Course Detail
Course Description
| Course | Code | Semester | T+P (Hour) | Credit | ECTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLOSE RELATIONSHIPS | PSY3115802 | Fall Semester | 3+0 | 3 | 6 |
| Course Program | Çarşamba 10:00-10:45 Çarşamba 11:00-11:45 Çarşamba 12:00-12:45 |
| Prerequisites Courses | |
| Recommended Elective Courses |
| Language of Course | English |
| Course Level | First Cycle (Bachelor's Degree) |
| Course Type | Elective |
| Course Coordinator | Assist.Prof. Büşra Eylem AKTAŞ |
| Name of Lecturer(s) | Assist.Prof. Büşra Eylem AKTAŞ, Lect. Metin Ege SALTER |
| Assistant(s) | |
| Aim | This course aims to provide a graduate-level overview on social psychological research on close relationships and self. It specifically focuses on intimate relationships (i.e., dating, marital etc.) and concepts revolving around it. |
| Course Content | This course contains; Introduction. |
| Dersin Öğrenme Kazanımları | Teaching Methods | Assessment Methods |
| By the end of this course, students will; 1. Be acquainted with fundamental approaches on attachment, close relationships and self. 2. Acquire knowledge on how self plays a role in close relationships. 3. Be acquainted with graduate-level course format. |
| Teaching Methods: | |
| Assessment Methods: |
Course Outline
| Order | Subjects | Preliminary Work |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Introduction |
| Resources |
| Week 2 - Introduction to Attachment Bretherton, I. (1992). The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. Developmental psychology, 28(5), 759. Week 3 - Attachment & Romantic Love Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511–524. Week 4 - The Dynamics, Development, and Cognitive Consequences of Attachment-Related Strategies Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., & Pereg, D. (2003). Attachment theory and affect regulation: The dynamics, development, and cognitive consequences of attachment-related strategies. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 77-102. Week 5 - Attachment & Information Processing Mikulincer, M. (1997). Adult attachment style and information processing: individual differences in curiosity and cognitive closure. Journal of personality and social psychology, 72(5), 1217. Week 6 - Attachment & Political Orientation Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological bulletin, 129(3), 339. Koleva, S. P., & Rip, B. (2009). Attachment style and political ideology: A review of contradictory findings. Social Justice Research, 22, 241-258. Gaziano, C. (2017). Adult attachment style and political ideology. Sage open, 7(3), 2158244017724493. Thornhill, R., & Fincher, C. L. (2007). What is the relevance of attachment and life history to political values?. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(4), 215-222. Week 7 - Introduction to Moral Psychology Yılmaz, O., & Bayrak, F. (2022). Ahlak psikolojisine giriş: temel kavramlar, kuramsal yaklaşımlar ve tartışmalar. REFLEKTİF Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(1), 27-50. Week 9 - New Integrations in Psychology of Morality Sunar, D. (2009). Suggestions for a new integration in the psychology of morality. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3(4), 447-474. Week 10 - Moral Foundations Theory Haidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2004). Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus, 133(4), 55-66. Doğruyol, B., Alper, S., & Yilmaz, O. (2019). The five-factor model of the moral foundations theory is stable across WEIRD and non-WEIRD cultures. Personality and Individual Differences, 151, 109547. Week 11 - Morality & Political Orientation Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 96(5), 1029. Haidt, J., & Graham, J. (2007). When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social justice research, 20(1), 98-116. Yilmaz, O., Harma, M., Bahçekapili, H. G., & Cesur, S. (2016). Validation of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire in Turkey and its relation to cultural schemas of individualism and collectivism. Personality and Individual Differences, 99, 149-154. Week 12 - Moral Judgements & Disgust Sensitivity Inbar, Y., Pizarro, D. A., Knobe, J., & Bloom, P. (2009). Disgust sensitivity predicts intuitive disapproval of gays. Emotion, 9(3), 435. Terrizzi Jr, J. A., Shook, N. J., & Ventis, W. L. (2010). Disgust: A predictor of social conservatism and prejudicial attitudes toward homosexuals. Personality and individual differences, 49(6), 587-592. Week 13 - Attachment & Morality Koleva, S., Selterman, D., Iyer, R., Ditto, P., & Graham, J. (2014). The moral compass of insecurity: Anxious and avoidant attachment predict moral judgment. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(2), 185-194. Shaver, P. R., & Mikulincer, M. (2012). An attachment perspective on morality: Strengthening authentic forms of moral decision making. The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil, 10(1), 257-274. Week 14 - Morality as Cooperation Curry, O. S., Mullins, D. A., & Whitehouse, H. (2019). Is it good to cooperate? Testing the theory of morality- as-cooperation in 60 societies. Current Anthropology, 60(1), 47-69. |
Course Contribution to Program Qualifications
| Course Contribution to Program Qualifications | |||||||
