PSYC 669 Dr.

Susanne
Denham
Spring 2016 Office Hours Th
3:00 – 4:00 or by appt. DKH 1024A
TR 1:30-2:45 Innovation Hall 131 Phone: 703-993-
1578
PSYC 669: Social and Emotional Development
Course Objectives
In this course, we will examine significant issues in social and emotional development. This course is designed to give the student a thorough
grounding in developmental theories describing children’s (1) abilities to interact and form relationships with others; and (2) their emotional
lives. Empirical results from eclectic theoretical and methodological perspectives also will be emphasized. In class and in our writing, we’ll be
articulating theories and ideas clearly and concisely, unpacking arguments into their components and analyzing the logic of these parts,
integrating the different aspects of development, and generating new ideas based on theory & research. Every class period we will end by
discussing “how can these issues/findings be applied?”
Course Format and Requirements
 We will hold this class as a true seminar of thinkers. I will be doing some lecturing, particularly on Tuesdays, but, as a seminar, this
course is discussion-based and thus reliant on the energies of all the participants. Given this format and the size of the class, it is
imperative that everyone come prepared to participate in each class. Readings other than texts will be available on Blackboard.
 All class members are expected to bring Thought Paragraphs to each Thursday class; our first task on these days will be to consider
each other’s initial ideas, in a “Teaching and Discussion by Request” format. We will divide into small groups (which will stay stable
through the semester) each class period for about 15-30 minutes, decide what aspects of the topic for the day each group would like to
see discussed by the class and/or reported on by Dr. Denham. During this class each week, writers of Critiques on the week’s readings
(see below) will be Co-Facilitators with Denham. After discussing readings in small groups and formulating questions, Critique Writers will
lead discussion and/or help us engage in a hand’s-on activity.
In this way, you control the workings of the class. (See last page, Thought Paragraphs).
 Four short Critiques (@ 4 double-spaced typed pages each), based on the readings, will be due in class during the semester. These
papers are a means of enhancing our discussion, by ensuring that approximately half of us will be extremely prepared to discuss the
issues for that class.
o Thought Paragraphs and Critiques should focus on selected issues from the week’s readings that are of interest to the
student and should demonstrate the four skills described above (see last page, Thought Paragraphs, for one organizational
template). I will read and grade these papers, which are uploaded by you to Blackboard; my goal is to return them within 1
week. I strongly suggest that the writing of these Critiques be spaced out through the semester; try not to write 2 consecutive
weeks, especially early in the semester. Also, ALL papers must be uploaded following the class for which they were written.
 A research grant proposal will be developed throughout the semester. Proposed research should address a carefully delineated
question reflecting your knowledge about issues in social-emotional development. Ideally, the chosen topic will have its origins in the
readings/class discussion, but the final package will be a unique creation based on the required readings, plenty of additional reading, and
the author’s particular interests, skills, knowledge base, and personal flair.
o The proposal should be written in NIH grant proposal format. In either case the following should be included: (a) aims of
proposed research; (b) relevant literature review; (c) significance of the proposed research; (d) clear and detailed method
section; (e) brief results section that reiterates the hypotheses and tells how the data will be analyzed; and (f) human subjects
ethics assurance. Proposal guidelines from NIH and example proposals may be found on Blackboard. These proposals should be
complete and thoughtful, but are not expected to be fundable!! Maximum length: 10 single-spaced pages.
o Brief oral presentations of your ideas (@ 5 - 10 minutes) will be made approximately one-third and two-thirds of the way
through the semester. The purpose of the presentations are (a) to ensure that you begin and continue to work on your grant
proposal; (b) to pick your colleagues’ brains for their expertise and good ideas, and (c) to help your colleagues develop and
improve their ideas. Each will be accompanied by 1-page summaries uploaded to Blackboard.
o We will also have small group review panels during which we will develop our reviewing and analytical skills, and further
contribute to our colleagues’ work. As is the custom with NIH panels, reviews are due in writing, up to 3 pages in length per
grant reviewed.
Evaluation
Class participation 15% (7 for TPs; 8 for Co-Facilitator role) Critiques 30% (7.5 pts each) Grant Proposal Revision 10%
Class presentations/paragraphs 10% (5% each grant topic and method) Reviewing Grants 5% Grant Proposal Submission 30%
A+= average > 97 A=93-96 A- = 90-92 B+= 87=89 B= 83-86 B- = 80-82 C= < 80

