INDS 491: Interdisciplinary Studies Capstone

Assessment 3 — Capstone Research Paper

Psychology & Theology | Spring 2026

Assignment at a Glance

Course Code & Title	INDS 491: Interdisciplinary Studies Capstone
Assessment Title	Assessment 3 — Capstone Research Paper
Discipline Integration	Psychology & Theology
Weighting	40% of final grade
Word Count	3,500–4,500 words (excluding title page, abstract, and references)
Format	APA 7th Edition, double-spaced, 12-pt Times New Roman or Arial
Submission	Via the course portal (LMS) by 11:59 PM on the due date
Turnitin Required	Yes — similarity report must accompany final submission
Late Submission Policy	5% deduction per calendar day; no submissions accepted after 5 days

Overview and Purpose

This capstone paper asks you to produce a sustained, evidence-based argument that meaningfully integrates two disciplines — Psychology and Theology — in addressing a defined research problem. Rather than treating each field as a separate compartment, you are expected to show how their methodologies, theoretical frameworks, and bodies of literature can be brought into genuine intellectual dialogue.

The focus for Assessment 3 is drawn from the interdisciplinary theme developed across the unit: faith-based coping strategies and emotional resilience in adults recovering from childhood trauma. You will select a specific research angle within this theme (see Approved Topics below), develop an original thesis, and support that thesis with peer-reviewed scholarly sources drawn from both psychology and theology or religious studies.

By the end of this paper, you should be able to demonstrate that you can identify the central theoretical tensions between disciplines, handle primary and secondary sources with scholarly care, and construct an argument that is disciplinarily informed but not reducible to either field alone.

Approved Research Topics

Select one of the following approved topics, or propose a closely related variation in writing to your instructor before the end of Week 10. Unapproved topics will be returned for revision and may incur a late penalty.

The role of personal prayer practices in cultivating emotional resilience among adults with a documented history of childhood abuse.
Faith-based coping strategies and their measurable relationship to post-traumatic growth in adult survivors of childhood neglect or maltreatment.
The intersection of attachment theory and theological anthropology in understanding relational healing after complex childhood trauma.
Pastoral care models and trauma-informed psychological practice: a critical synthesis for working with abuse survivors in faith communities.
Theodicy, suffering, and psychological meaning-making: how theological frameworks shape — or impede — trauma recovery in adult populations.
Congregational belonging, social support, and its role in long-term emotional resilience among childhood trauma survivors.

Note: Topics involving clinical diagnosis, pharmacological intervention, or direct survivor narrative as primary data are outside the scope of this assignment. Your argument must remain grounded in theoretical, empirical, and theological literature.

Assessment Task Description

Write a 3,500–4,500-word capstone research paper that integrates psychological and theological perspectives on your chosen topic. Your paper must satisfy all of the following requirements.

Introduction (approximately 400–500 words)

Open with a contextualising statement that positions the topic within current scholarly or public discourse.
Provide a clear, arguable thesis statement in your introductory paragraph — not a description of what you will do, but a claim you will defend.
Include a brief roadmap sentence or two explaining how the paper is organised.

Interdisciplinary Literature Review (approximately 900–1,100 words)

Survey relevant psychological literature (e.g., trauma theory, resilience research, attachment theory, post-traumatic growth frameworks).
Survey relevant theological or religious studies literature (e.g., theodicy, pastoral theology, spiritual coping, theological anthropology, congregational care).
Identify points of convergence, productive tension, or methodological contrast between the two fields. The literature review is not a summary list; it should advance your argument.
A minimum of 12 peer-reviewed sources is required, with at least 5 drawn from each discipline. Sources published within the last 15 years are strongly preferred; older foundational texts may be included where clearly justified.

Integrative Analysis (approximately 1,400–1,800 words)

Develop your thesis across at least two to three distinct analytical sections.
Engage critically with competing interpretations within both disciplines — do not present only supportive evidence.
Make explicit your method of integration: are you identifying homologies between frameworks, resolving a contradiction, or proposing a synthesis that neither discipline has articulated on its own? Name and defend your approach.
Apply your integrated argument to a specific population, context, or problem (e.g., adult survivors within evangelical communities; secular therapeutic settings with religious clients).

