UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX
PSYCHOLOGY
MSc module
Applications of Social Psychology (921C8)
Autumn Term 2015-16
Module Convenor: Professor Rupert Brown
Office: Pevensey 1, 2B11
(Office hours: Tuesdays, 16.00-17.00,
Thursdays, 11.00-12.00)
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (01273) 877443
1
Objectives
The core objective of this advanced level module is be to introduce students to
contemporary theorising in social psychology that has the potential to address today’s
most pressing social issues. Throughout the module there will be a continual emphasis
on the application of theoretical models to particular social contexts so as to deepen
students’ understanding of the utility and the limitations of these models in practice.
By the end of the module students will be expected to:
1. Demonstrate a critical understanding of the strengths and limitations of
social psychology for contributing to the amelioration of societal problems
2. Communicate their knowledge about the applicability of social psychology
effectively both orally and in writing
Level and Duration
The module will last for one term and will be offered to Masters students in
Psychology. It will assume some basic knowledge of social psychology gained from
undergraduate degree modules.
Assessment
The module will be assessed through a 3000 word essay (80%), submitted at the end
of this term, and a 10 minute presentation using Powerpoint during the term (20%).
Regarding the latter, the time limit for these presentations is 10 minutes, and you are
advised to stick strictly to this (or risk mark penalisation). Within such a time-frame,
do not attempt to present a detailed account of the whole paper or every study in it (in
a multi-study paper). Rather, use your judgement to decide: which are the key ideas
under examination, which findings are most important to illuminate those ideas, and
what are the main conclusions we should draw from it? Don’t forget to leave yourself
a minute or so at the end for your own critical evaluation of the paper.
The deadline for the essay is published on Sussex Direct. It should be handed in at the
Psychology Office in the normal way.
Information on the following can be found at the link below:
 submitting your work
 missing a deadline
 late penalties
 MEC – mitigating evidence
 Exams
 Help with managing your studies and competing your work
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/psychology/internal/students/examinationsandassessment
Teaching Methods
Teaching is through lectures and small group seminars. The group will meet weekly
with the module teacher for a 2 hour lecture/seminar. During each class one student
(or pair of students) will take responsibility for a presentation of a particular paper
2
relevant to that week’s topic. Together with a brief summary of the previous week’s
class, this presentation is made available on the module web page by the start of the
following week’s seminar.
This module puts a higher premium than usual on student preparation and active
participation. What you will learn will be in direct proportion to the amount of effort
you are prepared to expend engaging with the module materials and the seminar
discussions.
Contributing faculty
Rupert Brown (RB)
Richard De Visser (RdeV)
John Drury (JD)
Donna Jessop (DJ)
Karen Long (KL)
Viv Vignoles (VV)
Module Texts
There is no single text for this module, given the wide-ranging nature of the material
covered. However, there are a few books that you may find useful:
Brown, R. (2010) Prejudice: its social psychology, 2nd Edition. Oxford: WileyBlackwell.
Kremer, J., Sheehy, N., Reilly, J., Trew, K. & Muldoon, O. (2003) Applying Social
Psychology. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
Jetten et al. (2011) Social Cure: Identity, Health and Well-being. Hove: Psychology
Press
Smith, P. B., Fischer, R., Vignoles, V. L., & Bond, M. H. (2013). Understanding
social psychology across cultures. Engaging with others in a changing world.
London: Sage.
Thaler, R. H. & Sunstein, C. R (2009) Nudge: improving decisions about health,
wealth and happiness. London: Penguin
Journals that cover applied social psychology include,
Basic and Applied Social Psychology
Health Psychology
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
Journal of Social Issues
Psychology and Health
Social Issues and Policy Review
Seminar Topics and Reading Lists
Below are the seminar readings. For each topic there is an asterisked (*) essential
background reading. Everyone should read this as a minimum requirement. Then
there are several further readings, usually reports of empirical studies that will be
assigned to individuals to read and report back on to the rest of the group. The lists are
extensive partly to ensure that everyone is able to read something for each week, and
3
partly to assist you in preparing assignments. I have tried to ensure that all readings
are available electronically through the library’s on-line journals collection (go to the
Journal Titles tab on the Library homepage) or through pdf files located on the
module web-site. I recommend that you avail yourself of the library rather than using
other facilities (e.g., Google Scholar). The main reason for this is that all articles
obtained via the library are free, whereas you will find that many publishers seek
payment if you attempt to download them privately.
