Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Richard Harris, Pam Birtill, Madeleine Pownall Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. Psychological literacy is an approach to teaching which encourages students to consider their subject knowledge in ‘real world’ applied contexts (i.e. in student’s lives beyond university), which may be professional, personal, or societal. ‘Real world’ here refers to the application of psychological knowledge and skills to students’ personal, student-role, work, and community contexts. Psychological literacy is typically integrated into psychology programmes through classroom activities, extra-curricular activities, and opportunities outside of the core curriculum. However, for the goals of psychological literacy to be fully realised, it should be intentionally and thoughtfully embedded at the module and programme level. One way to achieve this is to develop and evaluate modules (i.e. standalone units or courses) that embed psychological literacy explicitly by design. In this paper, we provide overviews, brief evaluations, and reflections on four undergraduate modules within a UK Psychology (BSc) degree that integrate the principles of psychological literacy. These include a first-year compulsory module (‘Biological Approaches to Human and Non-Human Behaviour’), a second-year compulsory module (‘Neuroscience’) and two final-year elective optional modules (‘Face Perception’ and ‘Feminist Social Psychology’). We offer reflections on the process of designing these modules as educators who are interested in developing students’ psychological literacy and also provide student evaluations. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-09-25T05:45:04Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231201635
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Mario Gollwitzer, Johannes Prager, Marlene S. Altenmüller, Rizqy Amelia Zein Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. Bartels (2023; this issue) argues that (a) classic studies and topics covered in psychological textbooks and introductory classes are often misrepresented, (b) that there is an ideological bias among scholars in psychology towards the left side of the political spectrum, and (c) this bias is responsible for the misrepresentation of studies and topics in textbooks. In our commentary, we argue that claims (a) and (b) may be correct, but they have nothing to do with each other. Thus, claim (c) – that a liberal bias among scholars and course instructors leads to “indoctrination” in introductory courses and textbooks – is unsubstantiated and actually detrimental. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-09-11T06:08:58Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231195352
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Azaan Vhora, Ryan L. Davies, Kylie Rice Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. Background: Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) are a simulation-based assessment tool used extensively in medical education for evaluating clinical competence. OSCEs are widely regarded as more valid, reliable, and valuable compared to traditional assessment measures, and are now emerging within professional psychology training programs. While there is a lack of findings related to the quality of OSCEs in published psychology literature, psychometric properties can be inferred by investigating implementation. Accordingly, the current review assessed implementation of OSCEs within psychology programs against a set of Quality Assurance Guidelines (QAGs). Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) recommendations. Electronic databases including ProQuest Psychology, PsycArticles, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection, PsycInfo and key indexing databases such as Scopus, ProQuest, and Web of Science were used to identify relevant articles. Twelve full-text articles met all inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Results: There was considerable heterogeneity in the quality of studies and reporting of OSCE data. Implementation of OSCEs against QAGs revealed overall adherence to be “Fair.” Conclusion: The current review consolidated what is known on psychometric quality of OSCEs within psychology programs. A further need for quantitative evidence on psychometric soundness of OSCEs within psychology training is highlighted. Furthermore, it is recommended that future training programs implement and report OSCEs in accordance with standardized guidelines. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-09-08T07:01:42Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231196707
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Jared M. Bartels Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. In the target article I argued, based on a review of studies published on psychology textbook misrepresentations, that liberal or left-wing bias influences the presentation of politically relevant topics in the texts. Some responses to the target article provided helpful context in terms of better understanding the political backdrop against which psychological science is dispensed in psychology textbooks and courses. Questions were also raised about the sufficiency of the evidence and conclusions drawn. Lastly, several authors recommended changes to introductory psychology, most of which would reduce bias and indoctrination. In the rebuttal, I address several questions and concerns raised and review additional research in the process. While this research is further evidence of indoctrination, I will highlight how authors have been able to effectively navigate controversial topics. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-09-06T08:41:46Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231197352
