ASSESSMENT 3 – RESEARCH PROPOSAL ON THE APPLICATION OF A SELECTED LEARNING THEORY

ASSESSMENT 3 – RESEARCH PROPOSAL ON THE APPLICATION OF A SELECTED
LEARNING THEORY
Due Date: End of Week 6, Sunday 11.59pm
Weighting: 40%
Word Count: 1600 words (+/- 10%)
Introduction
You will prepare a research proposal that describes how one of the learning theories
covered in the course can be applied in the context of a psychological topic of your
choice. The research proposal needs to be prepared for an academic audience (i.e.
researchers and professionals with some prior knowledge). The proposal will include:
1) A broad literature review that summarises the existing research on your chosen
topic, describes how your chosen learning theory has been or could be applied to
the topic, and establishes a motivation for conducting the proposed research.
2) Your hypothetical research methodology
3) Consideration of potential ethical implications of your proposed research design.
This assessment is a research proposal only. You are not required to conduct any
research.
You will have the opportunity to spend some time working on your proposal and
discuss your initial topic ideas with your Tutor in Tutorials 4 and 5.
2
Purpose
In this assessment, you will demonstrate your ability to apply your conceptual knowledge
of learning theories to issues or open questions in psychology. The assessment also aims
to develop your ability to apply and communicate what you have learned in this course in an
academic context.
Preparing a research proposal is an important skill for future psychology study, research
grant funding applications, and future employment opportunities. You will also explore
possible ethical issues that might arise in a research context, a key focus within this
program, and for Australian and international psychology bodies.
Outcomes
This assessment maps to the following course learning outcomes:
• Critically analyse major theories and debates within classic and modern learning
theories
• Synthesise key principals of a variety of learning theories
• Apply principals of learning theory to human and animal behaviour
• Communicate applications of learning theories to a variety of audiences
• Formulate research designs based on the knowledge gained about learning
theories
Requirements
Your research proposal should adhere to APA 7th edition conventions for psychology
manuscripts (including style, formatting, and references). The text needs to be double
spaced, and size 12 font (Times New Roman, Arial or Calibri). You need to include a minimum
of five peer-reviewed references. The word count is 1600 words (+/-10%).
The proposal is worth 40% of your final grade, and is due at the end of Week 6 (Sunday at
11:59pm). The following sections need to be included:
1. A cover page (formatted to APA 7th edition standards):
• A title that succinctly captures the important elements of research
proposal, including the main variables that you will explore.
• Your student number but NOT your name
3
2. A literature review:
• An introduction to your chosen psychological topic, including a broad
contextualisation of why it is important.
• A description of your chosen learning theory from the course and a
justification for its application to your chosen topic.
• This justification might rely on previous research applying the
learning theory to your topic, or you might make an evidence based argument for a novel application of a theory to a topic.
• An explanation of why your proposed research is necessary, i.e.
demonstrate the gaps that in the existing literature on your topic that need
to be addressed.
• The research question(s) that you are seeking to answer and at least two
statistical hypotheses that you propose to test.
3. Method: Describe how you would conduct your study. Another researcher should
be able to conduct your based on the information in this section. Include the
following subsections:
• Participants; who will take part?
• Procedure; what will happen during your study? Describe the actions that
will take place.
• Measures; what data will you collect/record from participants?
• Statistical Analysis; which statistical tests will you use to analyse the data and
test your hypotheses? See below for more information on statistical test
selection.
4. Ethical considerations: In this section, outline potential ethical issues that you will
need to consider when running your proposed study. You will need to propose at
least three ethical issues and explain how you would mitigate these ethical risks.
5. Reference list formatted according to APA 7th edition requirements.
Statistical Test Selection
The assumed level of statistical knowledge for this course is the carousel one course “Research
Methods, Design and Analysis” (RMDA). The flow chart on the next page shows the statistical
tests covered in RMDA.
This means that you can adequately address the “statistical test selection” aspect of rubric
criteria 6: Methodology: Research Design and Analysis by selecting the correct test for your
4
hypotheses from the flowchart, even if a more sophisticated statistical test might typically be
used for your proposed study design.
You can also choose to specify more advanced statistical tests than those covered in RMDA,
although you will not receive any extra marks for doing so. Note that you will lose marks if the
more advanced tests you select are not appropriate for your hypotheses.

