovaglia, chapters 1, 2
2/3Guest speakers Healy & Hogg
2/10Decision making
Kahneman, D. and D. Lovallo. 1993.“Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking,” Management Science 39:17-31.(SPOB)
Staw, B. M. 1976. “Knee Deep in the Big Muddy: A Study of Escalating Commitment to a Chosen Course of Action,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 16:27-44.(SPOB)
Lovaglia, chapter 4
2/17 & 2/24Negotiation, persuasion and influence
Bazerman, M. H., T. Magliozzi, and M. A. Neale. 1985. “Integrative Bargaining in a Competitive Market,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 36:294-313.(SPOB)
Friedkin, Noah E. and Eugene C. Johnsen. 1999. “Social Influence Networks and Opinion Change.” Advances in Group Processes 16:1-29.(pdf)
Morris, M. W., R. P. Larrick, and S. K. Su. 1999. “Misperceiving Negotiation Counterparts: When Situationally Determined Bargaining Behaviors Are Attributed to Personality Traits,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77:52-67.(SPOB)
Rashotte. Lisa Slattery and Lynn Smith-Lovin. 1997. “Who Benefits from Being Bold: The Interactive Effects of Task Cues and Status Characteristics on Influence in Mock Jury Groups,” Advances in Group Processes 14: 235-55.(pdf)
Lovaglia, chapters 5, 6
3/3Snow Day
3/10No class (Spring Break)
3/17Social exchange and social dilemmas
Brewer, M.B. and R.M. Kramer. 1986. “Choice Behavior in Social Dilemmas: Effects of Social Identity, Group Size and Decision Framing,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 64:575-586. (SPOB)
Emerson, Richard. 1976. “Social Exchange Theory,” Annual Review of Sociology 2: 335-362.
Lovaglia, chapter 3
3/24Group structure
Berger, J., S.J. Rosenholtz and M. Zelditch Jr. 1980. “Status Organizing Processes,” Annual Review of Sociology 6: 479-508.
Wagner, David G. and Joseph Berger. 2002. “Expectation States Theory: An Evolving Research Program.” Pp. 41-76 in New Directions in Contemporary Social Theory, edited by Joseph Berger and Morris Zelditch Jr. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.(pdf)
Wheelan, Susan A., Barbara Davidson, and Felice Tilin. 2003. “Group Development Across Time: Reality or Illusion?” Small Group Research 34:223-245.(pdf)
3/31Cohesion and conflict
Gigone, D. and R. Hastie. 1993. “The Common Knowledge Effect: Information Sharing and Group Judgment,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65:959-974. (SPOB)
Heckathorn, Douglas D. and Judith E. Rosenstein. 2002. “Group Solidarity as the Product of Collective Action: Creation of Solidarity in a Population of Injection Drug Users.” Advances in Group Processes 19:37-66.(pdf)
McPherson, Miller and Lynn Smith-Lovin. 2002. “Cohesion and Membership Duration: Linking Groups, Relations and Individuals in an Ecology of Affiliation.” Advances in Group Processes 19:1-36.(pdf)
4/7Procedural justice
Cook, Karen and Karen Hegtvedt. 1983. “Distributive Justice, Equity and Equality,” Annual Review of Sociology 9:217-241.
Greenberg, J. 1993. “Stealing in the Name of Justice: Informational and Interpersonal Moderators of Theft Reactions of Underpayment Inequity,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 54:81-103.(SPOB)
Hegtvedt, Karen A. and Cathryn Johnson. 2000. “Justice Beyond the Individual: A Future with Legitimation.” Social Psychology Quarterly 63:298-311.
Jasso, Guillermina and Murray Webster, Jr. 1997. “Double Standards in Just Earnings for Male and Female Workers,” Social Psychology Quarterly 60: 66-78.
4/14Emotions in organizations
Heise, David R. 1987. “Affect Control Theory: Concepts and Model,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 13: 1-33.(pdf)
Smith-Lovin, Lynn. 1987. “Affect Control Theory: An Assessment,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 13: 171-92.(pdf)
Lovaglia, chapter 10
4/21Relationships and trust
McAllister,D.J. 1995. “Affect- and Cognition-based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations,” Academy of Management Journal 38: 24-59. (SPOB)
Molm, Linda D. 2003. “Power, Trust and Fairness: Comparisons of Negotiated and Reciprocal Exchange.” Advances in Group Processes 20:31-65.(pdf)
Lovaglia, chapter 9
4/28Attitudes, values and norms
Kerr, S. 1975. “On the Folly of Rewarding A, While Hoping for B,” Academy of Management Journal 18:769-783.(SPOB)
Tetlock, P.E. 2000. “Cognitive Biases and Organizational Correctives: Do Both Disease and Cure Depend on the Politics of the Beholder?” Administrative Science Quarterly 45:293-326.(SPOB)
Lovaglia, chapter 8
5/5Papers due by 6pm