[HarryMWilliams]

(Original post by Saif95)
Very good..but I still dont think a 12/10 marker will come up on it..well I would hope not anyway...it is my weak point..

The AQA AS Mini companion on page 39 says you only need to know 6 marks worth of material for implications for social change NOT '6 marks worth of desciption and 6 for evaluation' like it says for stuff like majority influece, obediance, etc.

I'm hoping for another Jan 2010 12 marker. "Discuss two or more definitions of abnormality." - Bliss!

[Deyesy]

(Original post by HarryMWilliams)
I'm hoping for another Jan 2010 12 marker. "Discuss two or more definitions of abnormality." - Bliss!

These being; deviation from social norms, failure to function adequately and Johada's ideal mental health thing? A question on them would be utter, utter bliss There's no way they'd be that nice Though Jan's PSYA1 was on memory, so maybe they can...

[HarryMWilliams]

(Original post by Deyesy)
These being; deviation from social norms, failure to function adequately and Johada's ideal mental health thing? A question on them would be utter, utter bliss There's no way they'd be that nice Though Jan's PSYA1 was on memory, so maybe they can...

Yeah.. DSN (Deviation from Social Norms), FFA (Failure to Function Adequately) and DIMH (Deviation from Ideal Mental Health). Looking at the mark scheme you also get a detail/breadth trade-off. I would send a thank you card if we got that question. I heard Unit 1 this time (I took mine in Jan) was a bit iffy with a 12-marker on Day Care so maybe they'll favor Unit 2.

[dench_crepz]

Do we have to know about Culture & Conformity??? also Conformity to Minority Influence???

[Saif95]

(Original post by HarryMWilliams)
I'm hoping for another Jan 2010 12 marker. "Discuss two or more definitions of abnormality." - Bliss!

(Original post by Deyesy)
These being; deviation from social norms, failure to function adequately and Johada's ideal mental health thing? A question on them would be utter, utter bliss There's no way they'd be that nice Though Jan's PSYA1 was on memory, so maybe they can...

Ahh I know right..? But it is unlikely they will repeat it...they probably want to cycle through all the possible 12 markers then they will start repeating again in a couple of years LOL...

There might be 10 or 8 marker on the definitions though

[HarryMWilliams]

(Original post by Saif95)
Ahh I know right..? But it is unlikely they will repeat it...they probably want to cycle through all the possible 12 markers then they will start repeating again in a couple of years LOL...

There might be 10 or 8 marker on the definitions though

One can only hope, mind mapping all the long questions instead of writing them out. Surprising how much you can recall sometimes.

[Daisia]

There's a lot in this unit isn't there?! Good thing I haven't got 2 days to learn it all! Speaking of which, thank you to all the good people who have given their notes/links to notes! Wonderfully helpful for someone who wasn't told about the specification change and has been very confused

[shybrowngirl]

hi everyone! i posted a list of topics that could up as a 12 marker, so i went through the mark schemes and the old specs' ones

i got a few 12 markers that appeared in the old specs - that we can get on tuesday!

Behaviourist approach to abnormality:
3 (c) .The behavioural model assumes that abnormal behaviour is the result of learning..
Outline and evaluate the behavioural model of abnormality. (18 marks)
AO1 is the outline of the behavioural model of abnormality. This is most
likely to be in terms of its assumptions about the causes of abnormality, but
need not be restricted to this.
AO2 is an evaluation of the model, for example in terms of its strengths and
limitations. Note that this would also include description of research studies
used as evaluation, though the mark may be restricted if the studies are not
used effectively.
The fundamental assumption of the behavioural model is that behaviour is
primarily the result of the environment rather than genetics (or instincts) and
the rejection of the view that abnormal behaviour has a biological basis. Like
the psychodynamic theorists, behaviourists have a deterministic view of
mental disorders: however, unlike Freud, they see abnormal behaviour as a
learned response (through conditioning) and not as the result of .mysterious.
(and, they would argue, unknowable) unconscious processes. While much of
our behaviour is adaptive, helping us to cope with a changing world, it is also
possible to learn behaviours that are abnormal and undesirable. However,
such maladaptive learning can be treated by changing the environment so that
un-learning could take place.
Commonly-recognised strengths of the behaviour model are:
• the model led to the development of specific behavioural therapies,
many of which have had high success rates
• the model lends itself to empirical study and evaluation
• proponents of the model argue that once the symptoms of an illness
are alleviated, the complaint disappears.
Weaknesses of the behavioural model include:
• the model is reductionist in the sense that it reduces the complexity of
human behaviour to behavioural responses to environmental stimuli
• only the symptoms of illnesses are treated, not the underlying causes
• the model provides a limited view of the causes of mental illness and does
not explain the evidence relating to genetic predispositions to mental illness
• environmental causes of abnormal behaviours are only rarely discovered in
patients.
One important extension of the behaviourist approach is social learning theory
(SLT). Theorists such as Bandura argued that observation and imitation are
important forms of learning neglected by the early behaviourists. Thus maladaptive
behaviour can be learned from poorly functioning parents through imitation, but it
can also be treated by therapies based on modelling. Such SLT explanations are
sometimes referred to as cognitive-behavioural, but are acceptable for this question.
In fact, the specification assumes a rather rigid demarcation between different
models which is contradicted by modern practice, especially in the case of
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). Most therapists adopt an eclectic account
of causation and treatment. Such a point is creditworthy as AO2, since the
implication is that no one model can explain complex mental disorders, particularly
ones that originated at a very early stage in the development of psychology.
Answers that focus on the general behavioural model (eg explanations of
conditioning) can only be credited to the extent that they relate to abnormality.