After the introductory session, the module is organised into two parts. The first part
focuses on applications which are rooted in group and intergroup processes; the
second part focusses more on changing individual behaviours.
1. Introductory session (RB)
Orientation. Allocation of student presentations.
Some core issues in applying social psychology.
Political and ethical limits of applied social psychology
Readings
*Brown, R., De Visser, R., Dittmar, H. E., Drury, J., Farsides, T., Jessop, D. &
Sparks, P. (2012) Social Psychology and policy-making: past neglect, future
promise. Public Policy Review, 18, 227-234. (pdf on module web-page on
Study Direct)
Thaler, R. H. & Sunstein, C. R (2009) Nudge: improving decisions about health,
wealth and happiness. London: Penguin (Introduction and Ch. 15).
Walton, G. M. & Cohen, G. L. (2011) A brief social-belonging intervention improves
academic and health outcomes of minority students. Science, 331, 1447-1451.
[A] Group and Intergroup Processes in Society
(2)
Intergroup contact and prejudice: panacea or pacifier? (RB)
*Brown, R. (2010) Prejudice: its social psychology. 2nd Edition. Ch. 9 (sections 1
and 3).
Barlow, F. K., Paolini, S., Pederson, A., Hornsey, M. J., Radke, H. R. M., Harwood,
J., Rubin, M. & Sibley, C. G. (2012) The Contact Caveat: negative contact
predicts increased prejudice more than positive contact predicts reduced
prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1629-1643.
Christ, O. et al. (2010) Direct contact as a moderator of extended contact effects:
cross-sectional and longitudinal impact on outgroup attitudes, behavioural
intentions, and attitude certainty. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
36, 1662-1674.
Christ, O. et al. (2014) Contextual effect of positive intergroup contact on outgroup
prejudice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United
States of America, 111(11), 3996-4000.
Glasford, D. E. & Dovidio, J. F. (2011) E pluribus unum: dual identity and minority
group members’ motivation to engage in contact, as well as social change.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1021-1024.
Paolini, S., Harwood, J., Rubin, M, Husnu, S., Joyce, N. & Hewstone, M. (2014)
4
Positive and extensive intergroup contact in the past buffers against the
disproportionate impact of negative contact in the present. European Journal
of Social Psychology, 44, 548-562.
Vezzali, L., Capozza, D., Stathi, S. & Giovannini, D. (2012) Increasing outgroup
trust, reducing infra-humanization, and enhancing future contact intentions via
imagined intergroup contact. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48,
437-440.
For general background on intergroup contact:
Brown, R. & Hewstone, M. (2005) An integrative theory of intergroup contact.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 255-343.
And a recent vigorous critique of contact as a strategy for reducing intergroup
inequality:
Dixon, J., Levine, M., Reicher, S. & Durrheim, K. (2012) Beyond prejudice:
Are negative evaluations the problem and is getting us to like one another
more the solution? Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 35.6 (Dec), 411-425. And
replies by, Abrams, Brown, Feddes, Hewstone and Schaller in same issue.
(3)
Real-world interventions aiming to improve intergroup relations (RB)
*Brown, R. (2010) Prejudice: its social psychology. 2nd Edition. Ch. 9 (section 2).
Cameron, L., Rutland, A., Hossain, R. & Petley, R. (2011). When and why does
extended contact work? The role of high quality direct contact and group
norms in the development of positive ethnic intergroup attitudes amongst
children. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 14(2), 193-206.
Paluck, E. L. (2009) Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: a
field experiment in Rwanda. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6,
574-587. (Look also at Staub and Pearlman’s commentary on this article,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96,588-593; and her rejoinder).
Paluck, E. L. (2011). Peer pressure against prejudice: a high school field experiment
examining social network change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
47, 350-358.
Samii, C. (2013) Perils or Promise of ethnic integration: evidence from a hard case in
Burundi. American Political Science Review, 107, 558-573.
Turner, R. N. & Brown, R. (2008) Improving children's attitudes towards refugees:
An evaluation of a school-based multicultural curricula and anti-racist
intervention. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 1295-1328.
For comprehensive reviews of prejudice reduction efforts:
Lemmer, G. & Wagner, U. (2015) Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the
lab? A meta-analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 152-168.
Paluck, E. L. & Green, D. P. (2009) Prejudice reduction: what works? A review and
assessment of research and practice. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 339367.
5
(4)
Intergroup reconciliation in post-conflict societies (RB)
*Staub, E. (2006) Reconciliation after genocide, mass killing, or intractable conflict:
understanding the roots of violence, psychological recovery, and steps toward
a general theory. Political Psychology, 27, 867-894.
