Course Detail
Course Description
| Course | Code | Semester | T+P (Hour) | Credit | ECTS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOCIAL INFLUENCE | - | Spring Semester | 3+0 | 3 | 6 |
| Course Program |
| Prerequisites Courses | |
| Recommended Elective Courses |
| Language of Course | Turkish |
| Course Level | First Cycle (Bachelor's Degree) |
| Course Type | Elective |
| Course Coordinator | Assist.Prof. Ela ARI |
| Name of Lecturer(s) | Assist.Prof. Ela ARI, Res.Assist. Taylan YURTBAKAN |
| Assistant(s) | |
| Aim | The aim of this course is to introduce students to the concepts and theoretical approaches to social influence, which is one of the main subfields of social psychology. In this course, Individuals' thoughts and behavior outputs within and between groups will be shed light on. |
| Course Content | This course contains; Introduction,Sherif: Social Norms,Asch: Conformity,Milgram: Obedience,Social Identity Theory: Reexamination of social norms, obedience and conformity ,Social Identity Theory: Reexamination of social norms, obedience and conformity,Social Facilitation,Collective Behaviour,Minority Influence,Social Power,Leadership,Attitude,Attitude Change,Overview. |
| Dersin Öğrenme Kazanımları | Teaching Methods | Assessment Methods |
| Teaching Methods: | |
| Assessment Methods: |
Course Outline
| Order | Subjects | Preliminary Work |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Introduction | |
| 2 | Sherif: Social Norms | Sherif, M. (1965). Formation of social norms: The experimental paradigm. Basic studies in social psychology, 461-470. |
| 3 | Asch: Conformity | |
| 4 | Milgram: Obedience | Milgram, S. (1973). The perils of obedience. Harper’s, 247(1483), 62-77, Milgram, S. (1965). Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority. Human Relations, 18(1), 57-76. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872676501800105. |
| 5 | Social Identity Theory: Reexamination of social norms, obedience and conformity | Hogg, M. A., & Reid, S. A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication theory, 16(1), 7-30., McGarty, C., Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., & Haslam, S. A. (1993). The creation of uncertainty in the influence process: The roles of stimulus information and disagreement with similar others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23(1), 17-38., Russell, N. J. C. (2011). Milgram’s obedience to authority experiments: Origins and early evolution. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 140–162. doi: 0.1348/014466610X492205 , Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2011). After shock? Towards a social identity explanation of the Milgram ‘obedience’ studies: Social identity and the Milgram studies. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(1), 163-169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02015.x, Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., Millard, K., & McDonald, R. (2015). ‘Happy to have been of service’: The Yale archive as a window into the engaged followership of participants in Milgram’s ‘obedience’ experiments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(1), 55-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12074, Reicher, S. D., Haslam, S. A., & Smith, J. R. (2012). Working towards the experimenter: Reconceptualizing obedience within the Milgram paradigm as identification-based followership. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 315–324. doi: 10.1177/1745691612448482. |
| 6 | Social Identity Theory: Reexamination of social norms, obedience and conformity | Hogg, M. A., & Reid, S. A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication theory, 16(1), 7-30., McGarty, C., Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., & Haslam, S. A. (1993). The creation of uncertainty in the influence process: The roles of stimulus information and disagreement with similar others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23(1), 17-38., Russell, N. J. C. (2011). Milgram’s obedience to authority experiments: Origins and early evolution. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 140–162. doi: 0.1348/014466610X492205 , Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2011). After shock? Towards a social identity explanation of the Milgram ‘obedience’ studies: Social identity and the Milgram studies. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(1), 163-169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02015.x, Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., Millard, K., & McDonald, R. (2015). ‘Happy to have been of service’: The Yale archive as a window into the engaged followership of participants in Milgram’s ‘obedience’ experiments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(1), 55-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12074, Reicher, S. D., Haslam, S. A., & Smith, J. R. (2012). Working towards the experimenter: Reconceptualizing obedience within the Milgram paradigm as identification-based followership. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 315–324. doi: 10.1177/1745691612448482. |
| 7 | Social Facilitation | Worchel, S., Rothgerber, H., & Day, E. A. (2011). Social loafing and group development: When “‘I’” comes last. Current Research In Social Psychology, 17(5), 461-482., Strube, M. J. (2005). What did Triplett really find? A contemporary analysis of the first experiment in social psychology. The American journal of psychology, 118(2), 271-286. https://doi.org/10.2307/30039059, Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. The American journal of psychology, 9(4), 507-533., Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social Facilitation: A solution is suggested for an old unresolved social psychological problem. Science, 149(3681), 269-274. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3681.269 |
