Exploring anti-asexual bias in a sample of Australian undergraduate psychology students

Teachers of psychology tend to agree that learning about diversity is an important goal for undergraduate psychology courses. There is significantly less agreement about what aspects of diversity psychology students should understand. The current research proposes and investigates two potentially distinct ways students might understand diversity: more scientific understandings of topical knowledge related to nature and nurture and more humanistic understandings related to multicultural awareness and sensitivity. Drawing on standardized surveys and open-ended responses to diversity questions from the beginning and end of introductory psychology courses, results indicate that students’ topical knowledge of diversity is not strongly associated with multicultural sensitivity. These results emphasize the importance of clarifying the meanings of addressing diversity as a course goal and are discussed in relation to the multiple challenges of teaching about diversity in psychology courses.

Download Full-text

The Presentation of Ethics in Undergraduate Psychology Syllabi

Teaching of Psychology ◽

10.1177/0098628318796921 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 45 (4) ◽

pp. 346-350 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Di You ◽

Ana Ruiz ◽

Judith Warchal

Keyword(s):

Psychology Students ◽

National Sample ◽

Learning Goals ◽

Academic Honesty ◽

Policy Statements ◽

Psychology Courses ◽

Undergraduate Psychology ◽

Ethics Courses

To identify where ethics is presented to undergraduate psychology students, this study reviewed a national sample of 706 syllabi for required mandatory psychology courses. The results indicated that 6 syllabi were designated as ethics courses and 65 syllabi did not mention ethics at all. Even though 641 syllabi mentioned ethics, the most frequent listing was under course policies, usually as a standard statement (e.g., academic honesty and plagiarism) required by many institutions. Our recommendation is that ethics should be intentionally included in the learning goals/objectives/outcomes with a corresponding assessment (assignments) in all syllabi in addition to policy statements.

Download Full-text

Subjects’ Religious Orientation, Counselor'S Orientation and Skill, and Expectations for Counseling

Journal of Psychology and Theology ◽

10.1177/009164718901700310 ◽

1989 ◽

Vol 17 (3) ◽

pp. 284-292 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Tony C. Godwin ◽

Joyce G. Crouch

Keyword(s):

Social Desirability ◽

Religious Orientation ◽

Psychology Students ◽

Partial Replication ◽

Christian Counseling ◽

Undergraduate Psychology ◽

High Skill

The present study is a partial replication of Pecnik and Epperson's (1985a) study of expectations for Christian counseling versus counseling of an unspecified orientation, with the additional aim of clarifying the possible impact of counselor skill and social desirability upon these expectations. Undergraduate psychology students read one of four profiles of a counselor: Christian orientation, high skill; Christian orientation, unspecified skill; unspecified orientation, high skill; unspecified orientation, unspecified skill. These subjects, designated as Christian and non-Christian, rated the counselor profile on 19 variables related to counseling. In comparison to non-Christians, Christian subjects in general give higher ratings to the counselor regardless of the counselor's religious orientation. Non-Christian subjects rated the high skill counselor lower on several expectancy scales than Christian subjects did. No support was lent to the contentions that counselors with a Christian orientation are viewed as less expert than counselors in general or that social desirability can account for Christians’ higher expectations for counseling. Instead Christians may view counseling more positively.

Download Full-text