Bilali, R. & Vollhardt, J. R. (2013) Priming effects of a reconciliation radio drama on
historical perspective-taking in the aftermath of mass violence in Rwanda.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 144-151.
Rimé, B., Kanyangara, P. Yzerbyt, V. & Paez, D. (2011) The impact of Gacaca
tribunals in Rwanda: psychosocial effects of participation in a truth and
reconciliation process after a genocide. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 41, 695-706.
Shnabel, N., Halabi, S. & Noor, M. (2013) Overcoming competitive victimhood
and facilitating forgiveness through re-categorization into a common victim or
perpetrator identity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 867-877.
Staub, E., Pearlman, L. A., Gubin, A. & Hagengimana, A. (2005) Healing,
reconciliation, forgiving and the prevention of violence after genocide or
mass killing: an intervention and its experimental evaluation in Rwanda.
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24, 297-334.
For other work on intergroup reconciliation:
Nadler, A., Malloy, T. E. & Fisher, J. D. (Eds) (2008) The social psychology of
intergroup reconciliation. Oxford; OUP.
Journal of Social Issues, 2013, vol., 63(1). Special Issue: The Aftermath of Genocide:
Psychological Perspectives.
(5)
Acculturation and immigration (RB)
*Sam, D. L., & Berry, J. W. (2010). Acculturation: when individuals and groups of
different cultural backgrounds meet. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5,
472-481.
Badea, C., Jetten, J., Iyer, A. & Er-Rafiy, A. (2011) Negotiating dual identities: The
impact of group-based rejection on identification and acculturation. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 586-595.
Baysu, G., Phalet, K. & Brown, R. (2011) Dual Identity as a Two Edged Sword:
Identity Threat and Minority School Performance. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 74, 121-143.
Brown, R., Baysu, G., Cameron, L., Nigbur, D., Rutland, A., Watters, C., Hossain,
R., LeTouze, D. & Landau, A. (2013) Acculturation Attitudes and Social
Adjustment in British South Asian Children: A Longitudinal Study.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1656-1667.
Zagefka, H., Binder, J., Brown, R. et al (2014) The relationship between acculturation
preferences and prejudice: longitudinal evidence from majority and minority
groups in three European countries. European Journal of Social Psychology,
44, 578-589.
For general background on acculturation and intergroup relations:
6
Brown, R. & Zagefka, H. (2011) The dynamics of acculturation: an intergroup
perspective. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 129-184.
Schwartz, S. J., Vignoles, V. L., Brown, R. & Zagefka, H. (2014) The identity
dynamics of acculturation and multiculturalism: situating acculturation in
context. In, Benet-Martinez, V. & Ying-Yi., H. (Eds) The Oxford Handbook of
Multicultural Identity (pp. 57-93). Oxford: OUP. (pdf available on Study
Direct site)
(6)
Understanding cultural differences (VV)
*Smith, P. B., Fischer, R., Vignoles, V. L., & Bond, M. H. (2013). Understanding
social psychology across cultures. Engaging with others in a changing world.
London: Sage. Chapter 2: Clarifying the way forward with culture: Theories and
frameworks.
Becker, M., Vignoles, V. L., Owe, E., Easterbrook, M., Brown, R., Smith, P. B., … &
Koller, S. (2014). Cultural bases of self-evaluation: Seeing oneself positively in
different cultural contexts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 657675.
Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L. A., Lun, J., Lim, B. C., . . . &
Yamaguchi, S. (2011). Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation
study. Science, 332, 1100–1104.
Kim, H., & Markus, H. (1999). Deviance or uniqueness, harmony or conformity? A
cultural analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 785-800.
Kitayama, S., Park, H., Sevincer, A.T., Karasawa, M., & Uskul, A.K. (2009). A
cultural task analysis of implicit independence: Comparing North America,
Western Europe and East Asia. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97,
236-255.
Owe, E., Vignoles, V. L., Becker, M., Brown, R., Smith, P. B., Lee, S. W. S., … &
Jalal, B. (2012). Contextualism as an important facet of individualismcollectivism: Personhood beliefs across 37 national groups. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 44, 24-45.
Singelis, T. M., & Sharkey, W.F. (1995). Culture, self-construal and embarrassability.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26, 622-644.
For an extensive overview of research into cross-cultural psychology:
Smith, P. B., Fischer, R., Vignoles, V. L., & Bond, M. H. (2013). Understanding
social psychology across cultures. Engaging with others in a changing world.
