Unformatted text preview:

Higher Level Cognition Proseminar (PSYC 5815)http://psych.colorado.edu/˜munakata/teaching/prosem07/WF 11:00 - 12:40, Spring 2007, Muenzinger D156Yuko Munakata & Randall O’[email protected], [email protected]: Muenzinger D241C/D (eventually), Jamaica Plain for nowGoals: The objective of this proseminar is to introduce graduate students to fundamental issues in thestudy of higher level cognition. We will start with origins (evolutionary and developmental) and basic mech-anisms (e.g., active maintenance, inhibition, and symbols). We will bring these perspectives to understand-ing a range of topics in the study of higher level cognition (e.g., intelligence, reasoning, decision-making,and morality), as investigated through a variety of methods (e.g., behavioral, neuroimaging, neurophysio-logical, and computational).The course is a module in the six-module proseminar sequence for beginning graduate students in cog-nitive psychology. It is organized around assigned readings and student presentations.Readings: Course readings are available at the class web site; the list appears at the end of the syllabus.Evaluation: Final grades will be based largely on a take-home essay exam, and leading and participatingin class discussion:Final exam 50%Class participation 15%Discussion leading 15%Reading reactions 10%Discussion-leading feedback 5%Student-submitted exam questions 5%Final exam: A take-home essay exam will be distributed on Friday 5/4 (the last class meeting). Theexam will be due in my mailbox by 5:00 pm on Friday 5/11. Students must complete the exam individually– no communication between class members about the exam will be permitted. This exam will be countedtoward fulfillment of the Preliminary Exam requirements.Class participation: This seminar is discussion-oriented. Your preparation, participation, and coopera-tion as a group is essential for this format to work. You are expected to read the readings the week they areassigned and to come to class prepared to ask questions and actively participate in discussion. 50% of yourparticipation grade will a shared grade for the group, and 50% will be individual.To support and encourage effective discussions, in the first class we will discuss “What makes a discus-sion bad (and what we can do about it).” Throughout the term, we will evaluate the effectiveness of ourdiscussions, and I will welcome suggestions on how to improve them to help us get the most out of them.Discussion leading: You will be asked to lead discussion in 1-2 class sessions. Such session leadingmay include very brief presentation of key points from the readings, posing of questions for discussion, andmoderating of discussion/debate. Discussion leaders will also be expected to prepare by reading additionalrelevant papers and to use knowledge gained from these papers to help the class consider the topic of theday. We have provided Optional readings on the web site as possible additional papers, but these are justHigher Level Cognition Proseminar PSYC 58152suggestions – you should not feel obligated to use these or constrain yourself to them. Discussion leadersshould also read students’ reading reactions (see below) in preparation.Reading reactions: For each set of readings (except for the ones that you are leading discussion on),you will be asked to email a few sentences with your reactions. These reactions should include com-ments or questions that are relevant to the readings and may provide a useful direction for the class dis-cussion. These reading reactions are designed to ensure that you are prepared for discussion, and haveprovided information about your perspective. Reading reactions should be emailed to the class mailing list([email protected]) by the evening before each class (6:00 pm deadline).Discussion-leading feedback: Students who are not leading discussion will provide feedback to discus-sion leaders, following the method pioneered by Lew Harvey. After each discussion (before the next classmeeting), students should email us with at least 3 “Strong Points” and 3 “Weak Points” for that discussion-leading. We will compile these comments, and give them to each discussion-leader anonymously and pri-vately. Students should strive for improvement on their second discussion-leading.Student-submitted exam questions: Each student will submit (email to us) two possible questions forthe take-home essay exam. The best questions will encourage integration across topics. The major incentiveto write good questions is that your own question (or some variant thereof) might appear on the final exam.The questions will be due Monday 4/30.Grading Policy: Grades are not curved; they are based on percentages:97-100 A+ 87-89 B+ 77-79 C+ 67-69 D+93-96 A 83-86 B 73-76 C 63-66 D90-92 A- 80-82 B- 70-72 C- 60-62 D-Schedule3/14/07 Origins: EvolutionaryA mind fit for mating. Chapter 4 from Miller, G. F. (2000). The mating mind: How sexual choice shapedthe evolution of human nature. New York: Doubleday.3/16/07 Origins: DevelopmentalScerif & Karmiloff-Smith (2005). The dawn of cognitive genetics? Crucial developmental caveats.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 126-135.pp. 458-472 of Diamond, A. (2002). A model system for studying the role of dopamine in prefrontalcortex during early development in humans. In M. H. Johnson, Y. Munakata & R. O. Gilmore (eds.), BrainDevelopment and Cognition (pp. 441-493). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.3/21/07 Prototype: Prefrontal cognitive reviewDuncan, J. and Owen, A. M. (2000). Common regions of the human frontal lobe recruited by diversecognitive demands. Trends in Neurosciences, 23(10):475-483.Higher Level Cognition Proseminar PSYC 581533/23/07 Basic Mechanisms: Active maintenanceMiller, E.K. and Cohen, J.D. (2001) An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Reviewof Neuroscience, 24:167-202.3/26/07-3/30/07 Spring Break4/4/07 Basic Mechanisms: InhibitionAnderson, M.C. (2005). The role of inhibitory control in forgetting unwanted memories: A considerationof three methods. In C. MacLeod & B. Uttl (Eds.) Dynamic Cognitive Processes. Springer-Verlag. Tokyo.pages 159-190.Hasegawa, R.P., Peterson, B.W., and Goldberg, M.E. (2004). Prefrontal neurons coding suppression ofspecific saccades. Neuron, 43, 415-425.4/6/07 Basic Mechanisms: Inhibition reconsideredMacLeod, C. M., Dodd, M. D., Sheard, E. D., Wilson, D. E., & Bibi, U. (2003). In opposition toinhibition. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The


View Full Document

CU-Boulder PSYC 5815 - Syllabus

Download Syllabus
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Syllabus and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Syllabus 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?