Responsible teacher: Andreas Olsson

Prepare a short reflection paper (PM) based on two of the four articles listed below under alternative 1 and 2. You choose either Alternative 1 or Alternative 2.

Please, note that it is impossible to summarize or discuss even a fraction of the content of the two papers. Be brief and to the point. No more than 2 pages excluding the list of references (font size 12). You can write in either Swedish or English.

For a suggestion of outline, pls see presentation in class (spring 24, end of Aggression II)

The grading criteria are the same as for PM 1 (see below).

Alternative 1 – AGGRESSION:

Chagnon, N. A. (1988). Life Histories, Blood Revenge, and Warfare in a Tribal Population. Science, 239, 985-992.
Anderson, C & Bushman, B. J. (2002). Human Aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 27–51

If you need more relevant resources and alternatives (both biological and more social and economic) perspectives, a tip is to take a look at the special edition on aggression: Annals of New York Academy of Science, 2004, 1036.

In this edition you find for example the following article on gang conflicts: Wrangham, R. W., Wilson, M. L. (2004). Collective Violence: Comparisons between Youths and Chimpanzees. Annals of New York Academy of Science, 1036, 233-256.

Alternative 2 - COOPERATION:

Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E, Darley, J.M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293, 2105-2108.

Crocket, J. M. (2013). Models of morality, Trends in Cognitive Science, 17, 363-6 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3925799/pdf/main.pdf)

If you need more relevant resources and alternatives (both biological and more social) perspectives, you can do a search on for example ‘moral psychology’.

When you discuss the relation between the two articles you have chosen, you can for example choose to look at what the articles have in common or what sets them apart.

You reflection paper should be no more than 2 pages (single-spaced), which means that you have to select wisely. Write short and concise. Remember that it is impossible to capture everything or even most of the content in the articles! In the summary you should be more general to capture the main points, while you can go into detail when you discuss the relations between the different perspectives.

Assessment & Grading

A. Are the instructions satisfied (completely = 2; kind of = 1; no = 0)

B. Does the text include irrelevant material (no = 2; some = 1; a lot = 0)

C. Logical or semantic predicaments (none = 2; some = 1; a lot/severe = 0)

D. Own (high-quality & relevant) ideas and reflections (several = 2; some = 1; none = 0)

E. Linkage to other relevant research and theories (several = 2; some = 1, none = 0)

For the grade “pass” you will need at least one point on criterion A + at least one point on criterion C + at least four points total.

GOOD LUCK!

Andreas Olsson

Kalender