PSY1064 Advanced Social Cognitive Psychology Continuous Assessment 1 and 2, 2026 | DCU

PSY1064 Continuous Assessment 1 

Description:

The aims of this module are to provide an advanced overview of theoretical, conceptual, research and methodological advances, at, or informed by, the forefront of enquiry within social cognitive psychology. Particular focus will be on social cognitive components of individual and group construal. Critical consideration will be given to factors influencing social cognition, affect and motivation. A social neuroscientific approach will also be critically considered within the module in terms of theory of mind.

SOCIAL COGNITION ASSIGMENT ARTICLE.pdf

SOCIAL COGNITION – AN EXAMPLE 2 OF AN OPINON PIECE..pdf

SOCIAL COGNITION SLIDES.pdf

Learning Outcomes:

On successful completion of this module the learner will be able to

1. Critically consider and evaluate key conceptual, theoretical, research and methodological advances, at, or informed by, the forefront of social cognitive psychology.
2. Demonstrate a critical awareness of social cognitive components of individual and group construal.
3. Critically identify and consider key factors influencing typical and atypical social cognitive function, including affective and motivational factors.
4. Critically appraise the neuroscientific approach to social cognition.
5. Critically consider implicit and explicit approaches to profiling attitudes.

Module Content and Assessment

Indicative Content and Learning Activities

PSY1064 Advanced Social Cognitive psychology CA1 OPINION EDITORIAL

 Prof. Gerry Molloy (External) 

January Release Date v.1.

SUBMISSION DATE:    XXX

WEIGHTING: 30% OF MODULE CREDIT

Opinion pieces are an opportunity for you as an author  to contribute your reasoned and evidenced viewpoints on the interpretation of the state of the art in a research area (Beliefs and Attitudes; Self and Group Construal), value of the methods used (e.g. measures: implicit and explicit; generative artificial intelligence), as well as critical consideration of strengths and challenges to theoretical frameworks and theories (including but not limited to extremism and attitude; modifiability of attitude; mis- and dis-information; construal of in- and out-groups; cognitive flexibility and attitudinal stance). The following guidelines and instructions are important to follow below. Please note that you will be given a companion preparation guide document with key resources from the OP ED project; the Harvard Kennedy School of Communications;

Students will be invited to read the following paper, and critically consider the constructs of relevance (e.g. moral conviction, mental health, affect, cognitive bias, cognitive inflexibility, extremism, neuroscience of decisionmaking etc.), and draft an original opinion piece pivoting from this published paper.  The opinion piece can be anchored in theory, methods, and so on.

Cao, Q., Cohen, M. S., Bakkour, A., Leong, Y. C., & Decety, J. (2025). Moral conviction interacts with metacognitive ability in modulating neural activity during sociopolitical decision-making. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 25(2), 291-310.

INSTRUCTIONS:

1. The word limit for this assignment is 1500 words. Students who greatly exceed this limit (by more than 150 words) will not be given credit for the excess words, and may be penalized by losing 10% off the total mark.
2. This assignment accounts for 30% of the final mark in this module.
3. The Opinion piece should not contain unpublished data, should be supported by evidence, be fully referenced, encourage constructive discussion, refrain from emotionally-charged argumentation. This is taken from Frontiers requirements. An example of a recent call in Frontiers, and two examples of an opinion piece 1 and opinion piece 2 on the topic related to Beliefs and Attitudes. These are examples and not templated responses to the proposed assessment.
4. Submitted opinion piece may contain no more than 1 Figure/Table.
5. Opinion articles should have the following format: 1) Introduction, 2) Subsections relevant for the subject, 3) Discussion.
6. The assignment must be submitted along with an anti-plagiarism declaration form via Loop on or before 5pm on xxx 2026.
7. Please consult the Handbook 2025-26 for details on late submissions (Loop).
8. Students should refer to the most recent APA 7 guidelines on writing in Psychology.
9. The use of any Open AI tool to ideate, draft, critique and write this assignment must be detailed and referenced as appropriate

This succinct guide provides a structured approach to drafting an opinion piece suitable for submission to the journal Frontiers in Psychology. It outlines the key headings, suggested content for each section, and recommended word counts to help ensure clarity, coherence, and adherence to academic standards.

1. Title (10-15 words)

1. • Content: Create a concise and engaging title that reflects the main argument or perspective of your opinion piece. It should be informative and capture the essence of your argument. If you use an Open AI tool to ideate the title, please indicate this in the reference section/responsible use of AI.

