Pub Date : 2024-07-23DOI: 10.1177/00986283241264793
Melissa Fortner, Iva Katzarska-Miller
Introduction: Recent advancements in generative AI (GAI) platforms appear to mark an abrupt shift in higher education. Statement of the Problem: Instructors have a responsibility to teach students to use GAI, which is a promising tool for promoting personalized, student-centered, process-focused learning environments. Literature Review: Drawing on the explosion of publications outlining ways that instructors and students can use GAI and turning to ChatGPT itself for ideas, we provide guidance for psychology instructors to integrate GAI into their courses, using the APA's Guidelines for the Undergraduate Psychology Major as a framework. Teaching Implications: We outline four principles and provide practical suggestions to demonstrate GAI's potential for enhancing psychology education. Conclusion: Our goal is to empower psychology instructors to explore and experiment with GAI alongside their students.
导言：生成式人工智能（GAI）平台的最新进展似乎标志着高等教育的突然转变。问题陈述：指导教师有责任教学生使用 GAI，这是一种很有前途的工具，可以促进个性化、以学生为中心、注重过程的学习环境。文献回顾：大量出版物概述了指导教师和学生使用 GAI 的方法，我们从 ChatGPT 本身中汲取灵感，以 APA 的《本科心理学专业指南》为框架，为心理学指导教师将 GAI 整合到课程中提供指导。教学启示：我们概述了四项原则，并提供了实用建议，以展示 GAI 在加强心理学教育方面的潜力。结论：我们的目标是让心理学教师有能力与学生一起探索和尝试 GAI。
{"title":"Using Generative AI to Promote the APA's Five Goals for Undergraduate Majors","authors":"Melissa Fortner, Iva Katzarska-Miller","doi":"10.1177/00986283241264793","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241264793","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Recent advancements in generative AI (GAI) platforms appear to mark an abrupt shift in higher education. Statement of the Problem: Instructors have a responsibility to teach students to use GAI, which is a promising tool for promoting personalized, student-centered, process-focused learning environments. Literature Review: Drawing on the explosion of publications outlining ways that instructors and students can use GAI and turning to ChatGPT itself for ideas, we provide guidance for psychology instructors to integrate GAI into their courses, using the APA's Guidelines for the Undergraduate Psychology Major as a framework. Teaching Implications: We outline four principles and provide practical suggestions to demonstrate GAI's potential for enhancing psychology education. Conclusion: Our goal is to empower psychology instructors to explore and experiment with GAI alongside their students.","PeriodicalId":47708,"journal":{"name":"Teaching of Psychology","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141785550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-23DOI: 10.1177/00986283241265741
David Stanyer, Lisa B. Wilshere-Cumming, Gal R. Bohadana-Brown, Heather J. Green
BackgroundSatisfaction of psychology students has implications for students’ engagement, learning, and persisting with education. Understanding of influences on satisfaction remains incomplete.ObjectiveTo investigate contributors to psychology students’ satisfaction, we assessed multivariate associations of satisfaction with institutional, teaching, and student factors.MethodIn two cross-sectional studies at the same university, first year psychology undergraduates ( N = 138 in 2019; N = 142 in 2023) completed online measures of student satisfaction, institutional factors (i.e., reputation, image, and learning environment), teaching factors (i.e., teaching quality, program structure, and assessment and feedback), student factors (i.e., self-efficacy, self-regulation, and motivation), and demographics.ResultsAll proposed factors correlated with satisfaction. In hierarchical regression, student (self-efficacy) and institutional factors (academic reputation) explained more variance in satisfaction than did teaching factors. A second institutional factor, learning environment, associated independently with satisfaction in 2023 but not 2019 data.ConclusionStudent self-efficacy and institutional reputation were the strongest predictors of psychology student satisfaction within this project. Replication at other institutions is needed, and longitudinal and experimental designs would also benefit future research.Teaching ImplicationsSupporting psychology students to enhance self-efficacy and understand their institution's contributions to psychology might assist students’ satisfaction and thereby potentially aid learning and engagement.