Points will be subtracted for each day that papers are late. All work is to be done individually and according to the letter and spirit of the
George Mason University Honor Code. When you are responsible for a task, you will perform that task. When you rely on someone else’s work
in an aspect of the performance of that task, you will give full credit in the proper, accepted form. The instructor reserves the right to enter a
failing grade to any student found guilty of an honor code violation. Another aspect of academic integrity is the free play of ideas. Vigorous
discussion and debate are encouraged in this course, with the firm expectation that all aspects of the class will be conducted with civility and
respect for differing ideas, perspectives, and traditions. When in doubt (of any kind) please ask for guidance and clarification. Another aspect
of civility is to absolutely refrain from usage of any electronic communication that is not class related; no exceptions!!!!

The last day to add a course, or drop without tuition penalty, is 1/26/16. The last day to drop this course without the dean’s permission is
2/19/16. If you are a student with a disability and you need academic accommodations, please see me and contact the Disability Resource
Center (DRC) at 703-993-2474.  All academic accommodations must be arranged through that office, http://ods.gmu.edu.

1
Texts:
Smith, P.K., & Hart, C. H. (2011). Childhood social development. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. (SH)
Schaffer, H. R. (1998). Making decisions about children. London: Blackwell. (MDAC)
Other readings available on Blackboard, www.mymason.gmu.edu

Date Discussion Reading Assignment

Topic (Critiques
throughout)
1/19/16 Greetings, SH Introduction by the Editors; Chapter 1 (when beginning a new section in Smith and Hart, All readings after
Introductions please read their introduction as a general rule) this one are due
Lemerise, E., & Arsenio, W. F. (2000). An integrated model of emotion processes and cognition the date they are
in social information processing. Child Development, 71, 109-118. assigned
1/21/16 The Study of Social SH Chapter 6, 8
Development: MDAC pp.1-18, all Part III
Theoretical
Perspectives
1/26/16 Theoretical Hartup, W. W. (1989). Social relationships and their developmental significance. American
Perspectives and Psychologist, 44, 120-126.
Methodological Howes, C. (1987). Social competence with peers in young children: Developmental sequences.
Issues Developmental Review, 7, 252-272.
1/28/16 Bio. Foundations SH Chapters 2 and 4 Thought
MDAC pp 40-70 Paragraph #1
2/2/16 Bio. Foundations SH Chapters 12 and 15 NO CLASS
2/4/16 Biological Brown, G. L., Mangelsdorf, S. C., Agathen, J. M ., & Ho, M-H. (2008). Young children's Thought
Foundations/ psychological selves: Convergence with maternal reports of child personality.  Social Paragraph #2
Temperament & Development, 17, 161-182
Personality Rothbart, M. K., & Ahadi, S. A. (1994). Temperament and the development of personality.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103, 55-66.
Shiner, R. L., Buss, K. A., McClowry, S. G., Putnam, S. P., Saudino, K. J., & Zentner, M.
(2012). What Is Temperament Now? Assessing Progress in Temperament Research on the
Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of Goldsmith et al. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 436–
444.
2/9/16 Early Social/ SH Chapter 17
Emotional MDAC 19-40, 90-111
Development: Rispoli, K. M., McGoey, K. E., Koziol, N. A., & Schreiber, J. B. (2013). The relation of
Constructing First parenting, child temperament, and attachment security in early childhood to social
Relationships competence at school entry. Journal of School Psychology, 51, 643-658.
2/11/16 Early Booth-LaForce. C.. Oh,.W.. Wonjung, K., Angel. H., Rubin, K. H., Rose-Krasnor, L, & Burgess, Thought
Social/Emotional K. (2006). Attachment, self-worth, and peer-group functioning in middle childhood.   Paragraph #3
Development: Attac hment & Human Development, 8, 309-325.
Constructing First Kidwell, S. L., Young, M. E., Hinkle, L. D., Ratliff, A. D., Marcum, M. E., & Martin, C. N.
Relationships (2010). Emotional competence and behavior problems: Differences across Preschool
Assessment of Attachment classifications. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 15,
391–406.
2/16/16 Families, Parents, SH Chapters 18, 19
and Socialization MDAC pp. 111-121, 210-219
2/18/16 Families, Parents, Grusec, J. E., & Goodnow, J. J. (1994). Impact of parental discipline methods on the child’s Thought
and Socialization internalization of values: A reconceptualization of current points of view. Developmental Paragraph #4
Psychology, 30, 4-19.
Holden, G. W. (2010). Childrearing and developmental trajectories: Positive pathways, off-
ramps, and dynamic processes. Child Development Perspectives, 4, 197-204.
2/23/16 Families, Parents, Lansford, J. E, Criss, M. M., Dodge, K. A., Shaw, D. S., Pettit, G. S., Bates, J. E. (2009).
and Socialization Trajectories of physical discipline: Early childhood antecedents and developmental
outcomes. Child Development, 80, 1385-1402
Dunn, J., Slomkowski, C., & Beardsall, L. (1994). Sibling relationships through the preschool
period to middle childhood and early adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 30, 315-
324.
2/25/16 Extra-Familial SH Chapters 10, 20 Thought
Influences MDAC pp.121-153, 189-198 Paragraph #5
Gifford-Smith, M. E, & Brownell, C. A. (2003). Childhood peer relationships: Social
acceptance, friendships, and peer networks. Journal of School Psychology. 41, 235-284.
3/1/16 Extra-Familial SH Chapters 21 and 23
Influences Lansford, J. E., Yu, T., Pettit, G. S., Bates, J. E., & Dodge, K. A. (2014). Pathways of peer
relationships from childhood to young adulthood. Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 35(2), 111-117.
3/3/16 Targets of SH Chapter 29 Grant Proposal