London: Sage. [Chapters 7, 9, and most of the rest of the book.]
Selected writings by some key cross-cultural theorists:
Chiu, C. -y., Gelfand, M. J., Yamagishi, T., Shteynberg, G., & Wan, C. (2010).
Intersubjective culture: The role of intersubjective perceptions in cross-cultural
research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 482-493.
Kitayama, S, & Uskul, A. K. (2011). Culture, mind, and the brain: Current evidence
and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 419-449.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for
cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
7
Schwartz, S. H. (2006). A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and
applications. Comparative Sociology, 5, 137-182.
Triandis, H. C. (1993). Collectivism and individualism as cultural syndromes. CrossCultural Research, 27, 155 -180.
Yamagishi, T. (2010). Micro-macro dynamics of the cultural construction of reality:
A niche construction approach to culture. In M. J. Gelfand, C. -y. Chiu, & Y. -y.
Hong (Eds.), Advances in Culture Psychology (Vol. 1, p. 251-308). Oxford
University Press.
(7) Mobilizing collective action for social change (JD)
*Drury, J., & Reicher, S. (2009). Collective psychological empowerment as a model
of social change: Researching crowds and power. Journal of Social Issues, 65,
707-725.
Hornsey, M. J., Blackwood, L., Louis, W., Fielding, K., Mavor, K., Morton, T.,
White, K. M. (2006). Why do people engage in collective action? Revisiting the
role of perceived effectiveness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 17011722.
Reicher, S., Haslam, S. A., & Hopkins, N. (2005). Social identity and the dynamics of
leadership: Leaders and followers as collaborative agents in the transformation of
social reality. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(4), 547-568.
Stott, C., Scothern, M., & Gorringe, H. (2013). Advances in liaison based public order
policing in England: Human rights and negotiating the management of protest?
Policing, 7, 210-224.
Tausch, N., & Becker, J. C. (2012). Emotional reactions to success and failure of
collective action as predictors of future action intentions: A longitudinal
investigation in the context of student protests in Germany. British Journal of
Social Psychology. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.2012.02109.x
Thomas, E. F., & McGarty, C. (2009). The role of efficacy and moral outrage norms
in creating the potential for international development activism through groupbased interaction. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 115-134.
Integrative reviews
Thomas, E. F., & Louis, W. R. (2013). Doing democracy: The social psychological
mobilization and consequences of collective action. Social Issues and Policy
Review, 7, 173–200,
Van Zomeren, M., Leach, C. W., & Spears, R. (2012). Protesters as ‘passionate
economists’: A dynamic dual pathway model of approach coping with collective
disadvantage. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 180-199.
Simon, B., & Klandermans, B. (2001). Politicized collective identity: A social
psychological analysis. American Psychologist, 56, 319-331. doi: 10.1037/0003066X.56.4.319
Wright, S. (2001). Strategic collective action: Social psychology and social change. In
R. Brown & S. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology:
Intergroup processes (pp. 409-430). Oxford: Blackwell.
(8) Collective resilience in emergencies and disasters (JD)
8
*Drury, J. (2012). Collective resilience in mass emergencies and disasters: A social
identity model. In J. Jetten, C. Haslam, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The social cure:
Identity, health, and well-being (pp. 195-215). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Carter, H., Drury, J., Amlôt, R., Rubin, G. J., & Williams, R. (2014). Effective
responder communication improves efficiency and psychological outcomes in a
mass decontamination field experiment: Implications for public behaviour in the
event of a chemical incident. PLoS One 9(3): e89846. DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0089846
Connell, R. (2001). Collective behaviour in the September 11 2001 evacuation of the
World Trade Center. University of Delaware. Disaster Research Center.
Preliminary paper #313
http://dspace.udel.edu:8080/dspace/bitstream/handle/19716/683/PP313.pdf?sequen
ce=1
Drury, J., Novelli, D., & Stott, C. (2013). Psychological disaster myths in the
perception and management of mass emergencies. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 43, 2259–2270. doi: 10.1111/jasp.12176
Johnson, N. R. (1987). Panic at ‘The Who Concert Stampede’: An empirical
assessment. Social Problems, 34, 362-373.
Proulx, G., & Sime, J. D. (1991). To prevent 'panic' in an underground emergency:
Why not tell people the truth? Fire Safety Science, 3: 843-852.
doi:10.3801/IAFSS.FSS.3-843
http://www.iafss.org/publications/fss/3/843/view
Reviews of the literature and recommendations:
Glass, T. A., & Schoch-Spana, M. (2002). Bioterrorism and the people: How to
vaccinate a city against panic. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 34, 217-23.