{"title":"Comparing Institutional, Teaching, and Student Factors in Relation to Psychology Student Satisfaction","authors":"David Stanyer, Lisa B. Wilshere-Cumming, Gal R. Bohadana-Brown, Heather J. Green","doi":"10.1177/00986283241265741","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241265741","url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundSatisfaction of psychology students has implications for students’ engagement, learning, and persisting with education. Understanding of influences on satisfaction remains incomplete.ObjectiveTo investigate contributors to psychology students’ satisfaction, we assessed multivariate associations of satisfaction with institutional, teaching, and student factors.MethodIn two cross-sectional studies at the same university, first year psychology undergraduates ( N = 138 in 2019; N = 142 in 2023) completed online measures of student satisfaction, institutional factors (i.e., reputation, image, and learning environment), teaching factors (i.e., teaching quality, program structure, and assessment and feedback), student factors (i.e., self-efficacy, self-regulation, and motivation), and demographics.ResultsAll proposed factors correlated with satisfaction. In hierarchical regression, student (self-efficacy) and institutional factors (academic reputation) explained more variance in satisfaction than did teaching factors. A second institutional factor, learning environment, associated independently with satisfaction in 2023 but not 2019 data.ConclusionStudent self-efficacy and institutional reputation were the strongest predictors of psychology student satisfaction within this project. Replication at other institutions is needed, and longitudinal and experimental designs would also benefit future research.Teaching ImplicationsSupporting psychology students to enhance self-efficacy and understand their institution's contributions to psychology might assist students’ satisfaction and thereby potentially aid learning and engagement.","PeriodicalId":47708,"journal":{"name":"Teaching of Psychology","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141776365","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A Recognition of the 2024 Society for the Teaching of Psychology Awards Recipients","authors":"Jess Kraybill, Seungyeon Lee, Fanli Jia, Leslie Berntsen","doi":"10.1177/00986283241259766","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241259766","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47708,"journal":{"name":"Teaching of Psychology","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141776364","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-28DOI: 10.1177/00986283241255605
Olga S. Hünler, Yudit Namer, N. Ekrem Düzen
BackgroundThe recent academic purge in Turkey eventuated by a twin wave starting in January 2016 was unprecedented. Two years of statutory rule after the July 2016 failed coup further damaged the rule of law. Even the legal authorities did not respect fundamental human rights. Psychology faculty had to keep a low profile to avoid further encroachments.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which psychology faculty discerned research and teaching-bound sociopolitical risks and exercised mitigation strategies.MethodSixty-three faculty responded to a questionnaire assessing risk appraisals and mitigation appeals countering threats to their research and teaching.ResultsFaculty remained inactive against high-risk appraisal in research and appealed to avoidance or vagueness when their risk appraisals were moderate. By contrast, avoidance was the primary strategy, compared to vagueness or inaction, in risk-bearing teaching.ConclusionFaculty try to cope with the adverse negative intellectual climate by being highly selective in their research and teaching. They appeal to differential strategies in either domain.Teaching ImplicationsResearch in risk apprehension and mitigation along with studies highlighting shared experiences may inform psychology departments on how to proceed under antagonistic circumstances.
{"title":"Academic Freedom and Patterns of Self-Censorship in Psychology Education in Turkey","authors":"Olga S. Hünler, Yudit Namer, N. Ekrem Düzen","doi":"10.1177/00986283241255605","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241255605","url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundThe recent academic purge in Turkey eventuated by a twin wave starting in January 2016 was unprecedented. Two years of statutory rule after the July 2016 failed coup further damaged the rule of law. Even the legal authorities did not respect fundamental human rights. Psychology faculty had to keep a low profile to avoid further encroachments.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which psychology faculty discerned research and teaching-bound sociopolitical risks and exercised mitigation strategies.MethodSixty-three faculty responded to a questionnaire assessing risk appraisals and mitigation appeals countering threats to their research and teaching.ResultsFaculty remained inactive against high-risk appraisal in research and appealed to avoidance or vagueness when their risk appraisals were moderate. By contrast, avoidance was the primary strategy, compared to vagueness or inaction, in risk-bearing teaching.ConclusionFaculty try to cope with the adverse negative intellectual climate by being highly selective in their research and teaching. They appeal to differential strategies in either domain.Teaching ImplicationsResearch in risk apprehension and mitigation along with studies highlighting shared experiences may inform psychology departments on how to proceed under antagonistic circumstances.","PeriodicalId":47708,"journal":{"name":"Teaching of Psychology","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141171901","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-28DOI: 10.1177/00986283241257677
Megan L. Strain, Katherine C. Moen
IntroductionProviding a quality undergraduate research capstone is a meaningful high-impact practice to facilitate American Psychological Association learning goals, and help students learn skills critical for both graduate school and future careers.Statement of the ProblemThe demands of such courses are often time-consuming and stressful, especially for instructors without teaching assistants. The goal of the current manuscript is to provide guidance and resources for faculty teaching undergraduate research experience (UREs) courses.Literature ReviewPrevious research suggests that faculty workload and burnout are recurring sources of stress, and faculty often struggle to implement UREs effectively. However, these experiences provide experiential learning, and increase student engagement and motivation.Teaching ImplicationsIn a three-credit course with strict deadlines and flexible scheduling, guiding student-led projects becomes less daunting. Required attendance, deduction-only participation points, and other policies ease grading loads while reinforcing course objectives.ConclusionStudent feedback, performance, and positive instructor experiences suggest that this structure helps overcome logistical barriers and create positive outcomes. Course resources are provided in open materials.