2. Introduction (150-200 words)

• • Content:
    ○ Introduce the topic and its relevance to current neuro psychological research or societal issues.
    ○ State your main argument or viewpoint clearly.
    ○ Briefly outline the structure of the opinion piece, indicating what will be discussed in subsequent sections.

3. Background and Context (200-250 words)

• • Content:
    ○ Provide a brief overview of the existing literature or theories related to your topic.
    ○ Highlight key studies or findings that are relevant to your argument.
    ○ Discuss any gaps or controversies in the current understanding that your opinion piece will address.

4. Main Argument (300-400 words)

• • Content:
    ○  Present your main argument in detail. This section should be the core of your opinion piece.
    ○ Use subheadings if necessary to break down complex arguments into manageable parts.
    ○ Support your argument with evidence from existing research, including empirical studies, theoretical frameworks, and relevant examples.
    ○ Address potential counterarguments and provide rebuttals to strengthen your position.

5. Implications and Applications (200-250 words)

• • Content:
    ○ Discuss the implications of your argument for the field of psychology, policy, or practice.
    ○ Suggest how your viewpoint could influence future research, interventions, or societal attitudes.
    ○ Highlight any practical applications of your argument in real-world settings.

6. Conclusion (150-200 words)

• • Content:
    ○ Summarize the key points made in the opinion piece.
    ○ Reiterate the importance of your argument and its relevance to the field.
    ○ End with a call to action or a thought-provoking statement that encourages further discussion or research.

7. References (not included in word count)

• • • Content:
      ○ List all sources cited in your opinion piece in accordance with APA 7 guidelines.
      ○ Ensure that all references are relevant and up-to-date, reflecting the current state of research in the field.
      ○ Include a statement about responsible use of Open AI tools in the production of this opinion piece

8. Optional: Figure/Table (if applicable)

• • Content:
    ○ If relevant, include one figure or table that supports your argument.
    ○ Ensure it is clearly labelled and referenced in the text.

 Suggested Word Count Summary

Additional Tips

• Clarity and Precision: Use clear and precise language throughout your piece. Avoid jargon unless it is necessary and well-defined.
• Engagement: Write in an engaging style that invites readers to consider your viewpoint. Use rhetorical questions or anecdotes where appropriate.
• Critical Thinking: Demonstrate critical thinking by analyzing and synthesizing information from various sources rather than merely summarizing existing literature.
• Revision: Revise your draft multiple times to improve clarity, coherence, and argument strength. Consider peer feedback to enhance the quality of your piece, and attend masterclasses/sessions with your module coordinator to get feedback on the ‘pitch’.

By following this structured guide, you can effectively draft an opinion piece that contributes meaningfully to the discourse in psychology and arguably, should meet the standards of Frontiers in Psychology!

General Guidelines for Assessment

• Content and Focus: Students should define, describe, and evaluate key concepts relevant to the topic. Evidence of independent reading and synthesis of information is expected.
• Knowledge and Understanding: Students should demonstrate a solid grasp of relevant theories and principles, supported by psychological evidence.
• Critical Evaluation: Students should construct and develop a coherent argument, critically evaluating the strengths and challenges of the theoretical frameworks discussed.
• Structure: The opinion piece should be logically organized, with a clear introduction, subsections, and discussion.
• Presentation: Adherence to APA 7 guidelines, clarity of expression, and proper citation of sources, including the use of Open AI tools, are essential.

General Content:

• Students are expected to define, describe, and evaluate key concepts relevant to the topic in question
• Students are expected to be able to construct, develop and structure an argument based on the opinion piece chosen
• Students are expected to read essential and recommended readings in their chosen topic; and are also expected to engage in independent reading as appropriate to the MPC programme. That is, evidence of independent information search, analysis and synthesis is expected.
• Each argument presented must be supported by psychological evidence – key principles, theories and research findings should be presented as appropriate to further one’s argument.
• Resit opportunities refer to any choice at first sitting or alternative choice at second/resit.

PSY1064 Continuous Assessment 2

Description:

The aims of this module are to provide an advanced overview of theoretical, conceptual, research and methodological advances, at, or informed by, the forefront of enquiry within social cognitive psychology. Particular focus will be on social cognitive components of individual and group construal. Critical consideration will be given to factors influencing social cognition, affect and motivation. A social neuroscientific approach will also be critically considered within the module in terms of theory of mind.