Cognitive approach to abnormality:
4 (c) Outline and evaluate the cognitive model of abnormality. (18 marks)The cognitive approach is usually associated with the likes of Aaron Beck
(cognitive triad) and Ellis (RET). The basic assumption is that mental events
cause behaviour. In the case of abnormal behaviour, it is the interpretations
and disordered cognitions that lead to the behaviour. Emotional problems
can be attributed to distortions in our cognitions or thinking processes.
These distortions are typically in the form of overgeneralisations, irrational
beliefs, illogical errors or negative thoughts.
Strengths of the cognitive model include:
There is much evidence of maladaptive thought processes in people
with psychological disorders
This model promotes psychological well being by teaching people
the means of control over their own lives
There have been successful treatments that are based on the model
It has been suggested that weaknesses of the cognitive model include:
The disordered cognitions may be a result of the disorder, not the
cause
The emphasis on the individual draws attention away from support
systems and the need to locate the causes of psychological distress
in wider social, political and cultural contexts
Examples of psychodynamic or cognitive explanations of specific disorders
may be given (eg depression). These can be credited (AO1) to the extent to
which they illustrate the main features of the model.
Discussion of treatments based on the model is creditworthy (AO1 or AO2
as appropriate) insofar as the provide evidence of knowledge and
understanding of the model itself.

Majority influence (conformity):
1 (c) .Social influence research has identified strong pressures to conform in group situations..
Outline and evaluate research into majority influence. (18 marks)

AO1 credit should be given for outline description of research into
majority influence.
AO2 credit should be given for an evaluation of this research.
There are several studies that candidates might outline, but the most
likely ones are those mentioned on the specification: Asch; Perrin &
Spencer. Asch carried out a series of experiments investigating the
effect a group would have on the behaviour of a naïve participant. He
varied the conditions, such as group size, task ambiguity and support
of a colleague. Perrin & Spencer replicated Asch.s experiment in the
1980s. They used different types of participants and found very little
evidence of conformity with university students in the UK.
Zimbardo.s prison simulation study investigated the extent to which
participants conformed to social roles.
Since the term research includes both studies and theories, any
description of relevant theories would be acceptable: for example, an
outline of normative and informational social influence as reasons why
people conform.
The evaluation can consider the methodology used in the studies. For
example, some studies were laboratory-based (may lack ecological validity,
demand characteristics, gender bias . both Asch and Zimbardo only used
males).
Ethical issues such as deception and psychological harm can be
considered.
One of the main criticisms of Asch.s study is that it was a .child of its time..
The reason for the relatively high level of conformity was due to the time
and the place in which the research was carried out (America in the 1950s).
.Positive criticisms. are also acceptable, for example the usefulness of this
research.