Rubin, G. J., Chowdhury, A. K, & Amlôt, R. (2012). How to communicate with the
public about chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear terrorism: a systematic
review of the literature. Biosecurity and Bioterrorism, 10, 383-95.
Williams, R., & Drury, J. (2010). The nature of psychosocial resilience and its
significance for managing mass emergencies, disasters and terrorism. In A.
Awotona (Ed.), Rebuilding sustainable communities for children and their families
after disasters: A global survey (pp. 121-148). Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK:
Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
[B] Changing behaviour in society
(9) Fear appeals (DJ)
*Epton, T., & Harris, P. R. (2008). Self-affirmation promotes health behavior change.
Health Psychology, 27, 746-752.
Harris, P. R., Mayle, K., Mabbott, L., & Napper, L. (2007). Self-affirmation reduces
smokers’ defensiveness to graphic on-pack cigarette warning labels. Health
Psychology, 26, 437-446.
Jessop, D. C., Albery, I. P., Rutter, J., & Garrod, H. (2008). Understanding the impact
of mortality-related health-risk information: A terror management theory
perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 951-964.
9
Jessop, D. C., Simmonds, L. V., & Sparks, P. (2009). Motivational and behavioral
consequences of self-affirmation interventions: A study of sunscreen use among
women. Psychology and Health, 24, 529-544.
Ruiter, R. A. C, Abraham, C. A., & Kok, G. (2001). Scary warnings and rational
precautions: A review of the psychology of fear appeals. Psychology and Health,
16, 613-630.
Ruiter, R. A. C., Verplanken, B., Kok, G., & Werrij, M. Q. (2003). The role of coping
appraisals in reactions to fear appeals: Do we need threat information? Journal of
Health Psychology, 8, 465-474.
Van Koningsbruggen, G. M., Das, E., & Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. (2009). How selfaffirmation reduces defensive processing of threatening health information:
Evidence at the implicit level. Health Psychology, 28, 563-568.
For an overview of the current state of play with regard to fear appeals (not to be
selected for a presentation paper):
Ruiter, R. A., Kessels, L. T., Peters, G. J. Y., & Kok, G. (2014). Sixty years of fear
appeal research: Current state of the evidence. International journal of psychology,
49, 63-70.
For a meta-analysis of protection motivation theory (not to be selected for a
presentation paper):
Milne, S., Sheeran, P., & Orbell, S. (2000). Prediction and intervention in healthrelated behavior: A meta-analytic review of Protection Motivation Theory. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 106-143.
For a meta-analysis of self-affirmation theory (not to be selected for a presentation
paper):
Epton, T., Harris, P. R., Kane, R., van Koningsbruggen, G. M., & Sheeran, P. (2015).
The impact of self-affirmation on health-behavior change: A meta-analysis. Health
Psychology, 34, 187-196. doi: 10.1037/hea0000116.
(10) Social relationships and social media (KL)
*Anderson et al (2012) Facebook Psychology: Popular questions answered by
research. Psychology of Popular Media Culture,1 (1), 23-37
Back et al. (2010). Facebook profiles reflect actual personality, not self-idealization.
Psychological Science, 21(3) 372-374.
Buffardi, L.E. & Campbell, W.K. (2008) Narcissism and social networking websites.
Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, (10), 1303-1314
Forest, A. L. & Wood, J.V. (2012) When social networking is not working:
Individuals with low self-esteem recognize but do not reap the benefits of selfdisclosure on Facebook Psychological Science, 23(3), 295-302.
10
Gentile, B.; Twenge, J. M.; Freeman, E. C.; Campbell, W. K. (2012) The effect of
social networking websites on positive self-views: An experimental
investigation. Computers In Human Behavior, 28 (5) 1929-1933
Gonzales, A.L. & Hancock, J.T. (2011). Mirror, mirror on my Facebook wall: Effects
of exposure to Facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsycholoy, Behavior & Social
Networking, 14, 79-83.
Kramer, A.D.I., Guillory, J.E. & Hancock, J.T. (2014). Experimental evidence of
massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. PNAS 111(24),
8788-8790,doi: 10.1073/pnas.1320040111.
Toma, C.L. & Hancock, J.T. (2013) Self-affirmation underlies Facebook use.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39 (3), 321-331.