| 8 | Collective Behaviour | Hogg, M. A., & Williams, K. D. (2000). From I to we: Social identity and the collective self. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4(1), 81-97. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.4.1.81 |
| 9 | Minority Influence | Moscovici, S., & Personnaz, B. (1980). Studies in social influence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16(3), 270-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(80)90070-0, Mugny, G. (1984). Compliance, conversion and the Asch paradigm. European Journal of Social Psychology, 14(4), 353-368. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420140402, Moscovici, S., & Personnaz, B. (1991). Studies in social influence VI: Is Lenin orange or red? Imagery and social influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21(2), 101-118. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420210202 |
| 10 | Social Power | Raven, B. H., & French, J. R. P. (1958). Legitimate power, coercive power, and observability in social influence. Sociometry, 21(2), 83. https://doi.org/10.2307/2785895, French, J. R., Raven, B., & Cartwright, D. (1959). The bases of social power. Classics of organization theory, 7, 311-320. |
| 11 | Leadership | Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(3), 184-200. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_1 |
| 12 | Attitude | |
| 13 | Attitude Change | |
| 14 | Overview |
| Resources |
| 1 – Sakallı, N. (2001). Sosyal Etkiler: Kim Kimi Nasıl Etkiler. İmge Kitabevi Yayınları. 2 – Sherif, M. (1936). Sosyal Kuralların Psikolojisi. Alan Yayıncılık. 3 – Sherif, M. (1965). Formation of social norms: The experimental paradigm. Basic studies in social psychology, 461-470. 4 - Milgram, S. (1973). The perils of obedience. Harper’s, 247(1483), 62-77. 5- Milgram, S. (1965). Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority. Human Relations, 18(1), 57-76. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872676501800105. 6 - Hogg, M. A., & Reid, S. A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication theory, 16(1), 7-30. 7 - McGarty, C., Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., & Haslam, S. A. (1993). The creation of uncertainty in the influence process: The roles of stimulus information and disagreement with similar others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23(1), 17-38. 8 - Russell, N. J. C. (2011). Milgram’s obedience to authority experiments: Origins and early evolution. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 140–162. doi: 0.1348/014466610X492205 9 - Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2011). After shock? Towards a social identity explanation of the Milgram ‘obedience’ studies: Social identity and the Milgram studies. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(1), 163-169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02015.x 10 - Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., Millard, K., & McDonald, R. (2015). ‘Happy to have been of service’: The Yale archive as a window into the engaged followership of participants in Milgram’s ‘obedience’ experiments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(1), 55-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12074 11 - Reicher, S. D., Haslam, S. A., & Smith, J. R. (2012). Working towards the experimenter: Reconceptualizing obedience within the Milgram paradigm as identification-based followership. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 315–324. doi: 10.1177/1745691612448482. 12 - Worchel, S., Rothgerber, H., & Day, E. A. (2011). Social loafing and group development: When “‘I’” comes last. Current Research In Social Psychology, 17(5), 461-482. 13 - Strube, M. J. (2005). What did Triplett really find? A contemporary analysis of the first experiment in social psychology. The American journal of psychology, 118(2), 271-286. https://doi.org/10.2307/30039059 14 - Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. The American journal of psychology, 9(4), 507-533. 15 - Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social Facilitation: A solution is suggested for an old unresolved social psychological problem. Science, 149(3681), 269-274. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3681.269 16 - Moscovici, S., & Personnaz, B. (1980). Studies in social influence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16(3), 270-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(80)90070-0 17 - Mugny, G. (1984). Compliance, conversion and the Asch paradigm. European Journal of Social Psychology, 14(4), 353-368. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420140402 18 - Moscovici, S., & Personnaz, B. (1991). Studies in social influence VI: Is Lenin orange or red? Imagery and social influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21(2), 101-118. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420210202 19 - Raven, B. H., & French, J. R. P. (1958). Legitimate power, coercive power, and observability in social influence. Sociometry, 21(2), 83. https://doi.org/10.2307/2785895 20 - French, J. R., Raven, B., & Cartwright, D. (1959). The bases of social power. Classics of organization theory, 7, 311-320. 21- Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(3), 184-200. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_1 22 - Hogg, M. A., & Williams, K. D. (2000). From I to we: Social identity and the collective self. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4(1), 81-97. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.4.1.81 |
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 | 14 | 3 | 42 | |||
| Resolution of Homework Problems and Submission as a Report | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Term Project | 2 | 15 | 30 | |||
