Degree | Type | Year | Semester |
---|---|---|---|
4313402 Psychosocial Research and Intervention | OT | 0 | 2 |
To carry out the module it is advisable to have completed the previous modules of the research itinerary: M1, M2a, M3 and M5a.
The overall objectives of the module are as follows:
.- Develop a psychosocial analysis that is driven by theory and based on the results obtained in one's own research.
.- Draw conclusions and make recommendations as a result of the research carried out.
.- Assess the ethical and political implications of the dissemination of the knowledge generated.
Thematic orientation of the module
.- Analysis and discussion of research results based on different qualitative methodologies: discourse analysis, critical, multimodal and narrative, analysis of ethnographic data and analysis of processes of action.
.- Identification of problems associated with the process of analysis of qualitative data in relation to the students’ projects.
.- Definition of the synthesis and conclusion-drawing processes.
.- Procedures for the systematization of recommendations for professional practice derived from the research work carried out.
.- Implications of the publication of qualitative “sensitive” data for ethical or political reasons.
Teaching methodologies will combine the following forms of work: seminars, individual and collective tutoring, job development, analysis of empirical materials, reading of articles and/or reports of interest, and personal study.
N.B. The proposed teaching and assessment methodologies may experience some modifications as a result of the restrictions on face-to-face learning imposed by the health authorities. The teaching staff will use the Moodle classroom or the usual communication channel to specify whether the different directed and assessment activities are to be carried out on site or online, as instructed by the Faculty
Annotation: Within the schedule set by the centre or degree programme, 15 minutes of one class will be reserved for students to evaluate their lecturers and their courses or modules through questionnaires.
Title | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|
Type: Directed | |||
Lectures and group discussions | 30 | 1.2 | 2, 4, 3, 5, 1, 6 |
Oral presentations | 15 | 0.6 | 2, 4, 3, 5, 1, 6 |
Type: Supervised | |||
Analysis of empirical material | 15 | 0.6 | 2, 4, 3, 5, 1, 6 |
Preparation of sessions | 20 | 0.8 | 2, 4, 3, 5, 1, 6 |
Reading and understanding articles and reports | 10 | 0.4 | 2, 4, 3, 1 |
Type: Autonomous | |||
Preparing and carrying out assignments | 60 | 2.4 | 2, 4, 3, 5, 1, 6 |
Study and personal and group work | 40 | 1.6 | 2, 4, 3, 5, 1, 6 |
EV1. Classroom activity: group exercise carried out in the classroom and linked to a specific analysis methodology and/or to the research done by the students themselves. The teacher of the session will indicate in due course what work should be done, and this will be prepared prior to the assigned session and presented in class on the corresponding day.
EV2. Individual exercise: written analysis of the material collected in the research process (includes method, procedure, analysis and preliminary results).
EV3. Module learning report for the master’s degree dissertation (TFM). Report on the application of the module to the TFM process, corrected by the student's tutor in line with the guidelines provided by the person coordinating the module.
Grading
Module passed: The module will be considered passed if the student gets an average grade greater than 5 in the set of assessment tasks.
Assessable. A student who has presented evidence of learning with a weight of 40% or more of the total module will be considered Assessable.
Non-Assessable. A student who has presented evidence of learning with a weight of less than 40% of the total module will be considered Non-Assessable.
Reassessment. This is not available.
Assessment Guidelines of the Faculty of Psychology: https://www.uab.cat/web/estudiar/graus/graus/avaluacions-1345722525858.html
Title | Weighting | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|
EV1. Preparation and delivery of oral presentations | 30% | 8 | 0.32 | 2, 4, 3, 5, 1, 6 |
EV2. Development and written presentation of the analysis work | 50% | 27 | 1.08 | 4, 3, 5, 1 |
EV3. TFM Learning Report | 20% | 0 | 0 | 4, 3, 5, 1 |
Antaki.C, (Ed.) (1988): Analysing Ordinary Explanation: A casebook of methods London: Sage.
