PSY614 Southern New Hampshire MOD7 Leadership Psychology Literature Paper Review the position paper assignment that is due in Module Seven. For the positio

PSY614 Southern New Hampshire MOD7 Leadership Psychology Literature Paper Review the position paper assignment that is due in Module Seven. For the position paper, you will make value judgments about prevailing debates in the field. While you will be relying more on your personal viewpoints, you must still substantiate claims with logic, reason, and evidence. This is your opportunity to engage in independent research. This assignment is made of two components. The literature review for your position paper is due in this module, and the position paper is due in Module Seven.For this task, conduct a literature review of at least five appropriately cited, peer-reviewed journal articles. This literature review is used as a framework for the position paper.For additional details, please refer to the Position Paper Guidelines and Rubric and the Literature Review Guidelines and Rubric. PSY 614 Literature Review Rubric
Overview
This literature review will be used to support your position paper, which is due in Module Seven. For your position paper, you will choose one of the current
debates in the field of leadership psychology and defend a position.
For the literature review, you must select at least five appropriately cited, peer-reviewed journal articles related to that debate. Refrain from stating your opinion
on any of the material in the literature review; you will have an opportunity to do that in the position paper.
Your Assignment
The literature review should begin with an overview of the subject. State your objective for conducting a literature review. Next, divide your selected resources
into categories (each side of the debate). Compare and contrast each source and determine which sources best support the argument.
For each source:
?
?
?
?
Include proper APA citation
Identify the problem: List the side of the debate the source supports
Compare the resource: Explain how it is similar to or different from other sources
Final Review: Consider the objectivity of the article, the sources the author selected to support his or her ideas, and the value of the author’s
conclusions. Discuss how the article can be used to support your position paper.
Resources
Use this database to locate peer-reviewed journal articles: Psychology Research Guide
For detailed information about writing literature reviews, use this resource: Write a Literature Review
Rubric
Guidelines for Submission: Double-spaced Word document, 12-point Times New Roman font, 1-inch margins, APA format. Page length requirement: six to eight
pages, not including title page and references.
Critical Elements
Purpose of Literature
Review
Exemplary (100%)
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
uses specific and relevant
examples to effectively
establish the significance
Comparison of
Sources
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
uses substantial relevant and
specific details
Objectivity
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
cites specific elements in the
source that precisely address
the author’s objectivity
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
uses specific and robust
examples of the author’s use
of evidence to support the
argument
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
uses specific and substantial
details
Value
Conclusions
Articulation of
Response
Submission is free of errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, and syntax and is
presented in a professional
and easy-to-read format
Proficient (90%)
Main point behind the
literature review is clearly
stated, demonstrating the
significance of the
psychological debate
Comparison demonstrates
how the source differs from
the other sources, using
specific details
Explains specific elements in
the source that reasonably
addresses the author’s
objectivity
Illustrates the value of the
sources by demonstrating
sufficient examples of the
author’s use of evidence to
support the argument
Identifies the conclusions and
demonstrates how each
source will be used to support
the position using specific
details
Submission has no major
errors related to citations,
grammar, spelling, or syntax
Needs Improvement (70%)
Main point behind the
literature review is stated but
requires additional details to
establish the significance of
the psychological debate
Comparison lacks sufficient
details to demonstrates how
the source differs from the
other sources
Lacks sufficient elements to
demonstrate the author’s
objectivity
Not Evident (0%)
Does not identify the purpose
of the literature review
Value
20
Comparison does not illustrate
the differences between the
sources
15
Does not illustrate the
author’s objectivity
15
Lacks sufficient examples of
the author’s use of evidence
to support the argument
Does not illustrate the value of
the article/author’s use of
evidence
15
Lacks sufficient details to show
how the sources will be used
to support the position
Does not identify conclusions
or how the sources will be
integrated into the position
paper
20
Submission has major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, or syntax that
negatively impact readability
and articulation of main ideas
Submission has critical errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, or syntax that prevent
understanding of ideas
15
Earned Total
100%
PSY 614 Position Paper Guidelines and Grading Guide
Overview
A position paper will be used as one of your comprehensive assessments. Within the position paper, you will make value judgments about prevailing debates in
the field of psychology. While you will be relying more on your personal viewpoints, you must substantiate claims with logic, reason, and evidence, as supported
by scholarly research. In Module Five, a literature review will be completed as part of the framework in preparation for this assignment. Using resources
identified in the literature review, you will craft your position paper due in Module Seven.