| Presentation of Project / Seminar | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Quiz | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Midterm Exam | 1 | 21 | 21 | |||
| General Exam | 1 | 32 | 32 | |||
| Performance Task, Maintenance Plan | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Total Workload(Hour) | 167 | |||||
| Dersin AKTS Kredisi = Toplam İş Yükü (Saat)/30*=(167/30) | 6 | |||||
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOCIAL INFLUENCE | - | Spring Semester | 3+0 | 3 | 6 |
| Course Program |
| Prerequisites Courses | |
| Recommended Elective Courses |
| Language of Course | Turkish |
| Course Level | First Cycle (Bachelor's Degree) |
| Course Type | Elective |
| Course Coordinator | Assist.Prof. Ela ARI |
| Name of Lecturer(s) | Assist.Prof. Ela ARI, Res.Assist. Taylan YURTBAKAN |
| Assistant(s) | |
| Aim | The aim of this course is to introduce students to the concepts and theoretical approaches to social influence, which is one of the main subfields of social psychology. In this course, Individuals' thoughts and behavior outputs within and between groups will be shed light on. |
| Course Content | This course contains; Introduction,Sherif: Social Norms,Asch: Conformity,Milgram: Obedience,Social Identity Theory: Reexamination of social norms, obedience and conformity ,Social Identity Theory: Reexamination of social norms, obedience and conformity,Social Facilitation,Collective Behaviour,Minority Influence,Social Power,Leadership,Attitude,Attitude Change,Overview. |
| Dersin Öğrenme Kazanımları | Teaching Methods | Assessment Methods |
| Teaching Methods: | |
| Assessment Methods: |
Course Outline
| Order | Subjects | Preliminary Work |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Introduction | |
| 2 | Sherif: Social Norms | Sherif, M. (1965). Formation of social norms: The experimental paradigm. Basic studies in social psychology, 461-470. |
| 3 | Asch: Conformity | |
| 4 | Milgram: Obedience | Milgram, S. (1973). The perils of obedience. Harper’s, 247(1483), 62-77, Milgram, S. (1965). Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority. Human Relations, 18(1), 57-76. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872676501800105. |
| 5 | Social Identity Theory: Reexamination of social norms, obedience and conformity | Hogg, M. A., & Reid, S. A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication theory, 16(1), 7-30., McGarty, C., Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., & Haslam, S. A. (1993). The creation of uncertainty in the influence process: The roles of stimulus information and disagreement with similar others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23(1), 17-38., Russell, N. J. C. (2011). Milgram’s obedience to authority experiments: Origins and early evolution. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 140–162. doi: 0.1348/014466610X492205 , Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2011). After shock? Towards a social identity explanation of the Milgram ‘obedience’ studies: Social identity and the Milgram studies. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(1), 163-169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02015.x, Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., Millard, K., & McDonald, R. (2015). ‘Happy to have been of service’: The Yale archive as a window into the engaged followership of participants in Milgram’s ‘obedience’ experiments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(1), 55-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12074, Reicher, S. D., Haslam, S. A., & Smith, J. R. (2012). Working towards the experimenter: Reconceptualizing obedience within the Milgram paradigm as identification-based followership. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 315–324. doi: 10.1177/1745691612448482. |
| 6 | Social Identity Theory: Reexamination of social norms, obedience and conformity | Hogg, M. A., & Reid, S. A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication theory, 16(1), 7-30., McGarty, C., Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., & Haslam, S. A. (1993). The creation of uncertainty in the influence process: The roles of stimulus information and disagreement with similar others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23(1), 17-38., Russell, N. J. C. (2011). Milgram’s obedience to authority experiments: Origins and early evolution. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 140–162. doi: 0.1348/014466610X492205 , Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2011). After shock? Towards a social identity explanation of the Milgram ‘obedience’ studies: Social identity and the Milgram studies. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(1), 163-169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02015.x, Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., Millard, K., & McDonald, R. (2015). ‘Happy to have been of service’: The Yale archive as a window into the engaged followership of participants in Milgram’s ‘obedience’ experiments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(1), 55-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12074, Reicher, S. D., Haslam, S. A., & Smith, J. R. (2012). Working towards the experimenter: Reconceptualizing obedience within the Milgram paradigm as identification-based followership. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 315–324. doi: 10.1177/1745691612448482. |
| 7 | Social Facilitation | Worchel, S., Rothgerber, H., & Day, E. A. (2011). Social loafing and group development: When “‘I’” comes last. Current Research In Social Psychology, 17(5), 461-482., Strube, M. J. (2005). What did Triplett really find? A contemporary analysis of the first experiment in social psychology. The American journal of psychology, 118(2), 271-286. https://doi.org/10.2307/30039059, Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. The American journal of psychology, 9(4), 507-533., Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social Facilitation: A solution is suggested for an old unresolved social psychological problem. Science, 149(3681), 269-274. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3681.269 |