Resources
On how to formulate hypotheses:
https://tomfaulkenberry.github.io/JASPbook/chapters/chapter8.pdf (page 154)
5
Rubric title: Assessment 3
Criteria Ratings Points
1: Literature
review: Title
and
Introduction
Points: 2.0
Full points
Your title reflects the content
of your research proposal
and your introductory
paragraph clearly describes
the topic and key concepts. It
contextualises your topic by
emphasising its importance.
Points: 1.0
Partial points
Your title reflects the content
of your research proposal
and your introductory
paragraph describes your
topic and key concepts, but
does not clearly explain the
context or importance of
your topic.
Points: 0.0
Partial points
Your title does not reflect the
content of your research
proposal and you did not
define key concepts or
emphasise the importance of
your topic.
2.0 pts
2: Literature
review:
Integration of
learning
theory and
selected topic
Points 3.0
Full points
You have
demonstrated
excellent
understanding of
your selected
learning theory by
providing a clear
definition and
explanation. Your
explanation of and
Points: 2.0
Partial points
You have
demonstrated
adequate
understanding of
your selected
learning theory, with
some minor errors in
definition or
omissions in
explanation. The
Points: 1.0
Partial points
You have
demonstrated a poor
understanding of
your selected
learning theory, with
major errors in
definition and errors
in explanation. The
application of your
learning theory to
Points: 0.0
Partial points
You have not
explained the
learning theory or
justified its
application to your
topic.
3.0 pts
6
justification for the
application of your
learning theory to
your topic is
coherent and
sophisticated.
application of your
learning theory to
your topic could be
better explained or
justified.
your topic is neither
well explained nor
well justified.
3: Literature
review:
Justification
for research
Points 3.0
Full points
Your literature
review has a strong
grounding in theory
and supporting
evidence.
Relevant peer reviewed references
are provided
throughout the
proposal. You have
clearly explained why
your proposed
research is important
in the context of the
literature you discuss.
Points: 2.0
Partial points
Your literature
review has some
grounding in
theory and
supporting
evidence and
relevant peer reviewed
references are
provided
throughout.
However, you have
not clearly explained
why your proposed
research is important
in the context of the
literature you have
discussed.
Points: 1.0
Partial points
Your literature review
has minimal
grounding in theory
and supporting
evidence and it is
unclear why your
research proposal is
important in the
context of previous
research.
Points: 0.0
Partial points
You have not
provided any
meaningful
justification for your
research, references
are not provided, and
you have not
explained why your
research is important
in the context of
previous research.
3.0 pts
7
4: Literature
review:
Articulation of
hypotheses
Points: 2.0
Partial points
You have specified at least
two clear, appropriate
hypotheses that logically
follow from your literature
review.
Points: 1.0
Partial points
You have specified at least
two appropriate hypotheses;
however, they lack clarity or
are only loosely linked to your
literature review.
Points: 0.0
Partial points
You have not provided any
hypotheses in your literature
review.
2.0 pts
5: Method:
Participants,
procedure and
measures
Points: 2.0
Partial points
The description of your
research identifies the target
group and clearly describes
what will be done. Proposed
measures and methodology
map on to the constructs
under investigation and are
described in sufficient detail
for the study to be
conducted based on the
information in the Method
section.
Points: 1.0
Partial points
The description of your
research identifies the target
group and describes most of
what will be done. Proposed
measures and methodology
mostly map on to the
constructs under
investigation. One of these
areas has a significant
omission or error, which
would require clarification
before the study could be
conducted based on the
information in the Method
section.
Points: 0.0
Partial points
You have not described your
target group, what will be
done, or your proposed
measures. The study could
not be conducted based on
the information in the
Method section.
2.0 pts
8
6: Method:
Research
design and
analyses
Points 3.0
Full points
You have designed
an appropriate study
for investigating
your variables of
interest. The research
design is described in
sufficient detail and
your proposed
analyses are
appropriate to test
your hypotheses.
Points: 2.0
Partial points
You have designed a
study that is mostly
appropriate for
investigating your
variables of interest. There are some
minor details missing
from your research
design OR your
proposed analyses
may not be the most
appropriate to test
your hypotheses.
Points: 1.0
Partial points
You have designed a
study that is
minimally
appropriate for
investigating your
variables of interest. The research design
is not explained in
sufficient detail and
your proposed
analyses are not the
most appropriate to
test your
hypotheses.