Discuss research on obedience:
2 (c) .Sometimes people obey authority, but sometimes people resist it..
Discuss what research into obedience tells us about why people obey, and how people might resist obedience. (18 marks)

AO1 credit is given for the outline description of why people obey and how
they might resist obedience
AO2 credit is given for an evaluation of these explanations.
There are numerous explanations of why people obey. These include:
 gradual commitment
 the agentic shift
 the role of buffers
 legitimate authority
 personality factors.
They might resist obedience:
 due to a switch to the autonomous state
 the presence of allies
 personality factors
 situational factors
 threat to own moral values/freedom.
The commentary could come from an evaluation of the evidence that supports such
explanations. Milgram.s study suggests that people obey because they see
themselves as agents of the researcher. It was those participants who saw
themselves as autonomous who did not obey. His study also supports the view that
participants obeyed the requests because initially they gave their consent to a
low-level shock (ie the foot-in-the-door technique). Hofling.s study with nurses
and Bickman.s field study can be used to illustrate the power of a legitimate
authority. In both cases the participants obeyed because they assumed the person
giving the orders had the authority to do so. The variations of Milgram.s studies
can be used to illustrate the reasons/conditions that help people to resist the
pressure to obey. Zimbardo is also creditworthy as long as it is made explicitly
relevant to obedience.
Better answers are likely to look at the processes involved rather than just focusing
on the studies and what happened.

Life changes:
1 (c) Discuss research into the role of life changes as sources of stress (eg Holmes & Rahe). (18 marks)

AO1 credit should be given for description of research studies into life
changes as a source of stress, eg as identified by Holmes & Rahé. It
can also be for description of mechanisms by which stress and life
changes may be linked (ie theory).
AO2 credit should be given to any legitimate attempt to analyse and
evaluate the possibility of a link between life changes and stress,
including evaluation of relevant research studies and comparisons
between competing explanations.
The approach taken could involve either breadth (a number of
aspects/studies/theories briefly outlined) or depth (selected research
in detail). The study by Holmes & Rahé will almost certainly figure
prominently in answers. This should provide in most cases sufficient
material for AO1, and, as there are many detailed criticisms of the
research, probably for AO2 as well.
Holmes and Rahé observed that their patients had often experienced
several life events in the months before the onset of an illness They
used the SRRS to obtain data about the person.s experience of life
changes over a 12-month period. They reported a positive correlation
between high SRRS scores for events in the preceding year and the
likelihood of experiencing some sort of physical illness within the
following year.
However there are several drawbacks to this research, which
candidates could use for AO2, including:
The overall relationship is small (in studies using the SRRS
correlations are typically in the order of 0.3) and are significant
only because very large samples were used.
The research relies on retrospective data.
The research is correlational and cannot prove that life events are a
cause of ill health.
Holmes and Rahé assumed that any event could result in stress if it
was a major enough change in a person.s life (even holidays!).
However, subsequent research has shown that positive events need
to be distinguished from negative events.
In connection with the last point, Kanner et al (1981) developed a 117 item
questionnaire (the hassles scale). High scores on this were found to be
related to psychological (eg depression) and physiological ill health. This
was a better predictor of ill health than the SSRS. On the other hand, high
scores on the 135 item uplifts scale (eg getting on well with your
spouse/lover) were negatively correlated with ill-health.

Workplace stress:
1 (c) Outline and evaluate research in relation to the workplace as a source of stress. (18 marks)
AO1 credit should be given for outline descriptions of relevant studies
into the workplace as a source of stress. It is also acceptable to give
accounts of what the effects are and how they are mediated, since this
would demonstrate knowledge of the findings of research and/or relevant
theory.
AO2 credit should be given for analysis and evaluation of relevant
research, including criticisms of the methodology of studies.
There is an extensive literature into the causes of workplace stress. A
number of stressful job factors have been identified:
Work overload/pressure (eg Breslow & Bell, 1960; Cobb, 1976;
Sokejima & Kagamimori, 1998)
Job insecurity
Role conflict and role ambiguity
Poor interpersonal relationships (eg Cooper & Marshall, 1976;
French, 1974)
Lack of control over work (eg Marmot et al, 1997)
Shift work
The combined effect of many of these factors is illustrated by
Frankenhaeuser (1975). In jobs that were very dull and repetitive, where
workers had little control over the pace of their work, where decisions
had to be made very quickly, the environment was noisy, and where
social contact was minimal, it was found that these workers had
abnormally high levels of stress hormones.
Note that discussion of environmental factors such as noise and
crowding must be linked to the workplace.
Particular occupations are known to be associated with higher stress
levels than others, so a study that has shown this, including some of the
above examples, is acceptable. In view of the question wording,
research focused on the consequences of the job stress, or on ways of
dealing with job stress, are also acceptable
Candidates may attempt to introduce research using non-human
animals, but such studies must be made relevant to the world of work to
gain credit (for example, it might be said that Brady was primarily
interested in the effects of stress in business executives). Similarly,
answers that focus on the effects of stress on health (CVD, immune
system, etc) must explicitly demonstrate a connection with workplace
stress to gain credit. However, some aspects of life-change research
could be relevant.