{"title":"Enhancing Instructor and Student Experiences: A Guide to Successful Capstone Research Courses","authors":"Megan L. Strain, Katherine C. Moen","doi":"10.1177/00986283241257677","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241257677","url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionProviding a quality undergraduate research capstone is a meaningful high-impact practice to facilitate American Psychological Association learning goals, and help students learn skills critical for both graduate school and future careers.Statement of the ProblemThe demands of such courses are often time-consuming and stressful, especially for instructors without teaching assistants. The goal of the current manuscript is to provide guidance and resources for faculty teaching undergraduate research experience (UREs) courses.Literature ReviewPrevious research suggests that faculty workload and burnout are recurring sources of stress, and faculty often struggle to implement UREs effectively. However, these experiences provide experiential learning, and increase student engagement and motivation.Teaching ImplicationsIn a three-credit course with strict deadlines and flexible scheduling, guiding student-led projects becomes less daunting. Required attendance, deduction-only participation points, and other policies ease grading loads while reinforcing course objectives.ConclusionStudent feedback, performance, and positive instructor experiences suggest that this structure helps overcome logistical barriers and create positive outcomes. Course resources are provided in open materials.","PeriodicalId":47708,"journal":{"name":"Teaching of Psychology","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141172274","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-06DOI: 10.1177/00986283241251855
Gary D. Fisk
IntroductionRecent innovations in generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies have led to an educational environment in which human authorship cannot be assumed, thereby posing a significant challenge to upholding academic integrity.Statement of the problemBoth humans and AI detection technologies have difficulty distinguishing between AI-generated vs. human-authored text. This weakness raises a significant possibility of false positive errors: human-authored writing incorrectly judged as AI-generated.Literature reviewAI detection methodology, whether machine or human-based, is based on writing style characteristics. Empirical evidence demonstrates that AI detection technologies are more sensitive to AI-generated text than human judges, yet a positive finding from these technologies cannot provide absolute certainty of AI plagiarism.Teaching implicationsGiven the uncertainty of detecting AI, a forgiving, pro-growth response to AI academic integrity cases is recommended, such as revise and resubmit decisions.ConclusionFaculty should cautiously embrace the use of AI detection technologies with the understanding that false positive errors will occasionally occur. This use is ethical provided that the responses to problematic cases are approached with the goal of educational growth rather than punishment.