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Virginia Clinton-Lisell, Alison E. Kelly Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. In recent years, renewable assignments, or student creations that have value outside of a course, have received considerable attention. However, there is little theoretically grounded inquiry into students’ motivation for renewable assignments such as scientific memes. Moreover, it is unknown how public sharing of renewable assignments affects students’ perceived value and learning from coursework. In addition, public sharing could logically affect students’ pride and anxiety related to the renewable assignment, but this lacks empirical testing. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of public sharing of renewable assignments on students’ perceived value, learning, pride, and anxiety relevant to the assignment. Across five courses, students (N = 102) were randomly assigned to have their scientific memes publicly shared or only shared within the course. Overall, scientific memes were generally considered as high in inherent interest and enjoyableness, moderate in usefulness, and low in levels of anxiety and emotional cost. Students whose scientific memes were publicly shared reported higher levels of perceived learning. There were no reliable differences in perceived value, pride, or anxiety due to public sharing. Overall, instructors may use these findings to inform the use of renewable assignments such as scientific memes in their courses. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-09-04T06:43:06Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231197359
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Lee Jussim, Nathan Honeycutt Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. The target article highlights research known to have promoted unjustified politicized claims. It also points out that, although researcher political biases might account for this, there are often alternative explanations. It then discusses areas of research in which those alternative explanations are unlikely, so that the best explanation is political bias. The target article is fundamentally correct. Nonetheless, we argue that political bias is a characteristic of the claims made in research articles rather than primarily a characteristic of scientists. Inasmuch as some claim is not wrong simply by virtue of supporting an ideological narrative, to detect politically biased research, we identify four questions to be answered. Test 0 is necessary but not sufficient to infer political bias. If Test 0 is passed, then at least one of Tests 1, 2, or 3 must also be passed. Test 0: Does the study vindicate some political narrative' Test 1: Did they misinterpret or misrepresent their results in ways that unjustifiably advance a particular politicized narrative' Test 2: Do the authors systematically ignore papers and studies inconsistent with their ideology-affirming conclusions' Test 3: Did they leap to ideology-affirming conclusions based on weak data' We close with recommendations for preventing politically biased conclusions. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-08-30T07:45:29Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231195347
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Joris Lammers Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print.
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Dennis Hayes Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. Bartels gives some good examples of ‘liberal’ or ‘left-wing’ bias in introductory textbooks and suggests that one of the ways to ameliorate this is to adopt a more heterodox approach. This comment suggests that to achieve this very desirable end that psychologists need to look critically at the philosophical assumptions which influence their professional thinking. They must ask, ‘What is our concept of a human being'’ otherwise they will unthinkingly reflect the philosophical assumptions of victimhood culture that see human beings as diminished, vulnerable individuals. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-08-24T10:13:37Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231195350
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Susan A. Nolan, Jacquelyn Cranney Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. The author of the target article hypothesizes that introductory psychology textbook authors aim to “indoctrinate” students toward a more liberal political worldview. In our response, we offer a counterhypothesis that introductory psychology authors are more likely to be biased against updating older research in general, given the enormous amount of new research that must be incorporated, as opposed to specifically ignoring findings that fit with a conservative political worldview. We point to content that is generally overlooked that would fit with a liberal perspective, and we suggest an empirical investigation that the author could conduct to evaluate these competing hypotheses. Finally, we encourage a pivot in how we think about the introductory psychology course from an emphasis on content to an emphasis on skills and values, offering psychological literacy as a framework for the renewal of the introductory psychology curriculum. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-08-23T09:07:50Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231195344
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Douglas A. Bernstein Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. This commentary describes a set of academic, social, and financial factors that provide a context for Jared Bartel's article in which he claims that students in introductory psychology in North America are being indoctrinated by instructors who present socio-politically biased coverage of controversial areas of psychological research. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-08-18T09:09:57Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231195353
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Christopher J. Ferguson Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. Several prior empirical studies have documented considerable mistakes, often ongoing, in how research is presented in introductory psychology textbooks. Extending upon these previous analyses, Bartels notes that introductory psychology textbooks also demonstrate a pronounced liberal/progressive bias. Given the pronounced ideological bias among both practitioners and researchers in the field, this should not be a surprise. In this comment, I extend Bartels’ observations by raising the issues with textbooks reflect widespread problems within our field. It is well past time that psychology takes a hard look at how to increase rigor and reduce political biases. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-08-18T08:02:27Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231195349