2
 Socialization: From Kochanska, G. Aksan, N., Prisco, T. R., & Adams, E. E. (2008). Mother-child and father-child Topics
Other Control to mutually responsive orientation in the first 2 years and children’s outcomes at preschool Discussion and
Self Control; age: Mechanisms of influence. Child Development, 79, 30-44. Paragraph Due
Morality, Altruism, Persson, G. E. B. (2005). Developmental perspectives on prosocial and aggressive motives in NO THOUGHT
Empathy preschoolers' peer interactions.   International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 80- PARAGRAPH
91 ****Critiques may be turned in late
SPRING BREAK (3-5-16 to 3-13-16)
3/15/16 Targets of Eisenberg, N. (2000). Emotion, regulation, and moral development. Annual Review of
Socialization: From Psychology, 51, 655-697.
Other Control to Findlay, L. C., Girardi, A., & Coplan, R. J. (2006). Links between empathy, social
Self Control; behavior, and social understanding in early childhool. Early Childhood Research
Morality, Altruism, Quarterly, 21, 347-359.
Empathy Finkenauer, C., Engels, Rutger C. M. E., & Baumeister, R. F. (2005). Parenting behaviour and
adolescent behavioural and emotional problems: The role of self-control.   International
Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 58-69.
3/17/16 Targets of SH Chapters 22, 30 Thought
Socialization: Eisenberg, N., Cumberland, A, & Spinrad, T. L. (1998). Parental socialization of emotion. Paragraph #6
Emotional Psychological Inquiry, 9, 241-273
Competence and Denham, S. A., Bassett, H. H., & Wyatt, T. (2015). The socialization of emotional competence.
Cognition In J. Grusec & P. Hastings (Eds.), The handbook of socialization (2nd edition). New York:
Guilford Press.
3/22/16 Targets of Cole, P. M., Martin, S. E., & Dennis, T. (2004). Emotion regulation as a scientific construct:
Socialization: Methodological challenges and directions for child development research. Child
Emotional Development, 75, 317-333.
Competence and Lunkenheimer, E. S., Shields, A.M., & Cortina, K. S. (2007). Parental emotion coaching and
Social Cognition dismissing in family interaction. Social Development, 16, 232-248.
3/24/16 Targets of Contreras, J. M, Kerns, K. A, Weimer, B. L., Gentzler, A. L., Tomich, P. L. (2000). Emotion Thought
Socialization: regulation as a mediator of associations between mother-child attachment and peer Paragraph #7
Aggression and relationships in middle childhood. Journal of Family Psychology. 14, 111-124.
Conflict Gilliom, M., Shaw, D. S., Beck, J. E., Schonberg, M. A., & Lukon, J. L. (2002). Anger
regulation in disadvantaged preschool boys: Strategies, antecedents, and the development
of self-control. Developmental Psychology, 38, 222-235
Halligan, S. L., Cooper, P. J., Fearon, P., Wheeler, S. L., Crosby, M., & Murray, L. (2013). The
longitudinal development of emotion regulation capacities in children at risk for
externalizing disorders. Development and Psychopathology, 25, 391-406.
3/29/16 Targets of SH Chapters 26 and 27 Grant Proposal
Socialization: Crick, N. R., Ostrov, J. M., Burr, J. E., Cullerton-Sen, C., Jansen-Yeh, E., & Ralston, P. (2006). Discussion of
Aggression/ Conflict A longitudinal study of relational and physical aggression in preschool.   Journal of Methods
Applied Developmental Psychology, 27, 254-268.
3/31/16 Targets of MDAC pp. 70-90 ****Critiques may be turned in late Grant Proposal
Socialization: Vitaro, F., Brendgen, M., Barker, E. D. (2006). Subtypes of aggressive behaviors: A Methods
Aggression and developmental perspective.   International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30, 12-19 Paragraph Due
Conflict NO THOUGHT
PARAGRAPH
4/5/16 Targets of Stoolmiller, M. (2001). Synergistic interaction of child manageability problems and parent-
Socialization: discipline tactics in predicting future growth in externalizing behavior for boys.
Aggression and Developmental Psychology, 37, 814-825.
Conflict Trentacosta, C. J., & Shaw, D. S. (2009). Emotional self-regulation, peer rejection, and
antisocial behavior: Developmental associations from early childhood to early
adolescence. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(3), 356–365.