导言最近人工智能（AI）生成技术的创新导致教育环境中无法假定作者为人类，从而对维护学术诚信构成了重大挑战。问题陈述人类和 AI 检测技术都难以区分 AI 生成的文本与人类撰写的文本。文献综述无论是基于机器还是人类的人工智能检测方法，都是以写作风格特征为基础的。教学启示鉴于人工智能检测的不确定性，建议对人工智能学术诚信案例采取宽容的、有利于成长的应对措施，如修改并重新提交决定。只要以教育成长而不是惩罚为目标来应对有问题的案例，这种使用就是合乎道德的。
{"title":"AI or Human? Finding and Responding to Artificial Intelligence in Student Work","authors":"Gary D. Fisk","doi":"10.1177/00986283241251855","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241251855","url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionRecent innovations in generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies have led to an educational environment in which human authorship cannot be assumed, thereby posing a significant challenge to upholding academic integrity.Statement of the problemBoth humans and AI detection technologies have difficulty distinguishing between AI-generated vs. human-authored text. This weakness raises a significant possibility of false positive errors: human-authored writing incorrectly judged as AI-generated.Literature reviewAI detection methodology, whether machine or human-based, is based on writing style characteristics. Empirical evidence demonstrates that AI detection technologies are more sensitive to AI-generated text than human judges, yet a positive finding from these technologies cannot provide absolute certainty of AI plagiarism.Teaching implicationsGiven the uncertainty of detecting AI, a forgiving, pro-growth response to AI academic integrity cases is recommended, such as revise and resubmit decisions.ConclusionFaculty should cautiously embrace the use of AI detection technologies with the understanding that false positive errors will occasionally occur. This use is ethical provided that the responses to problematic cases are approached with the goal of educational growth rather than punishment.","PeriodicalId":47708,"journal":{"name":"Teaching of Psychology","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140889697","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-09DOI: 10.1177/00986283241243089
Laura Madson, Michael C. Hout, Giovanna C. Del Sordo
Background: Belongingness is an important predictor of academic and psychological outcomes in college students. Team-based learning (TBL) includes a number of explicit structures that should increase students’ perceived belongingness (compared to other teaching approaches), including permanent team membership, and activities that encourage team interactions. Objective: In two studies, we compared perceived belongingness reported by students taught using TBL and non-TBL methods to determine whether students taught using TBL reported greater perceived belongingness. Method: In study 1, we measured perceived belongingness at the end of four different semesters of TBL and non-TBL sections of Introduction to Psychology. In study 2, we measured belongingness in a pre–post design, again in TBL and non-TBL sections of Introduction to Psychology. Results: In both studies, TBL students reported significantly greater belongingness than non-TBL students. Teaching Implications: These data contribute to a growing body of literature indicating that TBL has social and emotional benefits in addition to the previously established academic benefits. As such, instructors should consider adopting TBL.
{"title":"Students in Team-Based Learning Classes Report Greater Belongingness","authors":"Laura Madson, Michael C. Hout, Giovanna C. Del Sordo","doi":"10.1177/00986283241243089","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241243089","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Belongingness is an important predictor of academic and psychological outcomes in college students. Team-based learning (TBL) includes a number of explicit structures that should increase students’ perceived belongingness (compared to other teaching approaches), including permanent team membership, and activities that encourage team interactions. Objective: In two studies, we compared perceived belongingness reported by students taught using TBL and non-TBL methods to determine whether students taught using TBL reported greater perceived belongingness. Method: In study 1, we measured perceived belongingness at the end of four different semesters of TBL and non-TBL sections of Introduction to Psychology. In study 2, we measured belongingness in a pre–post design, again in TBL and non-TBL sections of Introduction to Psychology. Results: In both studies, TBL students reported significantly greater belongingness than non-TBL students. Teaching Implications: These data contribute to a growing body of literature indicating that TBL has social and emotional benefits in addition to the previously established academic benefits. As such, instructors should consider adopting TBL.","PeriodicalId":47708,"journal":{"name":"Teaching of Psychology","volume":"252 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140576094","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-01DOI: 10.1177/00986283241242366
Kathleen Fuegen, Gregory T. Hatchett
Background: Research on perceptions of the promotion process among psychology faculty at teaching-intensive institutions is missing. Objective: We examine whether perceptions vary by academic rank and faculty gender. Method: We surveyed 386 associate and full psychology professors at regional, public universities in the United States to measure perceptions of (1) the importance of effective teaching, scholarly productivity, and service activities and (2) the clarity of the criteria and standards, for promotion from associate to full professor. Results: Teaching was regarded as the most important criterion for promotion to full professor. However, full professors regarded teaching as more important than did associate professors. Perceived teaching importance was positively correlated with perceived clarity of criteria and standards for promotion. Women regarded promotion criteria as less clear than men. Mentoring was positively correlated with the intention to apply for promotion. Conclusion: Faculty who perceive that their institution strongly values teaching perceive greater clarity regarding the relative importance of teaching, research, and service for promotion, as well as how excellence in these areas is judged. Teaching Implications: Teaching is the most important criterion for promotion to full professor among faculty at regional public universities.