This assessment will assess your mastery with respect to the following course outcome:
?
PSY614.1 Defend a position on one of the significant debates in leadership psychology using scholarly evidence [MS.PSY.CORE.4]
Prompt
Your position paper should answer the following prompt:
Choose one or more of the current debates in the field of leadership psychology and defend a position. Sample debates include:
?
?
?
Analytical versus holistic approach
Individualism versus group cognition
Balancing employee satisfaction/needs and the bottom line
Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:
1. Background – Detailed information about a debate prevalent in the field of psychology must be presented. The following questions must be answered:
a. Which debate was chosen? Why?
b. What is the historical importance of the debate?
2. Positions – To be considered a debate, there must be a discussion that involves opposition.
a. Address the distinct positions of the debate.
b. Is each side of the debate sustainable? Why or why not?
c. Are the leader’s responsibilities practical in nature? Why or why not?
3. Defense – To be able to participate in a structured debate, one must choose a position and prepare to defend that stance.
a. Which side of the debate do you choose to defend? Why?
b. Provide an official position defense, including evidence to support your position using scholarly research.
Rubric
Guidelines for Submission: Double-spaced Word document, 12-point Times New Roman font, 1-inch margins, APA format. The position paper should be 12–15
pages in length, not including title page and references, and should include no less than 5 scholarly resources.
Critical Elements
Background:
Selection
Exemplary (100%)
Meets “Proficient” criteria, and
discussion is substantiated by
scholarly research
Proficient (90%)
Proposes logical reasoning for
the selection of the identified
debate for its prevalence in the
field of psychology
Background:
Historical Importance
Meets “Proficient” criteria, and
discussion is substantiated by
scholarly research
Positions:
Distinctions
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
provides insightful references
Explicit and detailed discussion
is provided of overall historical
importance of the chosen
debate
Includes accurate and well
developed distinctions between
the opposing positions of the
chosen debate
Positions:
Sustainability
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
discussion is substantiated by
scholarly research
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
uses specific, relevant pieces of
evidence when critiquing each
argument
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
addresses why this view was
chosen, demonstrated by
scholarly research
Meets “Proficient” criteria and
includes significant scholarly
research that supports the
position
Submission is free of errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, and
organization and is presented in
a professional and easy-to-read
format
Positions:
Leader Responsibility
Defense:
Selection of Position
Defense:
Official Position
Defense
Articulation of
Response
Adequately critiques each
argument for applicable
perceptions of sustainability
Adequately critiques each
argument for the practical
nature of leader responsibilities
Identifies which argument of
the debate will be defended
and includes why this side was
chosen
Defends a position related to
one side of the debate in a
logical and comprehensive
manner
Submission has no major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
Needs Improvement (70%)
Identifies an appropriate
selection of a prevalent debate
in psychology, but does not
provide logically reasoning for
its selection
Discussion of the overall
historical importance of the
chosen debate is brief or
lacking in detail
Includes accurate distinctions
between the opposing
positions of the chosen debate,
but the discussion is not well
developed
Provides a limited critique to
the sustainability of each
argument
Critiques each argument for the
practical nature of leader
responsibilities, but lacks
specific detail
Identifies which argument of
the debate will be defended,
but does not include rationale
for why it was chosen
Attempts to defend a position,
but the defense is not
comprehensive or there are
gaps in the logic
Submission has major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that negatively impact
readability and articulation of
main ideas
Not Evident (0%)
An appropriate debate was not
chosen
Value
10
Historical importance of the
chose debate is not discussed
10
Does not include accurate
distinctions between opposing
positions
10
Does not critique the
sustainability of each argument
10
Does not critique the practical
nature of leader responsibilities
10
Does not identify a specific side
of the argument for defense
10
Does not select a position to
defend
30
Submission has critical errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that prevent understanding of
ideas
10
Earned Total
100%

Purchase answer to see full
attachment