| No | Program Qualification | Contribution Level | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |||
| 1 | Knows the basic concepts of research and application-oriented sub-fields of psychology and the basic theories of these fields. | ||||||
| 2 | Can compare theories and schools in the history of psychology, and relate new developments with this knowledge. | ||||||
| 3 | Can recognize and interpret the problems they encounter and offer solutions using their expert knowledge. | ||||||
| 4 | Can investigate a problem with scientific methods, interpret findings and turn the results into a scientific publication. | ||||||
| 5 | Can lead the project, plan and manage the activities in a team established to solve the problems related to their field. | ||||||
| 6 | Can question and criticize new ideas from a scientific point of view without taking sides. | ||||||
| 7 | They adopt the principle of lifelong learning and can follow new developments in their field. | ||||||
| 8 | Can share their findings, knowledge and solution suggestions about a problem with colleagues or people outside of their field in written or oral form, in an appropriate language. | ||||||
| 9 | They have a sense of social responsibility and can use their professional achievements in solving problems in their near and far surroundings. | ||||||
| 10 | Speaks English at least at B1 level to follow international professional developments. | ||||||
| 11 | Has basic computer skills and can communicate with colleagues on up-to-date platforms. | ||||||
| 12 | Knows the basic tools of psychology used in assessment and evaluation and can use these tools. | ||||||
| 13 | Knows professional responsibilities, authorization, and limits, recognizes psychological problems, can make the right referral for their solution, and abides by ethical principles in research and practice. | ||||||
| 14 | They consider individual and cultural differences in research and practice and take these differences into account while evaluating the research results. | ||||||
Assessment Methods
| Contribution Level | Absolute Evaluation | |
| Rate of Midterm Exam to Success | 40 | |
| Rate of Final Exam to Success | 60 | |
| Total | 100 | |
| ECTS / Workload Table | ||||||
| Activities | Number of | Duration(Hour) | Total Workload(Hour) | |||
| Course Hours | 14 | 3 | 42 | |||
| Guided Problem Solving | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Resolution of Homework Problems and Submission as a Report | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Term Project | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Presentation of Project / Seminar | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Quiz | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Midterm Exam | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| General Exam | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Performance Task, Maintenance Plan | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Total Workload(Hour) | 42 | |||||
| Dersin AKTS Kredisi = Toplam İş Yükü (Saat)/30*=(42/30) | 1 | |||||
| ECTS of the course: 30 hours of work is counted as 1 ECTS credit. | ||||||
Detail Informations of the Course
Course Description
| Course | Code | Semester | T+P (Hour) | Credit | ECTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLOSE RELATIONSHIPS | PSY3115802 | Fall Semester | 3+0 | 3 | 6 |
| Course Program | Çarşamba 10:00-10:45 Çarşamba 11:00-11:45 Çarşamba 12:00-12:45 |
| Prerequisites Courses | |
| Recommended Elective Courses |
| Language of Course | English |
| Course Level | First Cycle (Bachelor's Degree) |
| Course Type | Elective |
| Course Coordinator | Assist.Prof. Büşra Eylem AKTAŞ |
| Name of Lecturer(s) | Assist.Prof. Büşra Eylem AKTAŞ, Lect. Metin Ege SALTER |
| Assistant(s) | |
| Aim | This course aims to provide a graduate-level overview on social psychological research on close relationships and self. It specifically focuses on intimate relationships (i.e., dating, marital etc.) and concepts revolving around it. |
| Course Content | This course contains; Introduction. |
| Dersin Öğrenme Kazanımları | Teaching Methods | Assessment Methods |
| By the end of this course, students will; 1. Be acquainted with fundamental approaches on attachment, close relationships and self. 2. Acquire knowledge on how self plays a role in close relationships. 3. Be acquainted with graduate-level course format. |
| Teaching Methods: | |
| Assessment Methods: |
Course Outline
| Order | Subjects | Preliminary Work |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Introduction |
| Resources |