Theological Reflection (approximately 400–500 words)

Engage with at least one primary theological or scriptural source (e.g., a patristic text, a confessional document, a specific biblical passage read through a scholarly lens) to deepen or test your argument.
This section is not devotional. It should demonstrate theological literacy and apply doctrinal or scriptural sources as argumentative evidence.

Conclusion (approximately 350–450 words)

Restate your thesis in light of the evidence developed — not simply repeat it.
Identify one or two genuine limitations of your argument or the existing literature.
Propose a concrete direction for future interdisciplinary research.

References

Full APA 7th Edition reference list, beginning on a new page.
All in-text citations must have a corresponding reference entry and vice versa.
Annotated bibliography entries are not required for this assessment.

Source and Citation Requirements

The following minimum source requirements apply. Meeting the minimum does not guarantee a high grade; consistently substantive engagement with a wider range of sources is characteristic of distinction-level work.

Requirement	Minimum
Total peer-reviewed sources	12
Psychology sources	5 (peer-reviewed journal articles)
Theology/Religious Studies sources	5 (peer-reviewed journals or scholarly monographs)
Primary theological/scriptural source	1 (used analytically in Section 4)
Sources published within last 15 years	Strongly preferred; exceptions require justification

Non-acceptable sources: Wikipedia, general encyclopaedias, devotional or pastoral blogs, sermon transcripts, and non-peer-reviewed online articles do not qualify toward minimum source requirements.

Formatting and Presentation Requirements

Title page: course code and title, assessment title, your full name and student ID, instructor name, institution, and date of submission.
Abstract: 150–200 words, structured (background, purpose, method of integration, key findings, conclusion). Appears after the title page, before the introduction.
Headings: use APA 7th Edition heading levels consistently throughout the paper.
Font and spacing: 12-point Times New Roman or Arial, double-spaced, 1-inch (2.54 cm) margins on all sides.
Page numbers: top right corner, beginning from the title page (following APA convention).
In-text citations: APA 7th Edition format throughout; cite every paraphrase and every direct quotation.
Direct quotations: use sparingly; no block quote should appear unless the original wording is analytically essential and the passage is more than 40 words.
Word count: stated on the title page; reference list and title page are excluded from the count.

Marking Rubric — Assessment 3 (Total: 100 marks | Weight: 40%)

Grades map as follows: High Distinction (HD): 85–100 | Distinction (D): 75–84 | Credit (CR): 65–74 | Pass (P): 50–64 | Not Yet Satisfactory (NYS): below 50. Instructors will annotate submissions using this rubric; the completed rubric will be returned with feedback within 15 business days of submission.

Criterion	HD (85–100%)	D (75–84%)	CR (65–74%)	P/NYS (below 65%)	Marks
1. Thesis & Argument Quality (Is there a clear, sustained, arguable claim?)	Thesis is original, precisely stated, and consistently developed. Argument progresses logically, with competing views genuinely engaged and rebutted.	Thesis is clear and arguable. Argument is mostly consistent; some counterarguments engaged but not fully resolved.	Thesis present but may be broad or partially descriptive. Argument is generally coherent but lapses into summary in places.	Thesis vague, missing, or purely descriptive. Argument is disorganised or largely a report of sources.	/25
2. Interdisciplinary Integration (Does the paper genuinely integrate both disciplines?)	Integration is explicit, theoretically sophisticated, and named methodologically. Neither discipline dominates. The paper produces insight neither field generates alone.	Clear integration attempted across both disciplines. The method of integration is evident if not fully theorised. Minor imbalance between fields.	Sources from both disciplines are present; integration is partial or additive rather than synthetic. One discipline tends to frame the other rather than engage it.	Paper is effectively single-discipline with the second discipline mentioned superficially. No methodology of integration evident.	/25
3. Engagement with Scholarly Literature (Quality, range, and criticality of sources used)	Minimum 12 sources met and exceeded. Sources are current, discipline-appropriate, and engaged critically. Key debates within each field are accurately represented.	Minimum 12 sources met. Most sources are peer-reviewed and relevant. Literature is summarised accurately with some critical evaluation.	Source minimum barely met or borderline. Some reliance on secondary or non-peer-reviewed material. Engagement is predominantly descriptive rather than critical.	Source minimums not met or significant reliance on non-scholarly material. Literature cited but not engaged with meaningfully.	/20
4. Theological Reflection (Analytical use of primary theological/scriptural source)	Primary source is selected with evident rationale and engaged with scholarly precision. Theological reflection deepens or complicates the argument rather than illustrating it.	Primary source is used analytically. Reflection is substantive, though the link to the broader argument could be more explicit.	Primary source included but primarily paraphrased or summarised. Theological reflection remains at the surface and does not significantly advance the argument.	Primary source absent, purely devotional in tone, or used without analytical engagement.	/15
5. Writing Quality & Academic Conventions (Clarity, structure, APA, word count)	Writing is precise, clear, and appropriately formal. APA 7th Edition applied correctly throughout. Word count within range. Headings, abstract, and title page correct.	Writing is clear with occasional lapses. Minor APA errors (fewer than 5 citation format issues). Structure is logical. Word count within range.	Writing is generally adequate but contains errors in expression, consistency, or style. Moderate APA errors. Structure may be unclear in places. Minor word count variance.	Writing impedes comprehension. Significant APA errors or citation missing. Structure unclear. Word count significantly outside the stated range.	/15