Personality factors including Type A and hardiness:
2 (c) “Some individuals cope better than others with stressful situations.”
Discuss research into the role played by personality in modifying the effects of stressors. (18 marks)
AO1 is a description of research (theories or studies) into personality as
a modifier of the stress response. Credit should also be given for
explanation of how the effects are mediated, provided this is based on
research.
AO2 is an evaluation of this research. This might involve criticisms of
studies/theories, assessments of practical significance, comparisons and
contrasts between explanations, etc.
Friedman and Rosenmans’ pioneering work first distinguished so-called
Type A and Type B personalities. It was claimed that the former
appears to be much more affected by stress than the latter. However,
early studies indicating that Type A personalities have a higher risk of
developing CHD have not been supported by later research. To make
sense of sometimes contradictory findings, it has been suggested that a
critical factor is hostility. There is evidence that when this is combined
with Type A personality, correlations with CHD are higher. Individuals
who repress rather than express their hostility may be particularly
vulnerable. Temeshok (1987) describes such individuals in terms of a
Type C personality.
Another personality trait which it is claimed is associated with responses
to stress is sensation seeking (Zuckerman, 1979). High sensation
seekers actively seek out activities that other people would find acutely
stressful. The extent to which a person measures high or low in
sensation seeking has been found to correlate with that of their partner in
intimate relationships (Lesnick-Oberstein & Cohen, 1984). Zuckerman
also suggest that high and low sensation seekers also tend to seek out
the ‘right’ occupation, preferring high-pressure or more routine jobs
respectively.
Kobassa has identified ‘hardy’ individuals, who she describes as those
whose cognitive strategies are better suited to dealing with stress. For
example, they are more able to identify the symptoms of stress (so
avoiding action can be taken in time). They make more realistic
assessment of stressors, including being aware of the positive aspects of
stressful situations (opportunities and new challenges).
The concept of hardiness has linked to the idea of control and, critics
would say, it is somewhat difficult to distinguish the two. Thus it is known
that there are important individual differences in locus of control
(Rotter, 1966). Hardy people are more likely to have an internal locus of
control. While this question is not directly on stress management, it
would be legitimate to consider such methods in so far as they offer
support or otherwise to the underlying theory. Thus, Kobassa suggests
that hardiness can be improved with appropriate training. There is little
direct research evidence on the effectiveness of hardiness training and
what research there is, has tended to be confined to white middle-class
managers, so may be difficult to generalise to women and cultural
groups.
Candidates may introduce gender as an aspect of personality. However,
the two areas are differentiated in the specification, and unless gender is
explicitly justified as an aspect of personality such answers cannot
receive credit. This would also apply to any other material candidates
may introduce, eg cultural differences.

are these safe to use as guidelines for the essays?

if they are, i hope you find them useful

[Saif95]

(Original post by HarryMWilliams)
One can only hope, mind mapping all the long questions instead of writing them out. Surprising how much you can recall sometimes.

What do you mean?

[i Pav i]

(Original post by shybrowngirl)
hi everyone! i posted a list of topics that could up as a 12 marker, so i went through the mark schemes and the old specs' ones

i got a few 12 markers that appeared in the old specs - that we can get on tuesday!