Points: 0.0
Partial points
You did not propose a
study design or
present analyses to
test your hypotheses.
3.0 pts
7: Ethical
considerations
: Description of
potential
ethical issues
Points 3.0
Full points
You have identified
and succinctly
described three
ethical issues that are
directly relevant and
mostly specific to
your proposed
Points: 2.0
Partial points
You have identified
three ethical issues
that are directly
relevant to your
research proposal
but they may be
somewhat generic,
Points: 1.0
Partial points
You have identified
and adequately
described less than
three ethical issues
that are directly
relevant to your
proposed research.
Points: 0.0
Partial points
You have not
identified or
described any ethical
issues that are
relevant to your
proposed research.
3.0 pts
9
research. or your description
may lack clarity or
minor details
8: Ethical
considerations
: Proposed
response to
ethical issues
Points 3.0
Full points
You have provided
thoughtful and
thorough responses
to the
aforementioned
ethical issues, with
detailed plans for
addressing them.
Points: 2.0
Partial points
You have provided
responses to the
aforementioned
ethical issues,
although some
responses may be
superficial or plans
may lack detail.
Points: 1.0
Partial points
You have provided
limited responses to
the aforementioned
ethical issues, with
minimal details about
how they will be
addressed.
Points: 0.0
Partial points
You have not
responded to the
aforementioned
ethical issues.
3.0 pts
9: General:
Written
expression
Points: 2.0
Partial points
Your written expression is
outstanding. Your writing is
clear and concise throughout.
The flow of the proposal is
logical and there are no gaps
in explanation.
Points: 1.0
Partial points
Your written expression is
adequate. There some
wordy sections and/or
sections lacking in clarity.
There are some minor
impediments to logical flow
and or minor gaps in
explanation.
Points: 0.0
Partial points
Your written expression does
not meet the expected
standard. It greatly impedes
communication and makes
your proposal very difficult to
understand.
2.0 pts
10
10: General:
Formatting
and
referencing
Points: 2.0
Partial points
Your formatting,
references, and
reference list adhere to APA
7
th edition requirements.
Points: 1.0
Partial points
Your formatting, references,
and reference list mostly
adhere to APA 7th edition
requirements, with some
minor omissions or errors in
one of these areas.
Points: 0.0
Partial points
Your formatting, references,
and reference list do not
adhere to APA 7th edition
requirements.
2.0 pts
TOTAL 25.0 pts
4062_PSYCHOL-6509O Assessment 3
Title
The Effect of Interoception with Respect to Vagal Platforms on Adult Resilience
Introduction to Key Concepts
Resilience is both a dynamic and interactive concept with many definitions (Horner, 2016;
Rutter, 2013), often describing the process of a psychologically positive outcome through or
despite various challenges or risk experiences (Bowes & Jaffee, 2013; Greenberg 2006; Rutter
2013). It is central to mental and physical wellbeing, and trauma prevention (Rutter 2013). It
is suggested that resilience is underpinned by interoception, which is defined as the sensing,
processing and interpreting of afferent signals from within our body to our brain (Harshaw,
2016; Porges, 2005). Through an understanding of the Polyvagal Theory, which has been
heralded as the ‘key’ to understanding the neurobiology of human resilience (Loizzo, 2018),
this paper briefly explores how emotions, physiology and behaviour may be directly affected
by the ability to both identify and modify the neural platforms underlying the respective
psychophysiological states.
This study proposes that through using a Constructivist/Active Learning Theoretical
Framework (Niederriter et al., 2019), the Polyvagal Theory and its ‘neural platforms’ offers
opportunities for individuals to develop health-promoting adaptive strategies for resilience
and regulation, through increasing interoception.
Resilience
Many current approaches to resilience focus on developing cognitive factors such as
‘psychological hardiness’ and ‘higher cognitive ability’, as well as socio-environmental factors
such as ‘good peer relationships’ and ‘support people’ (Horner, 2016). Many approaches
suggest effecting top-down measures such as improving attitudes (Greenberg 2006),
communication-building (Greenberg 2006), strengthening relationships (Oral et al, 2016), and
identifying and fostering strengths and interests (Horner, 2016).