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Pedro De Bruyckere Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. In this reply to the article “Indoctrination in Introduction to Psychology” by Jared M. Bartels, true to Occam's razor, the argument is made that there is maybe an easier explanation for the mistakes often found in textbooks: laziness. Different examples are presented to make this argument. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-08-18T08:01:58Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231195348
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Florian Ermark, Henning Plessner Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. In his target article on “Indoctrination in Introduction to Psychology,” Bartels proposes that in introductory textbooks of psychology studies and their results are systematically presented in such a way that they tend to correspond to left-liberal political positions and that the state of psychological knowledge is reflected in a correspondingly distorted way. In our commentary, we clarify that the evidence Bartels presents for this claim is insufficient. At first, he takes a purely hypothesis-confirming approach based on selective sampling. Second, he draws an invalid causal inference from a supposed liberal majority in the psychological community to their representation of psychological content in textbooks. And third, he assigns introductory textbooks a function that we believe they do not have. Nonetheless, we welcome the discussion of how best to teach critical reflective thinking in psychology courses. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-08-18T08:01:28Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231195343
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Jared M. Bartels Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. There have been dozens of papers published on the misrepresentation of psychological studies and theories (e.g., omitting criticisms) presented in introductory textbooks. Authors of these papers have offered numerous explanations for the errors including limited space for covering criticisms and the desire among textbook authors to “sell” psychological science to an introductory audience. In the present article, several studies and theories, most of which have been identified in previous research as misrepresented in introductory psychology textbooks, are reviewed. The possibility of ideological bias contributing to the misrepresentation is considered. The bias in introductory psychology is considered in the context of wider concerns about the consequences of political homogeneity in the field. Suggestions for reducing bias in introductory psychology textbooks and courses are offered. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-08-17T06:15:12Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231195450
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Ioulia Papageorgi, Nicola Falzon, Lenka Sokolova, Iva Stuchlikova, Sergio Salvatore, Morag Williamson, Juliet Foster, Nina Pavlin-Bernardic, Mirjana Beara, Helen Bakker, Stephan Dutke Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. Results from a survey conducted by the European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations Board of Educational Affairs are reported. A total of 227 psychology graduates from across Europe responded to an online survey. Participants were presented with a set of psychology subject-specific competencies and a set of general competencies and asked to rate the extent to which (a) their Bachelor studies supported the development of these competencies and (b) these competencies were relevant for employment as well as to comment on the value of a Psychology Bachelor degree. Findings suggest that an education in psychology develops psychological skills, but also graduates with more general competencies. Overall, psychological competencies appear to develop to a high level through the Bachelor in Psychology, with the exception of specific practical skills. On the contrary, general competencies appear to not develop to an adequate degree. Practical skills focusing on the administration of psychological tools, psychometric instruments and specialist software, as well as general competencies relating to computer literacy skills, communication skills and team-working skills should be further developed to prepare graduates adequately for employment. The study highlights the value of an education in psychology particularly for those individuals who do not wish to enter the applied psychology professions or academia. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-07-26T06:22:37Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231187532
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Kit W. Cho Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. The present study explored the accuracy of participants’ (N = 317) metacognitive awareness (self-reported difficulty and confidence) of psychology concepts and the moderating effects of their psychology background (academic major, number of psychology courses completed, and overall psychology course grades). Participants first rated the difficulty of and their confidence in their knowledge of concepts from seven different subareas of psychology. They then completed a multiple-choice assessment testing their knowledge of the concepts they had previously rated. The results showed that both participants’ metacognitive awareness and experience in psychology predicted their accuracy on the assessment. A more extensive background in psychology was associated with a stronger relationship between metacognitive awareness and accuracy. A hierarchical multiple regression analysis revealed that metacognitive awareness contributed unique variance in predicting accuracy after accounting for students' psychology background. A parallel mediation analysis investigated the relationship between psychology background and metacognitive awareness on accuracy. This analysis revealed that confidence mediated the relationship between participants’ psychology background and their performance on the assessment. The results of the present study demonstrate that participants’ metacognitive awareness of psychology concepts increases with increasing psychological knowledge and experience. These findings suggest that psychology instructors should adjust their instructional and assessment strategies according to their students’ experience and knowledge levels and that more experienced psychology students should rely more on their metacognitive judgments to self-regulate their learning. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-06-19T01:09:59Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231182301