4/7/16 Late Childhood- Woods, S., Wolke, D. (2004). Direct and relational bullying among primary school children and Thought
Adolescence: academic achievement.. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 155-155. Paragraph #8
Family Lieberman, M., Doyle, A-B., & Markiewicz, D. (1999). Developmental patterns in security of
Relationships, attachment to mother and father in late childhood and early adolescence: Associations with
Social Cognition, peer relations. Child Development, 70, 202-215.
Self System
4/12/16 Late Childhood- Burnette, M. L., Oshri, A., Lax, R., Richards, D., & Ragbeer, S. N. (2012). Pathways from harsh
Adolescence: parenting to adolescent antisocial behavior: A multidomain test of gender moderation.
Family Development and Psychopathology, 24, 857–870.
Relationships, Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D., Flanagan, C., &
Social Cognition, MacIver, D. (1993). Development during adolescence: The impact of stage-environment
Self System fit on young adolescents’ experiences in schools and families. American Psychologist, 48,
90-104.
4/14/16 Late Childhood- MDAC pp. 153-178 Thought
Adolescence: Peers, Juvonen J., Nishina, A., & Graham, S. (2000). Peer harassment, psychological adjustment, and Paragraph #9
Aggression, school functioning in early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 349-359
Morality Loeber, R., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1998). Development of juvenile aggression and

3
 violence: Some common misconceptions and controversies. American Psychologist, 53,
242-259.
4/19/16 Atypical Davies, P., & Martin, M. (2014). Children's Coping and Adjustment in High‐Conflict Homes:
development and its The Reformulation of Emotional Security Theory. Child Development Perspectives, 8(4),
relation to 242-249.
socialization Vélez, C. E., Wolchik, S. A., Tein, J.-Y., & Sandler, I. (2011). Protecting children from the
consequences of divorce: A longitudinal study of the effects of parenting on children’s
coping processes. Child Development, 82, 244–257.
4/21/16 Atypical S&H Chapters 32, 33 Thought
development and Schonfeld, D. J., Adams, R. E., Fredstrom, B. K., Weissberg, R. P., Gilman, R., Voyce, C., ... & Paragraph #10
prevention/intervent Speese-Linehan, D. (2014). Cluster-Randomized Trial Demonstrating Impact on
ion Academic Achievement of Elementary Social-Emotional Learning.
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011).
The Impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of
school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432.