While these are certainly evidence-based approaches, they fail to consider the
phylogenetically determined hierarchy that regulates neural platforms in response to
perceived risk within our environment as described in Porges’ Polyvagal Theory (1995, 2001,
2003, 2007, 2011, 2014). Despite a recent eruption of research concerning genetic and
biological susceptibilities to poor resilience (Horner, 2016), there is still comparatively little
concerning the neurophysiological pathways that determine our psychological and
behavioural experiences. It could be argued that without considering this central aspect, we
fail to ignore the biologically mandated processes that enable or inhibit resilience to flourish.
The Polyvagal Theory
The Polyvagal Theory (Porges 1995, 1998, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014, 2017) offers a
framework for understanding human behaviours, including stress, illness and pro-sociability,
through connecting the evolution of our Autonomic Nervous System (ANS) with specific
human behavioural states. It describes how vagal pathways regulate the heart in response to
safety, novelty and stressors, and proposes that this process allows mammals to maintain
social connections. Through modulating both sympathetic and parasympathetic stress
reactivity, the vagus family provide the neural capacity for our unique ‘social’ brain.
The vagus nerve, comprising of both motor and afferent fibres, has been shown to “carry
‘broadband’ information from nearly every somatic tissue to the brain stem […] including
information about mechanical and chemical stimulation, inflammation and sickness, pain and
temperature, hunger and satiety, as well as signals modulating sleep and arousal” (Harshaw,
4062_PSYCHOL-6509O Assessment 3
2015, p. 39). The multi-branched vagus is asymmetrical, with nerve trunks originating in both
sides of the brainstem, each performing different tasks (Porges 1995). Through measuring
heart rate variability, mechanisms of the vagus nerve family in its various functions can be
elicited (Porges 1995, 1998, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014, 2017).
Underpinning the theory is the concept of ‘neuroception’, coined to describe the automatic
and subconscious neural detection of real or perceived safety or danger in the environment
(Porges 1995, 1998, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014, 2017). This bottom-up process includes
endocrine mechanisms, vagal afferents, and various sensorial inputs pertaining to external
challenges that evaluate our environmental risks (Porges 1995, 1998, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2011,
2017). Of importance is that this neurally-driven evaluation occurs prior to higher cortical
involvement. Hence, it could be proposed that this is a missing piece in many approaches to
fostering resilience, and that a combination of both top-down and bottom-up is required for
lasting efficacy.
Based on the perception of threat, the ANS utilises three dominant pathways to maintain
safety and organism homeostasis: ventral vagal complex (VCC), sympathetic nervous system
(SNS), and dorsal vagal complex (DVC). These three pathways are briefly summarised below.
The Ventral Vagal Complex (VVC) innervates the muscles of the head, neck and face,
coordinating these structures with the heart and lungs. In doing so, it provides the neural
structures to prime humans towards the parasympathetic actions of social connection and
engagement, pro-social behaviours, and flexibility and adaptability to challenges (Porges
1995, 1998, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2017).
The Sympathetic Nervous System (SNS) is frequently associated with the behaviours of the
stress response, often termed ‘Fight or Flight’. When the VVC has been unsuccessful in
mitigating the real or perceived threat, activation of the SNS primes and mobilises the
mammal to defense strategies to promote survival and safety (Porges 1995, 1998, 2003, 2007,
2009, 2011, 2017).
The Dorsal Vagal Complex (DVC) innervates sub-diaphragmatic structures, and bi-directionally
communicates the state of the viscera and internal organs. When activated in response to
extreme terror or danger, it elicits a parasympathetic behavioural shut down or
immobilisation in the form of collapse or freeze. This may also be experienced as a dissociative
state or loss of consciousness (Porges 1995, 1998, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2017).
These pathways may be used in isolation or in cooperation, inhibiting actions in other
pathways or collaborating with each other to create 6 predominant neural platforms (Baldwin
2013; Porges, 1998, 2011; Sullivan et al., 2018):
1. Social engagement (VVC): safety, connection, clarity, eudaimonia, calmness,
tranquillity, equanimity.
2. Play and creative expression (VVC + SNS): activity, motivation, capacity for change,
creativity, playfulness.
3. Fawn (SNS + VNC): using social engagement to moderate danger in others.
4. Fight or flight (SNS): fear, anger, greed.
5. Intimacy (DVC + VVC): stability, form, restraint, social bonding, relaxation in social
conditions, immobilisation without fear.