General background reviews:
Bargh, J. & McKenna, K.Y.A. (2004) The internet and social life. Annual Review of
Psychology, 55, 573-590.
Nafkarni, A. & Hoffman, S.G. (2011). Why do people use Facebook? Personality and
Individual Differences, 52, 243-249.
Wilson et al (2012) A review of Facebook research in the social sciences.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7 (3) 203-220.
(11) Using and abusing alcohol (RdeV)
* de Visser, R.O., Graber, R., Hart, A., Abraham, C., Scanlon, T., Watten, P. &
Memon, A. (2015). Using qualitative methods within a mixed-methods approach to
developing and evaluating interventions to address harmful alcohol use among
young people. Health Psychology, 34, 349-360
Abraham, C., Southby, L., Quandte, S., Krahé, B., van der Sluijs, W. (2007). What's
in a leaflet? Identifying research-based persuasive messages in European alcoholeducation leaflets. Psychology and Health, 22, 31-60.
Atwell, K., Abraham, C. & Duka, T. (2011). A parsimonious, integrative model of
key psychological correlates of UK university students’ alcohol consumption.
Alcohol & Alcoholism, 46, 253-260.
Bewick, B.M., et al. (2013). The effectiveness of a web-based personalized feedback
and social norms alcohol intervention on United Kingdom university students:
randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(7): e137
[doi: 10.2196/jmir.2581]
Conroy, D. & de Visser, R.O. (in press) "Man up!": discursive constructions of nondrinkers among UK undergraduates. Journal of Health Psychology.
de Visser, R.O & Birch, J. (2012) My cup runneth over: Young people’s lack of
knowledge of low-risk drinking guidelines. Drug & Alcohol Review, 31, 206-212.
de Visser, R.O & McDonnell, E.J. (2012). “That’s OK. He’s a guy”: A mixedmethods study of gender double-standards for alcohol use. Psychology & Health,
27, 618-639.
(12)
Sexual relationships and sexual health (RdeV)
11
* de Visser, R.O. & Smith, A.M.A. (2004). Which intention? Whose intention?
Condom use and theories of individual decision making. Psychology, Health &
Medicine, 9, 193-204.
Abraham, C., Krahé, B., Dominic, R., & Fritsche, I. (2002). Do health promotion
messages target cognitive and behavioural correlates of condom use? A content
analysis of safer sex promotion leaflets in two countries. British Journal of Health
Psychology, 7, 227-246.
Albarracin, D., Johnson, B. T., Fishbein, M., & Muellerleile, P. (2001). Theories of
reasoned action and planned behavior as models of condom use: A meta-analysis.
Psychological Bulletin, 127, 142-161.
Cunningham, S.D., Kerrigan, D.L., Jennings, J.M. & Ellen, J.M. (2009) Relationships
between perceived STD-related stigma, STD-related shame and STD screening
among a household sample of adolescents. Perspectives on Sexual & Reproductive
Health, 41, 225-230.
de Visser, R.O. (2007) Why do heterosexual young adults who are using reliable
contraception also use condoms? Results from a diary-based prospective
longitudinal study. British Journal of Health Psychology, 12, 305-313.
Kippax, S., et al. (1997). Sexual negotiation in the AIDS era: negotiated safety
revisited. AIDS, 11, 191-197.
Ott, M.A., Adler, N.E., Millstein, S.G., Tschann, J.M. & Ellen, J.M. (2002). The
trade-off between hormonal contraceptives and condoms among adolescents.
Perspectives on Sexual & Reproductive Health, 34, 6-14.
Kristine Levonyan-Radloff, K., Parks, K.A. & Collins, R.L. (2012). Women bar
drinkers’ discussions about birth control and risky sexual behavior. Archives of
Sexual Behavior, 41, 987–993
12
Essay titles
(word limit: 3000 words excluding references)
1. Critically examine the thesis advanced by Dixon et al. that contact can do more
harm than good.
2. What gives social psychologists the right to intervene? Discuss the ethics and
politics of applied social psychology, illustrating your essay liberally with actual
social psychological interventions.
3. Assess the potential role(s) that social psychology can play in the aftermath of
severe intergroup conflict.
4. Is an acculturation strategy of ‘integration’ always good for you?
5. Compare and contrast two theoretical approaches to explaining cross-cultural
variation in behaviour. Which do you find more convincing, and why?
6. How do social psychologists say collective action can contribute to social change?
How can they help subordinate groups trying to change their situation?
7. How can an understanding of collective psychology help policy-makers and
professionals plan for emergencies and disasters?