Behaviourist approach to abnormality:
3 (c) .The behavioural model assumes that abnormal behaviour is the result of learning..
Outline and evaluate the behavioural model of abnormality. (18 marks)
AO1 is the outline of the behavioural model of abnormality. This is most
likely to be in terms of its assumptions about the causes of abnormality, but
need not be restricted to this.
AO2 is an evaluation of the model, for example in terms of its strengths and
limitations. Note that this would also include description of research studies
used as evaluation, though the mark may be restricted if the studies are not
used effectively.
The fundamental assumption of the behavioural model is that behaviour is
primarily the result of the environment rather than genetics (or instincts) and
the rejection of the view that abnormal behaviour has a biological basis. Like
the psychodynamic theorists, behaviourists have a deterministic view of
mental disorders: however, unlike Freud, they see abnormal behaviour as a
learned response (through conditioning) and not as the result of .mysterious.
(and, they would argue, unknowable) unconscious processes. While much of
our behaviour is adaptive, helping us to cope with a changing world, it is also
possible to learn behaviours that are abnormal and undesirable. However,
such maladaptive learning can be treated by changing the environment so that
un-learning could take place.
Commonly-recognised strengths of the behaviour model are:
• the model led to the development of specific behavioural therapies,
many of which have had high success rates
• the model lends itself to empirical study and evaluation
• proponents of the model argue that once the symptoms of an illness
are alleviated, the complaint disappears.
Weaknesses of the behavioural model include:
• the model is reductionist in the sense that it reduces the complexity of
human behaviour to behavioural responses to environmental stimuli
• only the symptoms of illnesses are treated, not the underlying causes
• the model provides a limited view of the causes of mental illness and does
not explain the evidence relating to genetic predispositions to mental illness
• environmental causes of abnormal behaviours are only rarely discovered in
patients.
One important extension of the behaviourist approach is social learning theory
(SLT). Theorists such as Bandura argued that observation and imitation are
important forms of learning neglected by the early behaviourists. Thus maladaptive
behaviour can be learned from poorly functioning parents through imitation, but it
can also be treated by therapies based on modelling. Such SLT explanations are
sometimes referred to as cognitive-behavioural, but are acceptable for this question.
In fact, the specification assumes a rather rigid demarcation between different
models which is contradicted by modern practice, especially in the case of
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). Most therapists adopt an eclectic account
of causation and treatment. Such a point is creditworthy as AO2, since the
implication is that no one model can explain complex mental disorders, particularly
ones that originated at a very early stage in the development of psychology.
Answers that focus on the general behavioural model (eg explanations of
conditioning) can only be credited to the extent that they relate to abnormality.

Cognitive approach to abnormality:
4 (c) Outline and evaluate the cognitive model of abnormality. (18 marks)The cognitive approach is usually associated with the likes of Aaron Beck
(cognitive triad) and Ellis (RET). The basic assumption is that mental events
cause behaviour. In the case of abnormal behaviour, it is the interpretations
and disordered cognitions that lead to the behaviour. Emotional problems
can be attributed to distortions in our cognitions or thinking processes.
These distortions are typically in the form of overgeneralisations, irrational
beliefs, illogical errors or negative thoughts.
Strengths of the cognitive model include:
There is much evidence of maladaptive thought processes in people
with psychological disorders
This model promotes psychological well being by teaching people
the means of control over their own lives
There have been successful treatments that are based on the model
It has been suggested that weaknesses of the cognitive model include:
The disordered cognitions may be a result of the disorder, not the
cause
The emphasis on the individual draws attention away from support
systems and the need to locate the causes of psychological distress
in wider social, political and cultural contexts
Examples of psychodynamic or cognitive explanations of specific disorders
may be given (eg depression). These can be credited (AO1) to the extent to
which they illustrate the main features of the model.
Discussion of treatments based on the model is creditworthy (AO1 or AO2
as appropriate) insofar as the provide evidence of knowledge and
understanding of the model itself.

Majority influence (conformity):
1 (c) .Social influence research has identified strong pressures to conform in group situations..
Outline and evaluate research into majority influence. (18 marks)

AO1 credit should be given for outline description of research into
majority influence.
AO2 credit should be given for an evaluation of this research.
There are several studies that candidates might outline, but the most
likely ones are those mentioned on the specification: Asch; Perrin &
Spencer. Asch carried out a series of experiments investigating the
effect a group would have on the behaviour of a naïve participant. He
varied the conditions, such as group size, task ambiguity and support
of a colleague. Perrin & Spencer replicated Asch.s experiment in the
1980s. They used different types of participants and found very little
evidence of conformity with university students in the UK.
Zimbardo.s prison simulation study investigated the extent to which
participants conformed to social roles.
Since the term research includes both studies and theories, any
description of relevant theories would be acceptable: for example, an
outline of normative and informational social influence as reasons why
people conform.
The evaluation can consider the methodology used in the studies. For
example, some studies were laboratory-based (may lack ecological validity,
demand characteristics, gender bias . both Asch and Zimbardo only used
males).
Ethical issues such as deception and psychological harm can be
considered.
One of the main criticisms of Asch.s study is that it was a .child of its time..
The reason for the relatively high level of conformity was due to the time
and the place in which the research was carried out (America in the 1950s).
.Positive criticisms. are also acceptable, for example the usefulness of this
research.