6. Freeze (DVC): observation, inertia, dullness, immobilisation with fear, ignorance,
delusion, dissociation.
4062_PSYCHOL-6509O Assessment 3
The theory proposes that both behaviour and psychological experience are in fact controlled
by physiological state (Porges 2007), rather than conscious cortical attempts to control our
thoughts and feelings. In light of this theory, is it time to reconsider our standard approach to
resilience?
Resilience and the Polyvagal Theory
Evidence suggests that effective vagal control is correlated with levels of demonstrated
resilience, while low vagal regulation is associated with compromised resilience (Streeter et
al., 2012; Park and Thayer, 2014; Sullivan et al., 2018). Dysregulated ANS function, as
demonstrated by low vagal tone, is linked to maladaptive bottom-up and top-down
processing, resulting in poor resilience and self-regulation, as well as lower behavioural
flexibility and higher incidence of depression, anxiety and other adverse health outcomes
(Streeter et al., 2012; Park and Thayer, 2014; Sullivan et al., 2018).
Resilience, then, could be defined as the capacity for the individual to accurately interpret and
manage both internal and external neuroceptive cues to navigate the vagal platforms. Such a
definition could also include the ability for the individual to access the parasympathetic
benefits of the VVC for pro-sociability, restoration and regulation, as well as to widen the so called ‘Window of Tolerance’ (Siegel, 1999) to maintain connection while experiencing other
states.
Resilience and Interoception
Interoception is the neuroception of our internal body state (Harshaw, 2015) and is central to
homeostasis, motivation and emotional processing. Described as both “context-dependent
and error-prone” (Cioffi 1991, as cited in Harshaw, 2015, p3), it is the detection and
interpretation of afferent signals, including change in heart or respiration rate, muscle
contractions, and homeostatic imbalance, as well as perceptions of feelings and emotions,
and disease-specific symptoms (Fischer et al., 2017). It has been proposed that individuals
with greater accuracy in detecting, interpreting and responding to said internal bodily signals
do not just experience their emotions and stress responses with greater intensity, but are also
better to recognise, manage and modify them (Craig, 2003; Fischer et al., 2017; Herbert et al.,
2011; Sullivan et al., 2018). Thus, it has been said that the greater the accuracy of our
interoception, the greater our adaptability and self-regulation (Sullivan et al., 2018).
If specific bodily experiences of stress are in fact determined by automatic neurophysiological
behaviour unique to the individual (Shalev, 2018), it could be argued that further research is
warranted into how the awareness of sensation can be used as a transformative change agent
in regards to resilience.
Working With Interoception
Approaches that utilise both top-down and bottom-up strategies have been shown to
synergistically affect subcortical networks to calm reflex stress-reactivity and post-traumatic
reactivity, which both block resilience (Loizzo 2014; Loizzo, 2018). In particular, mind-body
techniques that support the development of awareness of somatic sensations are suggested
to promote resilience (Shalev, 2018), including bodyscans, mindful breathing techniques
(Brown and Gerbarg, 2005; Fischer et al., 2017; Loizzo, 2018) and focusing (Gendlin, 1996, as
cited in Loizzo, 2018). Despite this, the literature yields an abundance of top-down emotion
regulation strategies (Shalev, 2018); similar levels of evidence regarding sensation-awareness
techniques are lacking.
The Present Study
4062_PSYCHOL-6509O Assessment 3
This study seeks to determine the relationship between the 6 Polyvagal platforms,
interoception and resilience. It seeks to answer the question: does increasing interoception
affect the ability to notice the 6 Polyvagal states and therefore increase resilience?
The study proposes three hypotheses:
1. Using a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches increases interoceptive
ability.
2. Interoception is positively correlated with detecting the 6 vagal platformsin their daily
lives.
3. Teaching people to recognise the 6 vagal platforms increases resilience.
Methods
Theoretical Framework
This study uses a Constructivist/Active Learning Theoretical Framework (Niederriter et al.,
2019) to investigate whether educating people on the nature of the 6 vagal platforms and to
recognise their associated sensations within their own bodies through mind-body prompts
increases levels of resilience.
Constructivism purports that learning is an active process in which learners build personally
meaningful understanding from content through interaction, reflection and drawing on
personal and observed experience. By engaging with and relating the content back to personal
experiences grounded in real-life scenarios, learners are able to take ownership of the
learning process and apply knowledge in their own way. Such approaches have been shown
to be significantly more effective when prior didactic instruction offers further foundation for
learning (Niederriter et al., 2019).
