Analysis and Presentation of Results in Psychosocial Research
Code: 45429 ECTS Credits: 9| Degree | Type | Year |
|---|---|---|
| 4313402 Psychosocial Research and Intervention | OT | 0 |
Contact
- Name:
- Luz Maria Martinez Martinez
- Email:
- luzmaria.martinez@uab.cat
Teachers
- Joan Pujol Tarres
- Joan Moya Kohler
- Isabel Pellicer Cardona
- Maria Beatriz San Roman Sobrino
- Enrique Baleriola Escudero
- Francisco Javier Tirado Serrano
Teaching groups languages
You can view this information at the end of this document.
Prerequisites
It is recommended to have studied the previous subjects of the itinerary.
Objectives and Contextualisation
The overall objectives of the subject are the following:
.- Develop a psychosocial analysis, theoretically oriented, based on the results obtained in the research itself.
.- Prepare conclusions and recommendations as a result of the research carried out.
.- Assess the ethical and political implications of the dissemination of the knowledge generated.
Learning Outcomes
- CA26 (Competence) Present the results and findings of psychosocial research by adapting it to different audiences and formats.
- KA25 (Knowledge) Theoretically and argumentatively define appropriate analytical techniques for the empirical material in a psychosocial research project.
- SA18 (Skill) Define theoretically grounded perspectives of understanding and action based on the results of a concrete research project.
- SA19 (Skill) Develop ethically responsible behaviour towards the people, groups and organisations with whom one comes into contact during social intervention.
- SA20 (Skill) Analyse the empirical material from a psychosocial research project using rigorous epistemological and methodological principles.
- SA21 (Skill) Organise the results of an intervention into a coherent and accurate report, appropriate to the psychosocial field.
- SA22 (Skill) Actively participate with other working groups and contribute to the conceptual and analytical improvement of data collection and analysis procedures.
Content
In this subject, mandatory for the research specialty in Social Psychology, students analyze the results of the study carried out, discuss them and derive conclusions and recommendations from all of this. In this process, problems that people taking the subject may have regarding the analysis of previously collected data are identified, in order to guide the research activity of the students based on common problems.
Contents:
● Analysis and discussion of research results based on different qualitative methodologies: discourse and narrative analysis, analysis of ethnographic data and analysis of action research processes.
● Identification of problems associated with the qualitative data analysis process according to the students' own projects.
● Definition of the synthesis processes and preparation of conclusions based on the qualitative material collected in the projects themselves.
● Procedures for the systematization of recommendations for professional practice that derive from the research work carried out.
● Implications of publishing “sensitive” qualitative data for ethical or political reasons.
Activities and Methodology
| Title | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type: Directed | |||
| Master classes and group discussions | 30 | 1.2 | CA26, KA25, SA18, SA19, SA20, SA21, SA22 |
| Oral presentations | 15 | 0.6 | CA26, KA25, SA18, SA19, SA20, SA22 |
| Type: Supervised | |||
| Analysis of empirical material | 15 | 0.6 | CA26, KA25, SA18, SA19, SA20, SA21, SA22 |
| Reading and understanding articles and reports | 10 | 0.4 | CA26, KA25, SA18, SA19, SA20, SA21, SA22 |
| Session preparation | 20 | 0.8 | CA26, KA25, SA18, SA19, SA20, SA21, SA22 |
| Type: Autonomous | |||
| Personal and group study and work | 50 | 2 | CA26, KA25, SA18, SA19, SA20, SA21, SA22 |
| Preparation and development of assignements | 83 | 3.32 | CA26, KA25, SA18, SA19, SA20, SA21 |
Teaching methodologies may combine the following forms of work: seminars, individual and collective tutoring, preparation and development of work, analysis of empirical materials, reading of articles and/or reports of interest and personal study.
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.
Assessment
Continous Assessment Activities
| Title | Weighting | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ev1. Presentation of the analysis of the material collected in the research in a written work | 50% | 0 | 0 | CA26, KA25, SA18, SA19, SA20, SA21 |
| Ev2. Presentations and oral exercises | 30% | 2 | 0.08 | CA26, KA25, SA18, SA19, SA20, SA22 |
| Ev3. Subject learning report for the TFM | 20% | 0 | 0 | KA25, SA18, SA19, SA20, SA21, SA22 |
a) Assessment conditions:
To pass the subject, all learning results linked to the acquisition of the different competencies, knowledge and skills of the subject will be evaluated. More specifically, it is essential that the student performs:
1.Ev1: Supervised learning activities (outside the classroom) (50%): presentation of the analysis and results of the empirical material collected in the research in a written work that includes method and procedure, as well as the analysis and preliminary results (individual activity presented in writing).
2.Ev2: In-person teaching-learning activities (in the classroom) (30%): presentation and performance of activities linked to a specific perspective and analysis methodology and/or to the students' own research (group activity presented orally in the classroom).
3. Ev3: Monitoring of tutorials (outside the classroom, 20%): monitoring of the final work of the subject with the tutor teachers and the achievement of the learning results of the subject. It includes planning the final work, reviewing the draft and reviewing the final version (in all cases, as long as they are delivered at least ten days before the work delivery date marked on the virtual campus). This evaluation of the monitoring of the subject is carried out by the tutor teachers.
The final grade will be the sum of the weighted results of tests 1, 2 and 3.