| 8 | Collective Behaviour | Hogg, M. A., & Williams, K. D. (2000). From I to we: Social identity and the collective self. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4(1), 81-97. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.4.1.81 |
| 9 | Minority Influence | Moscovici, S., & Personnaz, B. (1980). Studies in social influence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16(3), 270-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(80)90070-0, Mugny, G. (1984). Compliance, conversion and the Asch paradigm. European Journal of Social Psychology, 14(4), 353-368. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420140402, Moscovici, S., & Personnaz, B. (1991). Studies in social influence VI: Is Lenin orange or red? Imagery and social influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21(2), 101-118. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420210202 |
| 10 | Social Power | Raven, B. H., & French, J. R. P. (1958). Legitimate power, coercive power, and observability in social influence. Sociometry, 21(2), 83. https://doi.org/10.2307/2785895, French, J. R., Raven, B., & Cartwright, D. (1959). The bases of social power. Classics of organization theory, 7, 311-320. |
| 11 | Leadership | Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(3), 184-200. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_1 |
| 12 | Attitude | |
| 13 | Attitude Change | |
| 14 | Overview |
| Resources |
| 1 – Sakallı, N. (2001). Sosyal Etkiler: Kim Kimi Nasıl Etkiler. İmge Kitabevi Yayınları. 2 – Sherif, M. (1936). Sosyal Kuralların Psikolojisi. Alan Yayıncılık. 3 – Sherif, M. (1965). Formation of social norms: The experimental paradigm. Basic studies in social psychology, 461-470. 4 - Milgram, S. (1973). The perils of obedience. Harper’s, 247(1483), 62-77. 5- Milgram, S. (1965). Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority. Human Relations, 18(1), 57-76. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872676501800105. 6 - Hogg, M. A., & Reid, S. A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication theory, 16(1), 7-30. 7 - McGarty, C., Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., & Haslam, S. A. (1993). The creation of uncertainty in the influence process: The roles of stimulus information and disagreement with similar others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23(1), 17-38. 8 - Russell, N. J. C. (2011). Milgram’s obedience to authority experiments: Origins and early evolution. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 140–162. doi: 0.1348/014466610X492205 9 - Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2011). After shock? Towards a social identity explanation of the Milgram ‘obedience’ studies: Social identity and the Milgram studies. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(1), 163-169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02015.x 10 - Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., Millard, K., & McDonald, R. (2015). ‘Happy to have been of service’: The Yale archive as a window into the engaged followership of participants in Milgram’s ‘obedience’ experiments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(1), 55-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12074 11 - Reicher, S. D., Haslam, S. A., & Smith, J. R. (2012). Working towards the experimenter: Reconceptualizing obedience within the Milgram paradigm as identification-based followership. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 315–324. doi: 10.1177/1745691612448482. 12 - Worchel, S., Rothgerber, H., & Day, E. A. (2011). Social loafing and group development: When “‘I’” comes last. Current Research In Social Psychology, 17(5), 461-482. 13 - Strube, M. J. (2005). What did Triplett really find? A contemporary analysis of the first experiment in social psychology. The American journal of psychology, 118(2), 271-286. https://doi.org/10.2307/30039059 14 - Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. The American journal of psychology, 9(4), 507-533. 15 - Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social Facilitation: A solution is suggested for an old unresolved social psychological problem. Science, 149(3681), 269-274. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3681.269 16 - Moscovici, S., & Personnaz, B. (1980). Studies in social influence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16(3), 270-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(80)90070-0 17 - Mugny, G. (1984). Compliance, conversion and the Asch paradigm. European Journal of Social Psychology, 14(4), 353-368. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420140402 18 - Moscovici, S., & Personnaz, B. (1991). Studies in social influence VI: Is Lenin orange or red? Imagery and social influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21(2), 101-118. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420210202 19 - Raven, B. H., & French, J. R. P. (1958). Legitimate power, coercive power, and observability in social influence. Sociometry, 21(2), 83. https://doi.org/10.2307/2785895 20 - French, J. R., Raven, B., & Cartwright, D. (1959). The bases of social power. Classics of organization theory, 7, 311-320. 21- Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(3), 184-200. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_1 22 - Hogg, M. A., & Williams, K. D. (2000). From I to we: Social identity and the collective self. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4(1), 81-97. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.4.1.81 |
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 | |