Constructing knowledge is central to the approach of this study, associating theoretical ideas
with physical sensations, which is a uniquely individual experience. This study is unique in that
the knowledge being constructed is not just cognitive, but also somatic. The central premise
is that new knowledge and understanding of the platforms will be built upon these
experiential foundations, creating personal meaning; potentially allowing the participants to
modify their internal landscape and experience greater resilience.
Participants
50 participants will be adults randomly selected from the Australian public (convenience
sampling) and divided into two groups: a control group and intervention group.
Procedure
The intervention group will undergo a didactic experience of the Polyvagal Theory in layman’s
terms, and an overview of the 6 vagal platforms, including exercises on resourcing the VVC.
To this end, following an initial training on the 6 vagal platforms, participants will be invited
to relate the platforms back to their
Students will be invited to relate the vagal platforms back to their own personal, sensory
experiences, thereby constructing their own interpretations of the platforms. After this,
participants will have access to guided mind-body exercises designed to increase
interoceptive abilities and be invited to continue relating the material back to their ongoing
sensorial experiences on a moment-to moment basis in light of each platform. The group will
undergo no teaching or prompting.
4062_PSYCHOL-6509O Assessment 3
Measures
Participants from both groups will be assessed at baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks, for a)
interoception, b) vagal platform awareness from a physical interpretation, and c) resilience.
These will be assessed using the Multidimensional Assessment for Interoceptive Awareness –
version 2 (MAIA-2) (Mehling et al., 2018); a self-report questionnaire pertaining to awareness
of their day-to-day sensorial experiences corresponding to the 6 vagal platforms, including
how easily they found themselves in a parasympathetic ventral vagal state; and Predictor 6-
Factor Resilience Scale (PR6) respectively.
Analysis
Results for the three measures within each group will be assessed using repeated measures
ANOVA. Like measures will be compared between each group using students t-Test.
Relationship between variables will be measured with correlation.
Ethics
Informed consent
All participants will be informed of the nature of the study, including purpose, risks, and data
collection, processing and storage, as well the voluntary nature of their participation.
Participants will be informed that they have the right to withdraw at any time.
Anonymity & Confidentiality
All participants will be informed that all personal information will be treated as confidential
and measures to protect this information will be taken. No details will be released to third
parties unless required by law.
Support for participants
As the study involves connecting with internal communication and bodily sensations, some
participants could experience psychological or emotional distress. Participants will be
informed that appropriate support services will be made available, including counselling or
psychotherapy, or referral where necessary.
4062_PSYCHOL-6509O Assessment 3
References
Baldwin, D. V. (2013) Primitive mechanisms of trauma response: An evolutionary perspective
on trauma-related disorders. Neuroscience and Biobehavioural Reviews, 37(8): 1549-
1566
Bowes, L., Jaffee, S. (2013) Biology, genes and resilience: Toward a multidisciplinary approach.
Trauma, Violence and Abuse, 2013; 14: 195-208
Brown, R., Gerbarg, P. (2005) Sudarshan kriya yogic breathing in the treatment of stress,
anxiety and depression: Part I., neurophysiologic model. Journal of Alternative and
Complementary Medicine, 11, 189-201
Craig, A. D. (2003) Interoception: the sense of the physiological condition of the body. Current
Opinions in Neurobiology, 13, 500-505.
Fischer, D., Messner, M., Pollatos, O. (2017) Improvement of Intercoeptive Processes after an
8-Week body Scan Intervention. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, doi:
10.3389/fnhum.2017.00452
Greenberg, M. (2006) Promoting resilience in children and youth: Preventive interventions
and their interface with neuroscience. Annals of New York Academy of Sciences, 2006;
1094: 139-150
Harshaw, C. (2015) Interoceptive Dysfunction: Toward An Integrated Framework for
Understanding Somatic and Affective Disturbance in Depression. Psychological
Bulletin Journal, 2015 March; 141(2): 311-363.
