Blog Announcements!
Syllabi for PSY 101, PSY 230, PSY 260, PSY 336, PSY 364, PSY 365, and PSY 480.Blog rules: Make sure to end your comments with your name and course on the last line. Posts without may be treated as spam and will not appear. Thank you for your understanding.
Do you want to "block quote" text or italicize your comments, please click here.
Please note that links to downloadable files expire in a timely fashion given particular due-dates.
When sourcing material, include the author's last name, date of publication, and page number, as in Ramey (2009) argued that "these are the blog rules" (p. 1).
The last unit for PSY 480: Neuroethics and the extended mind
Please see Comment #1 of this post for your homework.
As always, let us know if you have any questions by posting on the blog!
In the last unit, we read articles on non-associative and non-conscious learning, or learning without awareness. It is as if some things are learned without the need for any ‘conscious’ mind at all! In this unit, we review two ‘classic’ kinds of behaviorist learning (viz. classical conditioning and operant conditioning, or instrumental learning).
Hello. Please make sure you’re reading in your textbook about t-tests. Next class we will continue our conceptual overview of what a t statistic is and how it is calculated (though we won’t be doing anything by hand). This way, what we already know through SPSS (PASW) will make a bit more sense.
Your homework is in Comment #1 as a downloadable PDF.
Your homework, due Thursday at 11:59pm (but earlier is preferred), is to hit REPLY to your previous assignment and revise your comments on Zwaan, Stanfield, and Yaxley (2002) and Meier and Robinson (2004).
Take to heart the comments of your peers and incorporate what you now understand better, given the presentation of the procedure in class today.
Use all of your allotted 115-125 words.
You are practicing to write for your final paper, in which you must present summaries and critiques of articles in the approved literature. Take advantage of this opportunity.
I hope you have enjoyed the special topics course on neuroethics and the extended mind. We’re be wrapping up the term in just a few more weeks. This course has only been offered a few times thus far and is the first course of its kind here at Drexel University. It is scheduled to make a few more encore appearances before it either becomes a catalogue course (which requires paperwork!) or is replaced by a new special topics course (which is exciting in its own way because I get to develop a new course).
I am quite grateful for everyone’s enthusiasm and participation this quarter. It has been a treat for me. If you are interested further on this topic beyond the necessarily limited coverage this term, please let me know. I would be happy to direct you. In addition, please consider joining the Neuroethics Society, of which I am an original member, as well as subscribing to the American Journal of Bioethics (which has special issues each year on neuroscience and neuroethics) or Neuroethics.
There are a few topics left in the course, the first of which is the ‘extended’ self and the notion of an ‘extended’ morality.
Recalling the advice of Hyman (1995), your assignment is to hit REPLY to two or three of your fellow classmates’ posts for the most recent blog on Zwaan, Stanfield, and Yaxley (2002) and Meier and Robinson (2004) and offer advice on what to improve. (If a post already has two REPLIES, find a new post on which to comment.)
This can take many forms. Rewrite a sentence for clarity. Point out redundancies. Offer advice about tone. Suggest different interpretations of Zwaan et al. (2002) or Meier and Robinson (2004). Praise sentences or transitions you find that are even better than your efforts! Let’s be constructive and helpful to each other, but given that we’re a long way away from perfect, let’s refrain from hugs and high-fives.Be honest with each other!
Your blog assignment is due Tuesday night by 11:59pm.
Be ready to discuss Zwaan et al. (2002) and Meier and Robinson (2004) in class 11/18/09.
Hello, everyone. If you haven’t already done so, please contact me regarding your ideas for a final paper in the course. Your topic and citations need to be approved by me. Start with the assigned readings from the course, as well as the textbook chapters coverage of materials, and start brainstorming!
Here are some possible topics:
Your blog homework, due Sunday at 11:59pm, is similar to the previous assignment. I would like you to write what is essentially an abstract that incorporates a discussion of Zwaan, Stanfield, and Yaxley (2002) and Meier and Robinson (2004). (See below.) What did both of these studies’ authors do; what did they find; and what do they have to do with one another?
Please do this is in about 120 tightly crafted words. (This can range only from 115-125.)
Recall our previous lectures on the use of pronouns, transitions, and redundancy and wordiness.
Independent samples t-tests!
What could be more fun? Well, maybe dependent samples t-tests or the one-sample t-test? It’s a tough call.
Your homework appears in Comment #1.
Please let us know if you have questions by posting on the blog!
Your recent assignments include reading Koch, Holland, Hengstler, and van Knippenberg (2009) and Williams and Bargh (2008).
Your assignment is to write a blog post (essentially mirroring an abstract) that is about 120 words (115-125 only) that does the following: Discuss Koch et al. (2009) and Williams and Bargh (2008). Tell me what they did, what they found, and why someone ought to care. In addition, think of the craft of an argument in scientific writing. Don’t just summarize. Weave these two papers together and produce a novel point of your own. Recall this post from the blog, as well.
The following is an announcement from the Drexel University Philosophy Club:
Well hello, Philosophers!
We thought we’d encourage people to attend the big philosophy event on campus this week which happens to be taking place at the same time we normally meet (coincidence or master plan??). It’s a great play based on the dialogues of Plato. It’s free and open to the public:
“The Apology of Socrates” will be performed Thursday, November 12 at 5:30 in the Mitchell Auditorium of the Bossone Center.
This event is sponsored by the Pennoni Honors College and the College of Arts and Sciences. (See attached poster.)
If anyone would prefer to meet in the conference room for an open discussion as we would normally be doing on a Thursday at 5:00, please let Pete know (he can be reached at peterama@drexel.edu.) He will share the information among those who express interest so that those of us who would like to can have a normal meeting of sorts. Otherwise, see everybody at the play!!
What does it mean to learning and not be aware of it? Can you learn without a mind? How can simple exposure and experience create memories and learning? Does doing something repeatedly effect changes in the brain? What is the significance of all of this happening outside of the conscious awareness of an organism—especially human beings?
Your blog entry is due Wednesday at 11:59pm.