Academic Integrity and AI Use Policy

Submission of this capstone paper constitutes your declaration that the work is entirely your own, except where acknowledged through correct citation. Paraphrasing another author’s ideas without attribution is plagiarism regardless of whether their exact words are reproduced.

Artificial Intelligence tools: The use of generative AI tools (including but not limited to ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Copilot) to produce any portion of your written argument, literature review, or analysis constitutes academic dishonesty under institutional policy and will be referred for formal investigation. AI tools may be used for reference management organisation, initial keyword searches, or grammar review of your own completed draft, provided your use is disclosed in a brief methodological note on the title page.

If you are uncertain whether a particular use of AI or a particular source constitutes academic misconduct, consult your instructor before submission. Retrospective claims of uncertainty will not be accepted.

Assessment Support and Milestones

The following milestones are structured to support your completion of Assessment 3. Only the final submission is formally graded, but engagement with milestones will be recorded and factored into participation.

Milestone	Task	Due
Topic Confirmation	Submit approved topic and 3-sentence thesis statement via the LMS discussion forum	End of Week 10
Annotated Source List	Submit working reference list (min. 10 sources) with one-sentence annotation for each	End of Week 12
Draft Introduction & Thesis	Submit 400–500-word draft introduction for peer feedback via LMS	End of Week 13
Final Submission	Full paper (3,500–4,500 words) + Turnitin report via LMS	Week 15, 11:59 PM

Sample Answer Content — Illustrative Excerpt

Note for Module Leaders: The following excerpt illustrates the register, source integration, and argument structure expected at Distinction level. It is provided for student orientation and internal moderation purposes only.

Prayer, when practised consistently over time, functions not merely as a spiritual exercise but as a regulatory mechanism that demonstrably influences neurobiological stress-response pathways in adult trauma survivors. Tedeschi and Calhoun’s post-traumatic growth framework identifies meaning-reconstruction as central to resilience, and theological anthropology — particularly within Reformed and Catholic traditions — has long insisted that persons are constitutively relational and oriented toward transcendence (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004).

What neither field has adequately theorised is the way in which private prayer, as a sustained dialogical practice directed toward a perceived relational other, simultaneously enacts the relational repair processes central to attachment-informed trauma therapy and the coram Deo orientation that doctrinal frameworks describe as integral to human flourishing. Faith communities offer not only doctrinal resources for meaning-making but also the kind of safe, consistent relational presence that Bessel van der Kolk identifies as the most reliable environmental condition for trauma recovery — a convergence that neither pastoral theology nor clinical psychology has fully exploited.

Citation for this paper’s literature review:

Write a 3,500–4,500-word capstone research paper for INDS 491 that integrates psychological and theological frameworks on faith-based coping and emotional resilience in adults recovering from childhood trauma, using a minimum of 12 peer-reviewed sources in APA 7th Edition format.
Develop a 12–16 page interdisciplinary capstone paper integrating psychology and theology perspectives on prayer, coping, and resilience in adult survivors of childhood trauma, submitted via the course LMS with a Turnitin similarity report.
Submit a fully integrated psychology and theology capstone research paper on faith-based resilience and childhood trauma recovery — 3,500 to 4,500 words, APA 7th Edition, due Week 15.

INDS 491 | Assessment 3 | Spring 2026 | School of Interdisciplinary Studies