Herbert, B. M., Herbert, C., Pollatos, O. (2011) On the relationship between interoceptive
awareness and alexithymia: is interoceptive awareness related to emotional
awareness? Journal of Personality, 79, 1149-1175
Horner, G. (2016) Resilience. Journal of Paediatric Health Care, 31(3): 384-390
4062_PSYCHOL-6509O Assessment 3
Loizzo, J. J. (2014) Meditation research, past, present and future: perspectives from the
Nalanda contemplative science tradition. Annals of New York Academy of Sciences,
1307: 43-54
Loizzo, J. J. (2018) Can Embodied Contemplative Practices Accelerate Resilience Training and
Trauma Recovery? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00134
Marlysa, B. S., Erb, M., Schmalzi, L., Moonaz, S., Noggle Taylor, J., Porges, S. W. (2018) Yoga
Therapy and Polyvagal Theory: The Convergence of Traditional Wisdom and
Contemporary Neuroscience for Self-Regulation and Resilience. Frontiers in Human
Neuroscience, doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00067
Mehling, W. E., Acree, M., Stewart, A., Silas, J., Jones, A. (2018) The Multidimensional
Assessment for Interoceptive Awareness: Version 2 (MAIA-2). PLoS ONE 13(12):
e(0208034. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208034
Niederriter, J., Hovland, C., Hazelett, S., Whitford, M., Drost, J., Brown, D., Morgan, A., Kropp,
D., Sanders, M., Gareri, M., Fosnight, S., Radweny, S., McQuown, C., Ahmed, R. (2019)
Using the Constructivist/Active Learning Theoretical Framework to develop and test a
simulation-based interprofessional geriatric training curriculum. Journal of
Interprofessional Education & Practice, 19 doi: 10.1016/j.xjep.2020.100322
Oral, R., Ramirez, M., Coohey, C., Nakada, S., Walz, A., Kuntz A., Peek-Asa C. (2016) Adverse
childhood experiences and trauma informed care: The future of health care. Pediatric
Research, 79: 227-233
Park, G., and Thayer, J. F. (2014) From the heart to the mind: cardia vagal tone modulates top down and bottom-up visual perception and attention to emotional stimuli. Frontiers
in Psychology, 5:278. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00278
Porges, S. W. (1995) Orienting in a defensive world: mammalian modifications of our
evolutionary heritage. A Polyvagal theory. Psychophysiology, 32: 201-318
4062_PSYCHOL-6509O Assessment 3
Porges, S. W. (1997) Love: an emergent property of the mammalian autonomic nervous
system. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 23: 837-861
Porges, S. W. (2001) The polyvagal theory: phylogenetic substrates of a social nervous system.
International Journal of Psychophysiology, 42:123-146
Porges, S. W. (2003) The polyvagal theory: phylogenetic contributions to social behaviour.
Physiological Behaviour, 79: 503-513
Porges, S. W. (2004) Neuroception: a subconscious system for detecting threats and safety.
Zero to Three, 74: 19-24
Porges, S. W. (2007) The Polyvagal Perspective. Biological Psychology, 74(2): 116-143
Porges, S. W. (2009) The polyvagal theory: new insights into adaptive reactions of the
autonomic nervous system. Cleveland Clinical Journal of Medicine, 76: S86-S90
Porges, S. W. (2011) The Polyvagal Theory: Neurophysiological Foundations of Emotions,
Attachment, Communication, and Self-Regulation. 1st Edn. New York, NY: W. W.
Norton.
Porges, S. W. (2017) “Vagal pathways: portals to compassion: in The Oxford Handbook of
Compassion Science, ed. E. M. Seppala (new York, NY: Oxford University Press), 189-
202
Rutter, M. (2006) Implications of resilience concepts for scientific understanding. Annals of
New York Academy of Sciences, 1094: 1-12
Rutter, M. (2013) Resilience: clinical implications. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,
54: 474-487
Shalev, I. (2018) Using Motivated Cue Integration Theory to understand a Moment-by Moment Transformative Change: A New Look at the Focusing Technique. Frontiers in
Human Neuroscience, doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00307
Siegel, D. (1999) The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape who
we are. New York, Guildford Press.
4062_PSYCHOL-6509O Assessment 3
Streeter, C. C., Gerbarg, P. L., Saper, R. B., Ciraulo, D. A., and Brown, R. P. (2012) Effects of
yoga on the autonomic nervous system, gamma-aminobutyric-acid and allostatis in
epilepsy, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder. Medical Hypothesis 78, 571-
579.