TAKE-HOME WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT TWO
(DUE THURS. APR. 29, OR, AT VERY LATEST, WED. MAY 5, 1999)

Due at the last class period on Th. April 29th (which is also the day of the second in-class exam), or:
Mon.(May 3rd) from 1-3 pm Room 373 Sch
Tues (May 4th) from 1-3 pm pm Room 373 Sch
or Wed. (May 5th) from 12-5 pm Room 373 Sch.

Papers may also be turned in at an earlier class or office hour on the following condition: Please make sure to give it to one of us directly, telling us what it is, and allowing us time to take care of it properly before you dash away. Do not leave the papers in our mailboxes or under our doors because they may get lost.

Late papers will not be accepted except in extreme circumstances and, even in those cases, permission to be late should be arranged ahead of time if at all possible and penalty points may be assigned.

***Other more general instructions are the same as for the first written assignment Re-read handout #22 re collaborations, information from outside the textbook, etc. ) ****

The T.A.s and I will not answer questions of the form: "What do you want us to do in section xxx?" Part of the point of the assignment is for you to choose something reasonable to do within the constraints imposed by the assignment as written down here (and in general instructions).

What I want to see in your answers (in addition to the particulars required by the specific question) is: (1) evidence of knowledge of the course material, (2) understanding of the knowledge, (3) some further thinking about this knowledge and its relation to other knowledge or to your life, and (4) an attempt to write clearly about the knowledge, the understanding, and the thinking. Creativity comes in at all stages of this process.

Section I. Data Analysis -- Group Differences (Graphs, 500-750 words, 60 points

Analyze and discuss the results from the LeVay (1991) study of the brains of women and homosexual men and heterosexual men (See accompanying handout with article giving a description of this study and also a graph of the results. Also see p. 203 in your text.) To avoid misunderstanding about what should be included in the answer to this part, a very explicit outline follows.

(A) Results
Consider three samples (disregarding the question of whether they have AIDS or not):
¥ all the females,
¥ all the homosexual males,
¥ all the heterosexual males

(For extra credit you may further analyze the data -- to the extent possible -- separating those with AIDS from those without AIDS. You could also discuss, with great caution of course, the one known bisexual indicated by the open circle.)

(1) First estimate or calculate the mean (average) and the standard deviation of each sample. Whether you calculate or estimate them you should present at least one graph showing your results clearly. And you should should how you got the numbers (either show your calculation or briefly desribe your estimation procedure).
Note well: We do NOT expect or want you to read the exact numbers from the graphs and then calculate exactly the mean and standard deviation. We would rather that you estimated. You may calculate, however, if you insist.

(2) Briefly describe in words the degree of overlap between these three groups. In your description you should succinctly describe the degree of overlap either using technical language, e.g. "the female and heterosexual-males samplesÕ means are approximately 3 standard deviations apart" (if this were true) or using non-technical language, e.g. "there is no heterosexual male with a score inside the female distribution" (if this were true).

(3) Calculate SE (the standard error of the mean) for each sample. Present your answers in graphical as well as numerical form. On the basis of these calculations, give your best guess (in the form of a coherent short paragraph) about the answer to the following questions: Are the averages of the three populations (from which these three samples were taken) different or not? How sure are you of your answer?

(B) Discussion
Include in your discussion at least the following two topics

(1) Heredity vs. Environment (150-300 Words). Briefly discuss this finding and its relationship to the nature/nurture question. Be sure you include the answer to the following question: Does finding a biological difference (size of a place in the brain -- INAH3 -- in this case) that correlates with behavior (sexual orientation in this case) imply that the behavior at issue is inherited?

(2) Relation of this study to others (150-300 words). In order to integrate one group of investigatorÕs results into the work of others (which is how science proceeds) a typical journal paper explicitly discusses how the study presented in it adds to (or contradicts) evidence available from other research. Do a mini-version of that here. In particular, write a brief discussion for LeVayÕs paper comparing and contrasting it to the other animal and human results currently available (which you can take from Gray and from the handout on LeVay). Include a tentative conclusion about what, taken as a whole, these studies suggest about human sexual orientation. You are allowed to be speculative in such a discussion section (although you must be overtly rather than covertly so). You might go on (but this is optional) to briefly describe the Òunanswered questionsÓ about this topic and to indicate what sort of studies would need to be done to answer them. You should do all this briefly, clearly, and correctly .

(3) Optional discussion-- Politics and heritability (0-250 words). You might also (but it is not necessary and should occupy no more than 100-250 words) consider the following issue in your discussion: For the issue of sexual orientation (or, if you prefer, choose IQ., or schizophrenia, or personality traits) , what are the political pressures connected with its heritability ? Do you think that the people using the heritability question in their arguments are really interested in the heritability question or something else? If so, what is it they are interested in?

Section II. (40 points, 500-750 words) Illustrate 3 of the 7 Not's

Write an essay illustrating three of the seven "Not's" discussed in this class. For each, you should give an example where the wrong reasoning is an attractive mistake that people are likely to make. For this section of the written assignment: These examples should come from material in the second half of the course. You can make up each example, or you could use examples in which the mistake has actually been made in a newspaper, magazine, a conversation with a friend or relative, or even our textbook (or -- I hope not but it is a possibility -- from my lecture). You should then explain what the RIGHT reasoning is. AND WHY!! And you might discuss how the wrong reasoning can lead people astray either in making decisions about their personal life or in their opinions about sociopolitical issues.
Some graphs or diagrams may very well be appropriate and useful here.
(Caution: Please do not repeat in this question the material that you used in section on Levay's study.)
Section III. The study of emotion (50 points, 500-750 words, some graphs would be nice)
The general topic of emotion can be studied from many different perspectives -- from single molecules at the beginning of the semester to groups of humans at the end. Or, to put it another way, many different kinds of psychologists and other scientists might find themselves studying it.
Part A. Very briefly (a sentence or two each, no more than 250 words total),. describe how at least 5 different subareas of psychology (from 5 different places in the course) might approach the topic (might study or theorize about emotion). Another constraint for this part: Include material from the first half of the class as well as from the second. Exactly what counts as different subareas is up to you, but, roughly speaking, each chapter could be considered a different subarea, certainly each couple of chapters.
Part B. Then, in more detail, discuss 3 different studies of emotion that have been done -- coming from three quite different approaches (preferably from both before and after the midterm) -- and what these studies have taught us about emotion and related behaviors in humans. For 1 of these 3, instead of describing a study that has already been done to your knowledge, you could propose a new study to do.Graphs of experimental results and/or other kinds of diagram would be appropriate and useful here.