{"title":"Perceptions of Teaching Importance Among Associate and Full Professors at Regional, Public Universities","authors":"Kathleen Fuegen, Gregory T. Hatchett","doi":"10.1177/00986283241242366","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241242366","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Research on perceptions of the promotion process among psychology faculty at teaching-intensive institutions is missing. Objective: We examine whether perceptions vary by academic rank and faculty gender. Method: We surveyed 386 associate and full psychology professors at regional, public universities in the United States to measure perceptions of (1) the importance of effective teaching, scholarly productivity, and service activities and (2) the clarity of the criteria and standards, for promotion from associate to full professor. Results: Teaching was regarded as the most important criterion for promotion to full professor. However, full professors regarded teaching as more important than did associate professors. Perceived teaching importance was positively correlated with perceived clarity of criteria and standards for promotion. Women regarded promotion criteria as less clear than men. Mentoring was positively correlated with the intention to apply for promotion. Conclusion: Faculty who perceive that their institution strongly values teaching perceive greater clarity regarding the relative importance of teaching, research, and service for promotion, as well as how excellence in these areas is judged. Teaching Implications: Teaching is the most important criterion for promotion to full professor among faculty at regional public universities.","PeriodicalId":47708,"journal":{"name":"Teaching of Psychology","volume":"68 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140576343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-03-18DOI: 10.1177/00986283241238234
Tyler L. Collette, William Douglas Woody, Theresa A. Wadkins
{"title":"Obituary for Richard L. Miller","authors":"Tyler L. Collette, William Douglas Woody, Theresa A. Wadkins","doi":"10.1177/00986283241238234","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241238234","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47708,"journal":{"name":"Teaching of Psychology","volume":"77 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140172423","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-03-01DOI: 10.1177/00986283241235907
Laura Priscilla Wesely, Cindy Miller-Perrin
BackgroundPast research on the representation of religion/spirituality in introductory psychology textbooks is dated.ObjectiveAnalyze religion/spirituality content in the nine most frequently purchased introductory psychology textbooks published within the last 5 years.MethodThe current study identified 27 terms that related to religion/spirituality and performed qualitative analysis of term's mentions in each textbook.ResultsFindings indicated that 100% of textbooks mentioned religion/spirituality, which represents an increase in mentions compared to past research. However, none of the textbooks included a specific section on the psychology of religion and spirituality. Overall, there was greater discussion-based coverage of religion/spirituality than research-based coverage, similar to past research findings, although the current study found a greater percentage of research-based discussion than previous research. Compared to past research, the current study found a greater proportion of positive coverage of religious/spiritual mentions but found that most textbooks included negative coverage of religious/spiritual mentions representing rare phenomena associated with religion/spirituality.ConclusionThis study provides evidence that coverage of religion/spirituality is better represented in introductory psychology textbooks than past research, but organization and inclusion is still lacking.Teaching ImplicationsReligion/spirituality content could be better organized in textbooks by including a specific section dedicated to the psychology of religion and spirituality.
{"title":"Analysis of Psychology of Religion Content in Introductory Psychology Textbooks","authors":"Laura Priscilla Wesely, Cindy Miller-Perrin","doi":"10.1177/00986283241235907","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241235907","url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundPast research on the representation of religion/spirituality in introductory psychology textbooks is dated.ObjectiveAnalyze religion/spirituality content in the nine most frequently purchased introductory psychology textbooks published within the last 5 years.MethodThe current study identified 27 terms that related to religion/spirituality and performed qualitative analysis of term's mentions in each textbook.ResultsFindings indicated that 100% of textbooks mentioned religion/spirituality, which represents an increase in mentions compared to past research. However, none of the textbooks included a specific section on the psychology of religion and spirituality. Overall, there was greater discussion-based coverage of religion/spirituality than research-based coverage, similar to past research findings, although the current study found a greater percentage of research-based discussion than previous research. Compared to past research, the current study found a greater proportion of positive coverage of religious/spiritual mentions but found that most textbooks included negative coverage of religious/spiritual mentions representing rare phenomena associated with religion/spirituality.ConclusionThis study provides evidence that coverage of religion/spirituality is better represented in introductory psychology textbooks than past research, but organization and inclusion is still lacking.Teaching ImplicationsReligion/spirituality content could be better organized in textbooks by including a specific section dedicated to the psychology of religion and spirituality.","PeriodicalId":47708,"journal":{"name":"Teaching of Psychology","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140019105","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：