A student who has presented evidence of learning (one or more) with a weight equal to or greater than 4 points (40%) may not be recorded in the minutes as “not evaluated.”
b) Submission/completion of evidences:
Refer to the Master's calendar.
d) Single assessment:
When the student chooses the single evaluation, the procedure will be as follows: all the contents of the subject will be evaluated on the date of delivery of Evidence 1. That day, an oral presentation will be made as a team (Ev2: 30%) with the other students who opt for this unique evaluation, with presentation and discussion of aspects related to specific perspectives and analysis methodologies and reflections on their scope and applications. This presentation will be evaluated according to the criteria established for evidence 2. In addition, the written work of evidence 1 (Ev1: 50%) will be delivered in the virtual campus classroom.
d) Recovery:
There are no recovery assessments.
Evaluation guidelines of the Faculty of Psychology:
https://www.uab.cat/web/estudiar/graus/graus/avaluacions-1345722525858.html
Bibliography
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, Vol. 6, No. 2, On Narrative and Narratives, 237-272.
Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Bassi, J. (2008): El buen camino. Una historia de vida que ilustra los efectos de la (in)disciplina en la producción de conocimiento [tesis de doctorado, UAB].
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.
Geertz, C. (1992). La interpretación de las culturas (Vol. 1). Barcelona: Gedisa.
Crowle, A.J. (1976): The deceptive language of the laboratory. En H. Harré (ed.): Life Sentences. Chichester: Wiley.
Fairclough,N,(1989): Language and Power. London: Longman.
Fairclough,N,(1992): Discourse and Social Change, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fernández Christlieb, P. (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
Frank, A. W. (2012). Practicing dialogical narrative analysis. Varieties of narrative analysis, 33-52.
Gilbert,G,N,-Mulkay,M,(1984):Opening Pandora's Box: Asocio/ogical analysis of scientists' discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 4
Grice, H,P.(1975): logic and conversation. En P,Cole and J, Morgan (Eds.): Syntax and Semantics, vol 3: Speech Acts. NY: Academic Press.
Haraway, D. (1995). Ciencia, ciborgs y mujeres. La reinvención de la naturaleza. Madrid: Cátedra/Universitat de València /Instituto de las Mujeres.e
Harding, S. (1987). ¿Existe un método feminista? Feminismo y metodología. Universidad de Indiana. Disponible en: https://urbanasmad.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/existe-un-mc3a9todo-feminista_s-harding.pdf
Harding, S. (2010). “¿Una filosofía de la ciencia socialmente relevante? Argumentos en torno a la controversia sobre el Punto de vista feminista”. En Blázquez, N.; Flores, F. y M. Ríos (coords.). Investigación feminista. Epistemología, metodología y representaciones sociales. México: Centro de Investigaciones Interdisciplinarias en Ciencias y Humanidades, unam, pp. 39-66.
Iñiguez, L.; Antaki, Ch. (1994): El análisis del discurso en Psicología Social. Boletín de Psicología, No. 44, 59-66.
Iñiguez, L.; Antaki, Ch. (1998): Análisis del discurso. Anthropos, No. 177, 57-75.
Levinson, S.(1983): Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP.
Linder, S. H. (2006). Cashing-in on Risk Claims: On the For-profit Inversion of Signifiers for´┐¢ Global Warming. Social Semiotics, 16(1), 103.
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.
McNaught, C.; Lam, P. (2010) Using Wordle as a Supplementary Research Tool. The Qualitative Report, Volume 15 Number 3, May 2010, 630-643. Disponible en: http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR15-3/mcnaught.pdf
Molina, J. L. (2004). La ciencia de las redes. Apuntes de Ciencia Y Tecnología, (11), 36-42.
O'Halloran, K. (Ed.). (2004). Multimodal discourse analysis: Systemic functional perspectives. A&C Black.
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).
Riessman, C. K. (2007). Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. SAGE Publications.
Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual. London: SAGE.
Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis. A handbook. London: Sage.
Silva, C. (2011) La teoría delActor-red tal como yo la imagino. Breve ensayo sobre el cosmos semafórico. Athenea Digital - 11(1): 203-215 (marzo 2011).
Silva, C.; Iñiguez, 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. (1999): Análisis crítico deldiscurso. Anthropos, 186, 23-36.
Van Dijk,T. (2002). El análisis crítico del discurso y el pensamiento social. Atenea Digital, 1, 18-24. Disponible en http://blues.uab.es/athenea/num1/vandijk.pdf
Van Dijk,T. (2003). La multidisciplinaridad del análisis crítico del discurso: un alegato en favor de la diversidad. En R.Wodak y M.Meyer Métodos de análisis crítico del discurso, 143-177. Barcelona:Gedisa.
Wetherell, M.; Potter, J.(1992): Mapping the language of racismo. London: Harverster.
Williams, G. (1984) "The genesis of chronic illness: Narrative reconstruction", Sociology of Health & Illness, 6(2): 175-200.
Wodak, R.; Meyer, M. (comps.) (2003): Métodos de análisis crítico del discurso. Barcelona: Gedisa.
The specific bibliography for each contentof the subject will be provided through the virtual campus.
Software
This subject promotes the use of free software for ethical and political reasons. We recommend students to use free operating systems (e.g., Linux distributions), to create their work using open-source software (e.g., LibreOffice and similar), and to submit assignments in open formats (e.g., .odt, .odp, .ods).
Language list
| Name | Group | Language | Semester | Turn |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (TEm) Theory (master) | 1 | Catalan/Spanish | second semester | afternoon |