SOCIAL COGNITION ASSIGMENT ARTICLE.pdf

SOCIAL COGNITION – AN EXAMPLE 2 OF AN OPINON PIECE..pdf

SOCIAL COGNITION SLIDES.pdf

Learning Outcomes:

On successful completion of this module the learner will be able to

1. Critically consider and evaluate key conceptual, theoretical, research and methodological advances, at, or informed by, the forefront of social cognitive psychology.
2. Demonstrate a critical awareness of social cognitive components of individual and group construal.
3. Critically identify and consider key factors influencing typical and atypical social cognitive function, including affective and motivational factors.
4. Critically appraise the neuroscientific approach to social cognition.
5. Critically consider implicit and explicit approaches to profiling attitudes.

Module Content and Assessment

Indicative Content and Learning Activities

PSY1064 Advanced Social Cognitive Psychology CA 2 Proposal And Interactive Oral

Prof. Gerry Molloy (External) 

January Release Date v.1.

SUBMISSION DATE:    XXX

WEIGHTING: 70% OF MODULE CREDIT

Students are required to develop a hypothetical grant submission (PROPOSAL) to the Futures Charity about a proposed intervention for a chosen patient group that can address a specified social competence/social cognition deficit, with a focus on either developmental/ adolescent/emerging adult or older adult issues.

The student will receive feedback from the module coordinator about their pitch, and must demonstrate later in the interactive oral that they have considered it.

The Proposal will be a 800 word count limited proposal, worth 15%.

Ideate (What is the problem-intervention scenario? What is the extent of the problem at a population level?)

Rationale (What evidence will you use to support your scenario mapping?) Impact Prediction (What will be the direct and indirect impact of employing such an intervention to this social cognitive problem?)

Use of Open AI (outside word count):  Detail what open AI tools were employed in Ideate, Rationale, Impact Prediction.

The interactive oral conversation weighted 55% will be 10 minutes long, synchronous and face to face by recorded zoom (TBC). The module coordinator will be the Senior research manager at Futures Charity, acting as an assessor.  For assessment purposes, this conversation will be recorded (assessment grading and moderation), and then deleted.  It will be an interactive conversation where the student will submit a proposed intervention study to address a social-cognitive competence/deficit in a specific patient cohort.  A research grant call brief will be shared with the student as a companion ‘preparation for the assessment’ document, which will outline the key focus points of the call.

Key learning outcomes and prompts will support the interview conversation, based on the following:

• Critically consider and evaluate key conceptual, theoretical, research and methodological advances, at, or informed by, the forefront of social cognitive psychology.
• Critically identify and consider key factors influencing typical and atypical social cognitive function, including affective and motivational factors.
• Critically appraise the neuroscientific approach to social cognition.

The focus is on Social Cognitive Theoretical Framework; Disorder and Intervention. Within this interview, some consideration must be given to affective and motivational factors related to social cognitive functioning; and also the neuroscientific approach to social cognition.

Grading Rubric for the Pitch (15%)

Expectations for Each Performance Level

• Poor (<39%): The proposal lacks clarity and depth in all sections. There is minimal understanding of the problem, rationale, and impact. The use or non-use of Open AI tools is either absent or poorly articulated. The overall presentation is disorganized and contains numerous errors.
• Fair (40-49%): The proposal shows some understanding of the problem but lacks depth and detail. The rationale is present but not well-supported. Impact predictions are vague. The use or non-use of Open AI tools is mentioned but lacks clarity. The overall presentation has several errors.
• Good (50-59%): The proposal is clear and demonstrates a basic understanding of the problem and rationale. Impact predictions are present but may lack depth. The use or non-use of Open AI tools is adequately detailed. The overall presentation is mostly organized with minor errors.
• Very Good (60-69%): The proposal is well-defined and demonstrates a solid understanding of the problem, rationale, and impact. The use or non-use of Open AI tools is well-articulated. The overall presentation is clear and professional with few errors.
• Excellent/Outstanding (>70%): The proposal is exceptionally clear, insightful, and well-structured. It demonstrates a deep understanding of the problem, rationale, and impact. The use or non-use of Open AI tools is thoroughly integrated and innovative. The overall presentation is flawless and engaging.

Assessment Rubric (55% INTERACTIVE ORAL)

Likely Interactive oral questions

Can you tell me about your research proposal?  What is the social cognitive problem that you want to tackle?

How do you plan on doing that?

What is the evidence that it is a problem and that your intervention can work?

What is the neuroscience behind this intervention?

What improvements are we likely to see?

If your intervention cannot be applied, how best can we address this problem?