Discuss research on obedience:
2 (c) .Sometimes people obey authority, but sometimes people resist it..
Discuss what research into obedience tells us about why people obey, and how people might resist obedience. (18 marks)

AO1 credit is given for the outline description of why people obey and how
they might resist obedience
AO2 credit is given for an evaluation of these explanations.
There are numerous explanations of why people obey. These include:
 gradual commitment
 the agentic shift
 the role of buffers
 legitimate authority
 personality factors.
They might resist obedience:
 due to a switch to the autonomous state
 the presence of allies
 personality factors
 situational factors
 threat to own moral values/freedom.
The commentary could come from an evaluation of the evidence that supports such
explanations. Milgram.s study suggests that people obey because they see
themselves as agents of the researcher. It was those participants who saw
themselves as autonomous who did not obey. His study also supports the view that
participants obeyed the requests because initially they gave their consent to a
low-level shock (ie the foot-in-the-door technique). Hofling.s study with nurses
and Bickman.s field study can be used to illustrate the power of a legitimate
authority. In both cases the participants obeyed because they assumed the person
giving the orders had the authority to do so. The variations of Milgram.s studies
can be used to illustrate the reasons/conditions that help people to resist the
pressure to obey. Zimbardo is also creditworthy as long as it is made explicitly
relevant to obedience.
Better answers are likely to look at the processes involved rather than just focusing
on the studies and what happened.

Life changes:
1 (c) Discuss research into the role of life changes as sources of stress (eg Holmes & Rahe). (18 marks)

AO1 credit should be given for description of research studies into life
changes as a source of stress, eg as identified by Holmes & Rahé. It
can also be for description of mechanisms by which stress and life
changes may be linked (ie theory).
AO2 credit should be given to any legitimate attempt to analyse and
evaluate the possibility of a link between life changes and stress,
including evaluation of relevant research studies and comparisons
between competing explanations.
The approach taken could involve either breadth (a number of
aspects/studies/theories briefly outlined) or depth (selected research
in detail). The study by Holmes & Rahé will almost certainly figure
prominently in answers. This should provide in most cases sufficient
material for AO1, and, as there are many detailed criticisms of the
research, probably for AO2 as well.
Holmes and Rahé observed that their patients had often experienced
several life events in the months before the onset of an illness They
used the SRRS to obtain data about the person.s experience of life
changes over a 12-month period. They reported a positive correlation
between high SRRS scores for events in the preceding year and the
likelihood of experiencing some sort of physical illness within the
following year.
However there are several drawbacks to this research, which
candidates could use for AO2, including:
The overall relationship is small (in studies using the SRRS
correlations are typically in the order of 0.3) and are significant
only because very large samples were used.
The research relies on retrospective data.
The research is correlational and cannot prove that life events are a
cause of ill health.
Holmes and Rahé assumed that any event could result in stress if it
was a major enough change in a person.s life (even holidays!).
However, subsequent research has shown that positive events need
to be distinguished from negative events.
In connection with the last point, Kanner et al (1981) developed a 117 item
questionnaire (the hassles scale). High scores on this were found to be
related to psychological (eg depression) and physiological ill health. This
was a better predictor of ill health than the SSRS. On the other hand, high
scores on the 135 item uplifts scale (eg getting on well with your
spouse/lover) were negatively correlated with ill-health.

Workplace stress:
1 (c) Outline and evaluate research in relation to the workplace as a source of stress. (18 marks)
AO1 credit should be given for outline descriptions of relevant studies
into the workplace as a source of stress. It is also acceptable to give
accounts of what the effects are and how they are mediated, since this
would demonstrate knowledge of the findings of research and/or relevant
theory.
AO2 credit should be given for analysis and evaluation of relevant
research, including criticisms of the methodology of studies.
There is an extensive literature into the causes of workplace stress. A
number of stressful job factors have been identified:
Work overload/pressure (eg Breslow & Bell, 1960; Cobb, 1976;
Sokejima & Kagamimori, 1998)
Job insecurity
Role conflict and role ambiguity
Poor interpersonal relationships (eg Cooper & Marshall, 1976;
French, 1974)
Lack of control over work (eg Marmot et al, 1997)
Shift work
The combined effect of many of these factors is illustrated by
Frankenhaeuser (1975). In jobs that were very dull and repetitive, where
workers had little control over the pace of their work, where decisions
had to be made very quickly, the environment was noisy, and where
social contact was minimal, it was found that these workers had
abnormally high levels of stress hormones.
Note that discussion of environmental factors such as noise and
crowding must be linked to the workplace.
Particular occupations are known to be associated with higher stress
levels than others, so a study that has shown this, including some of the
above examples, is acceptable. In view of the question wording,
research focused on the consequences of the job stress, or on ways of
dealing with job stress, are also acceptable
Candidates may attempt to introduce research using non-human
animals, but such studies must be made relevant to the world of work to
gain credit (for example, it might be said that Brady was primarily
interested in the effects of stress in business executives). Similarly,
answers that focus on the effects of stress on health (CVD, immune
system, etc) must explicitly demonstrate a connection with workplace
stress to gain credit. However, some aspects of life-change research
could be relevant.

