Critical Reading and Academic Writing 2500-EN-CS-OB-04

Learning outcomes:
K_U01. Student can search for, select, and critically analyze scientific literature from various areas of cognitive science using advanced bibliographic tools and databases, comprehensively evaluating the quality, reliability, and relevance of the arguments.
K_U11. Student can effectively and clearly present research findings in the form of scientific articles, reports, grant proposals, and presentations, taking into account the target audience, methodological context, and ethical requirements, while ensuring coherence and clarity of communication.
K_U13. Student can use the English language proficiently, enabling participation in international academic and professional environments (at least at the B2+ level of the CEFR).
K_K01. Student is ready to systematically and critically verify their existing knowledge and newly acquired information, being able to identify potential methodological errors and gaps in both scientific and public argumentation (including online communications).

Learning activities and teaching methods:
Deep-reading assignments (mock research papers designed to exhibit typical weaknesses of published papers in psychology, selected research papers in cognitive science), group discussions, presentations on the fundamentals of academic writing, writing assignments (abstract, precis, article review, discursive essay).

Assessment methods: homework (four graded writing assignments), ongoing assessment of in-class activity (students are expected to come prepared and participate in group discussions).

Components of the final grade and their weights:
Writing assignments 70%
Participation 30%

Requirements for retaking the assessment:
The course is designed to promote continuous learning and active participation. Since the final grade reflects systematic work throughout the semester, it is not possible to complete the course through a single retake or alternative assessment.

Students are allowed at most five absences – i.e., a student who has had over five absences will not get credit for the course. Out of the five allowed absences, two can be unexcused, but anything beyond that needs to be justified (e.g., by a note from a doctor). Additionally, a student who has had more than two absences may be asked to do additional work (usually, to prepare a presentation) to make up for each extra absence.

The topics for in-class discussions and the corresponding reading materials are updated each year, as they depend on the students interests, preferences, and perceived needs. The detailed list of topics and reading assignments will be proposed and discussed with the students ahead of time, and posted to the Kampus platform.

Topics related to writing include:
1. The functions and qualities of written communication in cognitive science
2. What makes a good abstract
3. What makes a good precis
4. What makes a good article review
5. What makes a good discursive essay (research paper)
6. Editorial conventions and guidelines of the APA and other institutions.

Selected topics in critical reading and research methods:
1. General evaluation criteria of research papers
2. N = 1 experimental study – mock paper 13 from Meltzoff (1998), Strasburger, H., & Waldvogel, B. (2015). Sight and blindness in the same person: Gating in the visual system. PsyCh Journal, 4: 178–185.
3. N > 1 experimental study using questionnaire measures – Costa, A., et al. (2014). Your morals depend on language. PLoS ONE, 9(4): e94843.
4. Systematic vs. narrative literature review – Merten, C. E., et al. (2017). Overdiagnosis of mental disorders in children and adolescents (in developed countries). Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 11: 5.
5. Metaanalysis – Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (1988). Gender Differences in Verbal Ability: Meta-Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 104(1): 53-69.
6. Experiments on AI systems – Anil, C., et al. (2024). Many-shot jail breaking. NIPS’24.
7. Correlational neuroimaging studies – Vul, E., Harris, C., Winkielman, P., & Pashler, H. (2009). Puzzlingly High Correlations in fMRI Studies of Emotion, Personality, and Social Cognition. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(3): 274-290.
8. Questionable Research Practices and Replicability – Bem, D. (2011). Feeling the Future: Experimental Evidence for Anomalous Retroactive Influences on Cognition and Affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(3): 407–425.

Useful publications on methodology and academic writing include:
- Meltzoff, J. (1998). Critical thinking about research psychology and related fields. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
- Belcher, W. L. (2019). Writing Your Journal Article in Twelve Weeks: A Guide to Academic Publishing Success. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
- American Psychological Association (2020). Publication Manual of the APA. 7th ed.