4/26/16 Atypical Anderson, A. R., Christenson, S. L., & Sinclair, M. F. (2004). Check & Connect: The
development and importance of relationships for promoting engagement with school.   Journal of School
prevention/ Psychology, 42, 95-115.
Intervention Havighurst, S. S., Wilson, K. R., Harley, A. E., Prior, M. R., & Kehoe, C. (2010). Tuning into
kids: Improving emotion socialization practices in parents of preschool children – findings
from a community trial. Journal of Child Psychiatry & Psychology, 51, 1542-1550.
Fraser, M. W., Galinsky, M. J., Smokowski, P. R., Day, S. H., Terzian, M. A., Rose, R. A., &
Guo, S. (2005). Social information-processing skills training to promote social competence
and prevent aggressive behavior in the third grades. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 73, 1045–1055.
4/28/16 Atypical Garandeau, C. F., Lee, I. A., & Salmivalli, C. (2014). Differential effects of the KiVa anti- Thought
development and bullying program on popular and unpopular bullies. Journal of Applied Developmental Paragraph #11
prevention/ Psychology, 35(1), 44-50. Grant Proposal
Intervention Guerra, N. G., Williams, K. R., & Sadek, S. (2011). Understanding bullying and victimization Due 8pm 5/3/16
during childhood and adolescence: A mixed method study. Child Development, 8, 295-
310.
Haltigan, J. D., & Vaillancourt, T. (2014). Joint trajectories of bullying and peer victimization
across elementary and middle school and associations with symptoms of psychopathology.
Developmental psychology, 50(11), 2426.
5/10/16 Scheduled Exam Grant Critique Class 1:30 pm - 4:15pm
Period
5/12/16 Grant Revisions Due 5pm

THOUGHT PARAGRAPHS
You will each write up thought paragraphs to be shared with your small group at the beginning of class, and turned in to the professor at the end of
class, each Thursday. These will serve multiple goals – to apprise us what each other thought was important in the readings, what was confusing or illogical,
where the connections are to other work, and in what new and interesting directions the work leads us. At least at the beginning, we will follow a four-part
format, which corresponds to the four kinds of critical thinking we will emphasize in class. These paragraphs can be quite short; they are graded pass/fail
only but are absolutely essential for class success.

The 1st paragraph should summarize what the big points are for the class meeting. In the readings, you have “the answers,” and the goal of this first
paragraph is to identify what the questions are (sort of like “Jeopardy”™). You may also want to indicate in a word or two how completely you think the
question is answered, and put asterisks by the questions you are most interested in exploring during class time. You are not summarizing the articles for me;
you are integrating across articles about the important main points).

The 2nd paragraph should be devoted to analysis. You have two choices for this paragraph. You can either: (a) find a problem with the research you
read, and/or (b) ask a pretty specific question about how something was done. For the first choice, you can analyze whether the goals the research were
actually achieved, thus investigating whether the theory and method are walking together hand in hand. Or you can ask whether alternative hypotheses might
as easily explain the data. Or you can ask whether cohort effects might reported explain developmental differences; or the particular type of statistical
analysis that was used; etc. Also use the second choice when there are statistical analyses, claims, connections that you do not understand. This section can
simply point to specific tables or figures, or can ask a specific question (e.g., “The authors claim significance for hypothesis 1, but I do not see where they
demonstrate this.”) or confusion (e.g., “I sort of understand multiple regression, but this one leaves me totally in the woods without a match.”).

The 3rd paragraph focuses on integration. Integration can include connections between or to (a) the readings within a weekly topic, (b) material that we
covered earlier during the semester, (c) content from other courses, general readings, etc., and, of course, (d) one’s own areas of expertise. The 4 th paragraph
involves generating ideas for the future. Weaving hypotheses is a lot of fun, and a central skill in psychology. You can begin with “if-then” statements, or
“The real question really is ... and I predict that…” Or you can add a twist to someone else’s hypothesis that suggests different outcomes (or causes) by age,
ethnicity, gender, life experience, etc. Or try to figure a distinct application to practice with typically or atypically developing children. But always try to
come up with something uniquely yours.

OTHER USEFUL CAMPUS RESOURCES:

WRITING CENTER: A114 Robinson Hall; (703) 993-1200; http://writingcenter.gmu.edu

4
UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES “Ask a Librarian” http://library.gmu.edu/ask
COUNSELING AND PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES (CAPS): (703) 993-2380;http://caps.gmu.edu

UNIVERSITY POLICIES:

Official Communications via GMU E-mail: Mason uses electronic mail to provide official information to students. Examples include communications from course instructors,
notices form the library, notices about academic standing, financial aid information, class materials, assignments, questions, and instructor feedback. Students are responsible for
the content of university communication sent to their mason e-mail account, and are required to activate that account and check it regularly.
The University Catalog, http://catalog.gmu.edu, is the central resource for university policies affecting student, faculty, and staff conduct in university academic affairs. Other
policies are available at http://universitypolicy.gmu.edu/. All members of the university community are responsible for knowing and following established policies.