Personality factors including Type A and hardiness:
2 (c) “Some individuals cope better than others with stressful situations.”
Discuss research into the role played by personality in modifying the effects of stressors. (18 marks)
AO1 is a description of research (theories or studies) into personality as
a modifier of the stress response. Credit should also be given for
explanation of how the effects are mediated, provided this is based on
research.
AO2 is an evaluation of this research. This might involve criticisms of
studies/theories, assessments of practical significance, comparisons and
contrasts between explanations, etc.
Friedman and Rosenmans’ pioneering work first distinguished so-called
Type A and Type B personalities. It was claimed that the former
appears to be much more affected by stress than the latter. However,
early studies indicating that Type A personalities have a higher risk of
developing CHD have not been supported by later research. To make
sense of sometimes contradictory findings, it has been suggested that a
critical factor is hostility. There is evidence that when this is combined
with Type A personality, correlations with CHD are higher. Individuals
who repress rather than express their hostility may be particularly
vulnerable. Temeshok (1987) describes such individuals in terms of a
Type C personality.
Another personality trait which it is claimed is associated with responses
to stress is sensation seeking (Zuckerman, 1979). High sensation
seekers actively seek out activities that other people would find acutely
stressful. The extent to which a person measures high or low in
sensation seeking has been found to correlate with that of their partner in
intimate relationships (Lesnick-Oberstein & Cohen, 1984). Zuckerman
also suggest that high and low sensation seekers also tend to seek out
the ‘right’ occupation, preferring high-pressure or more routine jobs
respectively.
Kobassa has identified ‘hardy’ individuals, who she describes as those
whose cognitive strategies are better suited to dealing with stress. For
example, they are more able to identify the symptoms of stress (so
avoiding action can be taken in time). They make more realistic
assessment of stressors, including being aware of the positive aspects of
stressful situations (opportunities and new challenges).
The concept of hardiness has linked to the idea of control and, critics
would say, it is somewhat difficult to distinguish the two. Thus it is known
that there are important individual differences in locus of control
(Rotter, 1966). Hardy people are more likely to have an internal locus of
control. While this question is not directly on stress management, it
would be legitimate to consider such methods in so far as they offer
support or otherwise to the underlying theory. Thus, Kobassa suggests
that hardiness can be improved with appropriate training. There is little
direct research evidence on the effectiveness of hardiness training and
what research there is, has tended to be confined to white middle-class
managers, so may be difficult to generalise to women and cultural
groups.
Candidates may introduce gender as an aspect of personality. However,
the two areas are differentiated in the specification, and unless gender is
explicitly justified as an aspect of personality such answers cannot
receive credit. This would also apply to any other material candidates
may introduce, eg cultural differences.

are these safe to use as guidelines for the essays?

if they are, i hope you find them useful

I just went through the past papers and saw yeah these are the ones that are most likely to come up..

Although I think as the specification has changed and Minority Influence has become bigger, At least a 6 marker on Hardiness or Minority/Social Change will come up..

The 12 Marker I personally believe will be Cognitive Approach to Psycho. - It's never properly come up before!

[scl95]

Does anyone want to write down the possible 12 markers? May take a while I know...
What could they be...

Abnormality:
Outilne and evaluate...this approach to abnormality
Outline and evaluate therapies...
Outline and evaluate one or more definitions of abnormality...

Stress:
Outline and evaluate research into how stress makes us Ill...
Outline and evaluate how personality factors effect stress
Outline and evaluate research into stress in the workplace..
Outline and evaluate methods of stress management.

Social influence:
Outline and evaluate research into conformity/obedience
Outline and evaluate reasons as to why people obey
Outline implications for social Change

These roughly the only ones they could ask anyone?

[iLoveRobSwire<3]

(Original post by scl95)
Does anyone want to write down the possible 12 markers? May take a while I know...
What could they be...

Abnormality:
Outilne and evaluate...this approach to abnormality
Outline and evaluate therapies...
Outline and evaluate one or more definitions of abnormality...

Stress:
Outline and evaluate research into how stress makes us Ill...
Outline and evaluate how personality factors effect stress
Outline and evaluate research into stress in the workplace..
Outline and evaluate methods of stress management.