8. Does the empirical evidence support the widespread use of fear appeals by health
promoters? Might alternative approaches to encouraging behaviour change be
more effective?
9. To what extent can online social networks offer psychological benefits to their
users?
10. Anti-drinking campaigns often emphasise the health effects of heavy drinking.
Discuss empirical evidence to support his approach. What alternative approaches
might be effective?
11. Understanding and promoting condom use is similar to other behaviours in some
ways, but different in important ways. Discuss these similarities and differences.
13
Assessment Criteria for Assessed Presentations
Presentations are assessed on each of the following 5 criteria:
1. Analysis,
2. Content,
3. Structure,
4. Delivery,
5. Materials.
The five areas of assessment are emphasised differently in distinguishing between different classes of
marks for presentation. For example, the quality of analysis and structure is likely to distinguish
between a Distinction and Merit presentation; whereas content and structure are more prominent when
differentiating Merit and Pass presentations. The following criteria must be interpreted with some
flexibility – for example, an innovative approach to delivery or discussion may compensate for
weaknesses elsewhere in a presentation. Where possible, students should avoid reading directly from
notes or a script. Presentations that run over the allocated time of 10 minutes will be penalised.
70% and above DISTINCTION
Distinction level presentations will demonstrate competence in all of the 5 areas specified above, with
excellence in most. Marks will increase as the number of areas in which the standard of performance is
high increases. Such presentations are likely to show originality in exposition as well as clarity,
accuracy and thoroughness. Appropriate analysis will have been applied to the material presented, and
clear and a well-organised Powerpoint presentation will have been used. The presentation will be well
structured and skilfully delivered, within the specified time limit.
60-69% MERIT
Presentations at this level will show competence in most of the 5 areas of assessment (with excellence
in one or two areas). Marks will rise from 60-69% as presentations satisfy the requirement of
competence more comfortably. Merit level presentations should have appropriate contents and a logical
structure (introduction, development, conclusion). There should be a clear and focused exposition of
the chosen material, with no major omissions. Presentations should be delivered clearly, using an
adequate Powerpoint presentation. Analysis of key conceptual and empirical issues will be evident,
evidence will be used to support or illustrate theoretical points and interpretations.
50-59% PASS
Presentations at this level will show competence in only 1 or 2 of the specified areas. Typical
presentations will comprise a predictable and unimaginative overview. They are likely to suffer from
omission of key material and/or sub-optimal structure. There is unlikely to be much attempt at original
analysis. The Powerpoint presentation may be poor, exposition is likely to lack clarity and focus and
may reflect lack of understanding of more complex arguments or evidence. Sometimes presentations at
this level involve the student simply reading directly from notes or a script. Irrelevant material may be
included. However, a basic, if perhaps unsophisticated, grasp of the topic area will be evident.
<50% FAIL
Presentations at this level are likely to be very basic in terms of topic coverage and are unlikely to
contain information beyond that available from lecture notes or basic textbook review chapters. They
are likely to be under-researched and inadequately prepared. Misunderstandings, omissions or errors
are likely to combine with poor structure and lack of clarity. Delivery is likely to be poor, reflecting
lack of preparation. In other words, Failing presentations are likely to be characterised by confusion, on
the part of the presenter due to lack of understanding or preparation.
14
University of Sussex
SEMINAR PRESENTATION SHEET
STUDENT................................................DATE/TIME.......................................
TOPIC.....................................................TUTOR..................
Dist. Merit Pass
1. Analysis
Fail
   
Interpretation, evaluation and critique
Conclusions and implications.
2. Content
   
Appropriate quantity, accuracy, understanding.
Use of evidence
3. Structure
   
Clarity of explanation & development.
Length (time).
4. Delivery
   
Voice liveliness, pace & volume.
Audience engagement.
5. Materials (Visual aids/ handout)
   
Clarity, relevance and accuracy.
Additional Comments and Suggestions for Improvement Next Time:
Overall Percentage:_______
15
GUIDE TO ESSAY ASSESSMENT
1. Below are key questions which guide the assessment of your essay:
Structure and Quality of Argument
Is the essay plan stated in the introduction?
Is the overall structure of the argument clear and coherent?
Are the points made in a logical sequence?
Is the argument sufficiently analytical?
Is the argument marred by inappropriate personal opinions and bias?
Is there a conclusion?
Does the conclusion address the essay question directly?
Is the conclusion adequately supported by the preceding argument?
Use of Evidence
Are the points made supported by evidence from cited sources?