| Week 2 - Introduction to Attachment Bretherton, I. (1992). The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. Developmental psychology, 28(5), 759. Week 3 - Attachment & Romantic Love Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511–524. Week 4 - The Dynamics, Development, and Cognitive Consequences of Attachment-Related Strategies Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., & Pereg, D. (2003). Attachment theory and affect regulation: The dynamics, development, and cognitive consequences of attachment-related strategies. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 77-102. Week 5 - Attachment & Information Processing Mikulincer, M. (1997). Adult attachment style and information processing: individual differences in curiosity and cognitive closure. Journal of personality and social psychology, 72(5), 1217. Week 6 - Attachment & Political Orientation Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological bulletin, 129(3), 339. Koleva, S. P., & Rip, B. (2009). Attachment style and political ideology: A review of contradictory findings. Social Justice Research, 22, 241-258. Gaziano, C. (2017). Adult attachment style and political ideology. Sage open, 7(3), 2158244017724493. Thornhill, R., & Fincher, C. L. (2007). What is the relevance of attachment and life history to political values?. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(4), 215-222. Week 7 - Introduction to Moral Psychology Yılmaz, O., & Bayrak, F. (2022). Ahlak psikolojisine giriş: temel kavramlar, kuramsal yaklaşımlar ve tartışmalar. REFLEKTİF Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(1), 27-50. Week 9 - New Integrations in Psychology of Morality Sunar, D. (2009). Suggestions for a new integration in the psychology of morality. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3(4), 447-474. Week 10 - Moral Foundations Theory Haidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2004). Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus, 133(4), 55-66. Doğruyol, B., Alper, S., & Yilmaz, O. (2019). The five-factor model of the moral foundations theory is stable across WEIRD and non-WEIRD cultures. Personality and Individual Differences, 151, 109547. Week 11 - Morality & Political Orientation Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 96(5), 1029. Haidt, J., & Graham, J. (2007). When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social justice research, 20(1), 98-116. Yilmaz, O., Harma, M., Bahçekapili, H. G., & Cesur, S. (2016). Validation of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire in Turkey and its relation to cultural schemas of individualism and collectivism. Personality and Individual Differences, 99, 149-154. Week 12 - Moral Judgements & Disgust Sensitivity Inbar, Y., Pizarro, D. A., Knobe, J., & Bloom, P. (2009). Disgust sensitivity predicts intuitive disapproval of gays. Emotion, 9(3), 435. Terrizzi Jr, J. A., Shook, N. J., & Ventis, W. L. (2010). Disgust: A predictor of social conservatism and prejudicial attitudes toward homosexuals. Personality and individual differences, 49(6), 587-592. Week 13 - Attachment & Morality Koleva, S., Selterman, D., Iyer, R., Ditto, P., & Graham, J. (2014). The moral compass of insecurity: Anxious and avoidant attachment predict moral judgment. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(2), 185-194. Shaver, P. R., & Mikulincer, M. (2012). An attachment perspective on morality: Strengthening authentic forms of moral decision making. The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil, 10(1), 257-274. Week 14 - Morality as Cooperation Curry, O. S., Mullins, D. A., & Whitehouse, H. (2019). Is it good to cooperate? Testing the theory of morality- as-cooperation in 60 societies. Current Anthropology, 60(1), 47-69. |
Course Contribution to Program Qualifications
| Course Contribution to Program Qualifications | |||||||
| No | Program Qualification | Contribution Level | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |||
| 1 | Knows the basic concepts of research and application-oriented sub-fields of psychology and the basic theories of these fields. | ||||||
| 2 | Can compare theories and schools in the history of psychology, and relate new developments with this knowledge. | ||||||
| 3 | Can recognize and interpret the problems they encounter and offer solutions using their expert knowledge. | ||||||
| 4 | Can investigate a problem with scientific methods, interpret findings and turn the results into a scientific publication. | ||||||
| 5 | Can lead the project, plan and manage the activities in a team established to solve the problems related to their field. | ||||||
| 6 | Can question and criticize new ideas from a scientific point of view without taking sides. | ||||||
| 7 | They adopt the principle of lifelong learning and can follow new developments in their field. | ||||||
| 8 | Can share their findings, knowledge and solution suggestions about a problem with colleagues or people outside of their field in written or oral form, in an appropriate language. | ||||||
| 9 | They have a sense of social responsibility and can use their professional achievements in solving problems in their near and far surroundings. | ||||||
| 10 | Speaks English at least at B1 level to follow international professional developments. | ||||||
| 11 | Has basic computer skills and can communicate with colleagues on up-to-date platforms. | ||||||
| 12 | Knows the basic tools of psychology used in assessment and evaluation and can use these tools. | ||||||
| 13 | Knows professional responsibilities, authorization, and limits, recognizes psychological problems, can make the right referral for their solution, and abides by ethical principles in research and practice. | ||||||
| 14 | They consider individual and cultural differences in research and practice and take these differences into account while evaluating the research results. | ||||||
Assessment Methods
| Contribution Level | Absolute Evaluation | |
| Rate of Midterm Exam to Success | 40 | |
| Rate of Final Exam to Success | 60 | |
| Total | 100 | |