In Journal Club, students and professors talk together about exciting new psychology research. By reading and discussing a short, current article, students learn necessary skills about understanding and interpreting psychological research.
Schedule for Fall 2024
Tuesday, October 1st, 4:30-5:30pm, Centenary Square 210
Discussion led by Dr. Jessica Alexander (PSY304 Statistics for the Behavior Sciences)
Simone, P. M., Whitfield, L. C., Bell, M. C., Kher, P., & Tamashiro, T. (2023). Shifting students toward testing: Impact of instruction and context on self-regulated learning. Cognitive Research: Principles & Implications, 8, 14 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-023-00470-5
Much of the learning that college students engage in today occurs in unsupervised settings, making effective self-regulated learning techniques of particular importance. We examined the impact of task difficulty and supervision on whether participants would follow written instructions to use repeated testing over restudying. In Study 1, we found that when supervised, instructions to test resulted in changes in the self-regulated learning behaviors such that participants tested more often than they studied, relative to participants who were unsupervised during learning. This was true regardless of the task difficulty. In Study 2, we showed that failure to shift study strategies in unsupervised learning was likely due to participants avoidance of testing rather than failure to read the instructions at all. Participants who tested more frequently remembered more words later regardless of supervision or whether or not they received instructions to test, replicating the well-established testing effect (e.g., Dunlosky et al. in Psychol Sci Public Interest 14:4–58, 2013. http://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266). In sum, there was a benefit to testing, but instructing participants to test only increased their choice to test when they were supervised. We conclude that supervision has an impact on whether participants follow instructions to test.
Thursday, October 24th , 4:30-5:30pm, Centenary Square 210
Discussion led by Dr. Adam Blancher (PSY362 Foundations of Psychopathology)
Effects of Diagnostic Labels on Perceptions of Marginal Cases of Mental Ill-Health
Brooke Altmann, Kylo Fleischer, Jesse Tse, & Nick Haslam
Two experimental studies (Ns = 261, 684) investigated how diagnostic labels affect perceptions of people experiencing marginal levels of mental ill-health. These effects offer insight into the consequences of diagnostic “concept creep”, in which concepts of mental illness broaden to include less severe phenomena. The studies found consistent evidence that diagnostic labeling increases the perception that people experiencing marginal problems require professional treatment, and some evidence that it increases empathy towards them and support for affording them special allowances at work, school, and home. The studies also indicated that labels may reduce the control people are perceived to have over their problems and their likelihood of recovering from them. These findings point to the potential mixed blessings of broad diagnostic concepts and the cultural trends responsible for them. Expansive concepts may promote help-seeking, empathy, and support, but also undermine perceived agency and expectations that problems can be overcome.
Wednesday, November 13th, 4:30-5:30pm, Centenary Square 210
Discussion led by Dr. Mae MacIntire (PSY393 Sport Psychology)
TBD
If you have questions, please contact Dr. Amy Hammond in the Psychology Department.