Barabási, A.-L. (2002). Linked : the new science of networks. Cambridge Mass.: Perseus Pub.
Barthes, R., & Duisit, L. (1975). An introduction to the structural analysis of narrative. New literary history, 237-272.
Bassi, J. (2008): El buen camino. Una historia de vida que ilustra los efectos de la (in)disciplina en la producción de conocimiento.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Billig, M.(1987): Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge: CUP.
Billig,M. et al.(1988): Ideological Dilemmas: A social psychology of everyday thinking, London: Sage,
Billig,M,(1991): Ideo/ogy and Opinions. London: Saqe.
Burman,E,-Parker,I.(Eds,)(1993): Discourse analytic research. Repertoires and readings of texts in action. London: Routledge,
Fairclough,N,(1989): Language and Power. London: Longman.
Fairclough,N,(1992): Discourse and Social Change, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fairclough, N. (2008). El análisis crítico del discurso y la mercantilización del discurso público: las universidades. Discurso & Sociedad, 2(1), 170-185.
Fernández Christlieb, Pablo (2012). Vehículos. URBS. Revista de Estudios Urbanos y Ciencias Sociales, 2 (1), 9-17. Disponible en: http://nevada.ual.es:81/urbs/index.php/urbs/article/view/fernandez_christlieb
Gilbert,G,N,-Mulkay,M,(1984): Opening Pandora's Box: A socio/ogical analysis of scientists' discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
Grice, H,P.(1975): logic and conversation. En P,Cole and J, Morgan (Eds.): Syntax and Semantics, vol 3: Speech Acts. NY: Academic Press.
Iñiguez, L.; Antaki, Ch. (1994): El análisis del discurso en Psicología Social. Boletín de Psicología, No. 44, septiembre 1994, 57-75.
Levinson, S.(1983): Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP.
Maingueneau, D.(1991): L'analyse du Discours. Introduction aux lectures de /'archive. Paris: Hachette.
Martínez-Guzmán, A. & Íñiguez-Rueda, L. (2010). La fabricación del Trastorno de Identidad Sexual. Discurso & Sociedad, Vol 4(1) 2010, 30-51.
Molina, J. L. (2004). La ciencia de las redes. Apuntes de Ciencia Y Tecnología, (11), 36–42.
Parker, I. (1988): Deconstructing accounts. En C,Antaki (ed.):Analysing Ordinary Explanation: A casebook of methods London: Sage.
Parker,L.(1992): Discourse Analysis. Critical Analysis for Social and Individual Psycho-logy. London: Routledge.
Potter, J.; Wetherell, M, (1987): Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond attitudes and benevtour. London: Saqe.
Riessman, C. K. (2003) Narrative Analysis. in M.S. Lewis-Beck, A. Bryman and T. Futing Liao, eds (2003), The Sage Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods, 3 Vol. boxed set, Sage. Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications.
Riessman, C.K. (2003) “Performing identities in illness narrative: Masculinity and multiple sclerosis”, Qualitative Research, 3(1).
Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual. London:SAGE.
Silva, C. y Íñiguez-Rueda, L., (2011): Tiempo y relaciones sostenibles en el espacio urbano. Papeles del CEIC, vol. 2011/2, nº 75, CEIC (Centro de Estudios sobre la Identidad Colectiva), Universidad del País Vasco, http: //www.identidadcolectiva.es/pdf/75.pdf.
Stubbs, M, (1983): Discourse Analysis: The sociolinguistic analysis of natural language, Oxford: Basil Blackweu.
Van Dijk,T. y Athenea Digital (2001). El análisis crítico del discurso y el pensamiento social. Atenea Digital, 1, 18-24. Disponible en http://blues.uab.es/athenea/num1/vandijk.pdf
Wetherell, M.; Potter, J.(1992): Mappingthe language of racismo. London: Harverster.
Williams, G. (1984) “The genesis of chronic illness: Narrative reconstruction”, Sociology of Health & Illness, 6(2): 175-200.
This module encourages the use of free software for ethical and political reasons. We recommend that students use free operating systems.