Social influence:
Outline and evaluate research into conformity/obedience
Outline and evaluate reasons as to why people obey
Outline implications for social Change

These roughly the only ones they could ask anyone?

My teacher showed me some questions which she thinks might be the 12 marker for social and stress

Social:
Discuss how social influence helps us to understand social change
Outline and evaluate individual differences in independent behaviour
Outline and evaluate explanations of how people resist pressures to obey and conform
Outline and evaluate explanations of why people obey

Stress:
Outline the body's responce to stress and consider whether it is the same in all people
Outline and evaluate research into stress related illness
Outline and evaluate research related to life changes and stress
Outline and evaluate research related ro daily hassles and stress
Outline and evaluate biological methods of stress management
Outline and evaluate psychological methods of stress management

She didn't tell us any abnormality questions though

[scl95]

(Original post by iLoveRobSwire<3)
My teacher showed me some questions which she thinks might be the 12 marker for social and stress

Social:
Discuss how social influence helps us to understand social change
Outline and evaluate individual differences in independent behaviour
Outline and evaluate explanations of how people resist pressures to obey and conform
Outline and evaluate explanations of why people obey

Stress:
Outline the body's responce to stress and consider whether it is the same in all people
Outline and evaluate research into stress related illness
Outline and evaluate research related to life changes and stress
Outline and evaluate research related ro daily hassles and stress
Outline and evaluate biological methods of stress management
Outline and evaluate psychological methods of stress management

She didn't tell us any abnormality questions though

Ooh okay so could you help with these two...

Outline and evaluate individual differences in independant behaviour..
Is that like confidence/locus of control/ moral reasoning/ gender..
Are evaluations just studies that go along with it? So locus of control - Blass...

And for research to understand social change;

Is that both minority and conformity eg..
Minority behavioural styles, dissent and snowball effect for minority..
Then social change such as educating nurses/ 10 steps to resisting unwanted influences yeah?

Thanks!

[mycollege]

Does anyone one know solid A02 points for following questions:

a) Why do people obey
b) How social influence leads to social change

[HarryMWilliams]

(Original post by mycollege)
Does anyone one know solid A02 points for following questions:

a) Why do people obey
b) How social influence leads to social change

I would be using studies to answer those questions, which have you used and I can help suggest some AO2 point.

[Deyesy]

(Original post by iLoveRobSwire<3)
My teacher showed me some questions which she thinks might be the 12 marker for social and stress

Social:
Discuss how social influence helps us to understand social change
Outline and evaluate individual differences in independent behaviour
Outline and evaluate explanations of how people resist pressures to obey and conform
Outline and evaluate explanations of why people obey

Stress:
Outline the body's responce to stress and consider whether it is the same in all people
Outline and evaluate research into stress related illness
Outline and evaluate research related to life changes and stress
Outline and evaluate research related ro daily hassles and stress
Outline and evaluate biological methods of stress management
Outline and evaluate psychological methods of stress management

She didn't tell us any abnormality questions though

Stress management came up in January. I highly doubt the latter two 12 markers you've posted will come up

[HarryMWilliams]

(Original post by Deyesy)
Stress management came up in January. I highly doubt the latter two 12 markers you've posted will come up

I concur, I reckon we'll have something along the lines of abnormality (Please, please please!) or social change (Eww!)

[mycollege]

(Original post by HarryMWilliams)
I would be using studies to answer those questions, which have you used and I can help suggest some AO2 point.

For 'why do people obey' I'd talk about Agentic shift/ Gradual commitment and Leg authority- so no studies (Thats what said in the mark schemes). That's probably why I struggling, which ones are you planning to use? and same for (b)

[Deyesy]

(Original post by HarryMWilliams)
I concur, I reckon we'll have something along the lines of abnormality (Please, please please!) or social change (Eww!)

No doubt we'll get the latter

[HarryMWilliams]

(Original post by mycollege)
For 'why do people obey' I'd talk about Agentic shift/ Gradual commitment and Leg authority- so no studies (Thats what said in the mark schemes). That's probably why I struggling, which ones are you planning to use? and same for (b)

That said, it depends on how many marks are available for the question. If the mark scheme says; Agentic Shift, Gradual Commitment and Leg Authority you could then link in Milgram to confirm your choices and AO2 him. Equally you could just evaluate the LOC measure.

(Original post by Deyesy)
No doubt we'll get the latter

I really will cry.