Are the sources drawn on sufficient and appropriate?
If empirical evidence is used, is it described clearly and in appropriate detail?
Does the evidence presented support the conclusions reached?
Is the interpretation of the evidence presented appropriately qualified (i.e. avoiding
overgeneralisations and sweeping statements)?
Content
Are the sources used subjected to analysis and critical reflection?
Has the student researched the topic sufficiently?
Are there any important omissions?
Has the student thought about what they have read or simply reproduced material
from sources?
Is there evidence of critical thinking or an original synthesis?
Has the student gone beyond the essential reading?
Writing and Presentation Skills
Is the essay referenced correctly, with a clear distinction between primary and
secondary sources?
Are quotations identified and fully referenced?
Are the ideas presented fully credited?
Is there any evidence of plagiarism?
Is the essay fluent and readable?
Is the grammar and spelling adequate?
Has the writer avoided sexist, racist or other discriminatory language?
Has the writer made an effort to use their own words?
16
Assessment criteria for Assessed essays
Essays are assessed according to the following qualities:
Content
 Breadth of research; independent research, going beyond core reading.
 Novelty of argument; going beyond 'standard' treatments, synthesising relevant material from
different topic areas
 Use of evidence. Argument must be backed up by relevant empirical findings or theoretical ideas.
Appropriate interpretation of empirical evidence.
 Quality of argument.
 Independence of thought. Extent and depth of analysis and critical reflection.
Structure
 Introduction. Introduction sets out the argument to follow.
 Material presented in a logical order.
Writing and technical skills
 Style. Fluency, liveliness and readability.
 Grammar, spelling and punctuation
 Consistent referencing system, preferably APA style.
 Avoidance of derivative writing.Ideas expressed in the author's own words.
Marks of 70% or above: Distinction
Tutors should not be reluctant to award marks in the 80s or even the 90s in the case of really excellent
work, although grades in the 90s should be reserved for work deemed to be outstanding. Students will
have read widely around the topic and will show a thorough understanding and appreciation of the
material. The essay will have a clear structure and will develop a coherent argument which shows
signs of original or critical thought. The standard of English should be good with few or no errors of
spelling or grammar, and the essay should be well presented and properly referenced. Essays in this
band of marks will be exciting to read; they should stand out from most of the others. Students may
have taken a risk and gone out on a limb to make a point about the topic or to challenge some accepted
position, but they must be able to back up their argument with sound resort to evidence or to theoretical
sources. The defining feature of essays marked in this band is that they show flair, maturity and
confidence.
Marks between 60% and 69%: Merit
Students should have read a diversity of material from the reading list and should show a clear
understanding of the issues raised by their reading. All important material on the topic should be
covered in the essay, and the essay should be well structured, clearly written and well presented. The
essay should show evidence that the student has thought about the topic and has not simply reproduced
standard arguments or evidence from major sources. Particularly in marks at the higher end of this
band, essays will show confidence in handling complex material. There should be no major omissions
in the coverage of the topic, nor should the essay contain any significant errors of understanding or
interpretation. The standard of English should be good, and spelling and grammar should be
reasonable. At this level of marking, the student should seem at ease in handling empirical data and/or
theoretical ideas as appropriate. All sources should be properly cited in a bibliography or in references.
Marks between 50% and 59%: Pass
Essays should show evidence that the student has read the basic material for the topic and has a
reasonable understanding of it. There should be a proper bibliography or other referencing system.
There may be some signs of weakness, such as confusion about debates and arguments or
misinterpretation of some evidence, but overall the grasp of the topic should be sound. The essay
should be reasonably well structured and the material should be coherently presented. The student
should have avoided heavy reliance on any one source unless this is in the nature of the topic. Essays
marked in this band will probably be either reasonably competent but somewhat predictable and
lacking in liveliness, or will show signs of an attempt at originality which is nevertheless insufficiently
grounded in a thorough appreciation of the material. The standard of English should be reasonably
17
competent, although problems in spelling or grammar may be tolerated provided they do not produce
unintelligibility.
Marks below 50%: Fail
They will be substantially below average. Students will probably have done only basic reading and
will show little or no appreciation of the debates or the different interpretations which might be drawn
from particular evidence. The essay will indicate a very basic understanding of the topic, but will not
have gone beyond this, and there may well be signs of confusion. The standard of English may leave
something to be desired, but the essay should make sense and should show some sign of structure and
organisation. Material should be properly referenced, although there may be few references with quite
heavy reliance on just one or two sources.
18