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Elida Cena, Paul Toner, Aideen McParcland, Stephanie Burns, Katrin Dudgeon Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. Background: The challenges presented by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in higher education pressured learners and instructors to incorporate online emergent learning which presented several well-being and academic challenges to students. Objective: The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of studying online to students’ well-being. Methods: A mixed methods approach was followed for this study. Eighty students completed an online survey that measured their stress level of studying online, and 13 semistructured interviews were conducted at Queen's University Belfast. Results: Findings suggest that online learning under such circumstances increased students’ level of stress due to a number of perceived factors. Our findings also reveal the journey of student adjustment to online learning, reflecting the flexibility of blended learning as a long-term pedagogical strategy in universities, necessary for University's survival. Conclusion: As demonstrated in this study, after the initial difficulties of moving to online learning which had negative impacts on students learning and well-being, students subsequently adjusted to the online learning environment documenting students’ adaptability to a new learning environment and highlighting student resilience. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-04-28T05:27:09Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231169938
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Rosario Ruiz-Olivares, Marién Mesa Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. The aims of this study were to compare the use of Review Questions (RQs) and RQs + Response Cards (RCs) in a Spanish university context; to observe which procedure most increases Active Student Responses (ASRs), to verify whether the use of these procedures improves the accuracy of students’ exam answers and, to observe whether unscheduled ASR increases under experimental conditions. 67 Spanish university students from a Spanish public university participated in the study. An A–B design of alternating treatments was used to compare the use of RQ and RQ + RC. The results showed that the condition RQ y RQ + RC increased the frequency of ASRs and RQ + RC improved the accuracy of students’ answers in online exams. There was also an upward trend in unscheduled ASRs during both conditions. The conclusion was that more research is needed to improve the daily teaching practice of university teachers by developing strategies to facilitate formative assessment, to improve ASR and, by extension, to improve the effectiveness of students’ final exam answers. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-04-25T05:02:30Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231170621
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Nina Udvardi-Lakos, Marlene Weirich, Kim Lützenburger, Julia Asbrand, Alexander Renkl Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. In psychology programs, students should acquire both domain-specific knowledge and cross-domain competences important for later practice (e.g., multiple document literacy). Typically, such competences are trained directly in courses explicitly devoted to them or indirectly in courses on psychological topics that require them without systematically teaching and training them (e.g., when reading multiple texts about a topic). To exploit the advantages of both direct and indirect training approaches, we combined them in a new psychology course in which students were taught domain-specific knowledge on pedagogy and psychotherapy, and they were trained in the competence facets of (a) epistemic beliefs, (b) multiple document literacy, and (c) argumentative thinking. The direct training took a tried-and-tested example-based learning approach. A central element of the indirect training consisted of course assessments requiring the application of these three competences to the contents about pedagogy and psychotherapy. The combined training approach led to significant increases in declarative knowledge, advanced epistemic beliefs, and greater self-efficacy in implementing strategies relating to multiple document literacy and argumentative thinking. This approach can be adapted to accommodate different psychological content areas or different cross-domain competences. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-03-22T07:34:57Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231163482
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors:Regan A. R. Gurung, Stephanie Byers, Jor Grapentine, Arianna Stone Abstract: Psychology Learning & Teaching, Ahead of Print. While colleges and universities grapple with delivering instruction face-to-face during the pandemic, there is still a lot to learn from remote teaching experiences. The present study aimed to predict self-reported learning during the first year of the pandemic. Building on previous scholarship on the topic, we focus on the moderating effects of self-efficacy, and the mediating effects of coping styles on the relationship between stress and self-reported learning experiences. We also included self-perceptions of class effort, the instructor, and changes in class, personal, professor, and health behaviors. Students (N = 272) in Introductory Psychology classes participated in an online survey as part of a class research requirement. Analyses demonstrated that self-efficacy predicted differences in many measures associated with learning and predicted learning over and above all other variables entered in a hierarchical regression. The relationship between stress and learning was mediated by coping, but not moderated by self-efficacy. These results suggest student beliefs about their ability to perform online are important to learning outcomes, but coping mechanisms mediate the relationship of stress and learning. Especially while teaching during pandemic times using different modalities, instructors will do well to directly address students’ perceptions of their own ability and build self-efficacy. Citation: Psychology Learning & Teaching PubDate: 2023-02-10T06:56:30Z DOI: 10.1177/14757257231155250
Subscription journal
