[Luxray]

(Original post by Miracle Day)
Ohh, I see our styles of writing them are very different.

Do you have the aims and context of 'Sane in insane places' That's the one I'm struggling with.. I just don't get it

In the 1930s several controversial medical practices were introduced to ‘treat’ (control) illnesses including inducing seizures or lobotomy but there were concerns and much opposition on grounds of morality, harmful effects, or misuse of these treatment.

Foucault argued that the concepts of sanity and insanity were social constructs that did not reflect patterns of human behavior. They were showed only the power of the "sane" over the "insane". This may have influenced Rosenhan, because he wanted to see if the power of labels (e.g. schizophrenic) causes others to unnecessarily treat the patients as helpless and possibly inferior. For example the ‘labeling’ and controlling of social problems in German mental institutions in the 1930s could have influenced mass murder of the 1940s to occur. The dangers of labeling others mentally ill can lead to extremists using it as an excuse to control people, which perhaps Rosenhan was against.

In the 1960s, "anti-psychiatry" defined a movement that challenged the claims and practices of mainstream psychiatry. Psychiatrist Szasz argues that "mental illness" is an inherently incoherent combination of a medical and a psychological concept, but popular because it legitimizes the use of psychiatric force to control and limit deviance from societal norms. Rosenhan was interested in seeing how people are diagnosed and if this may affect how others treat a patient.

Rosenhan aimed to investigate if psychiatrists could distinguish the difference between people who are genuinely mentally ill and those who aren’t.

A note to all users: please dont go copying my essay word for word or redistributing without permission. I spent A LOT of time on these essays. I'm talking 150+ hours

[Sesshomaru24U]

(Original post by Miracle Day)
But I thought I could follow

Method
Sample
Validity
Reliability
Ethical issues

and get 12/12?

I'm pretty sure that's it? except for reliability and validity being swapped around.
By the way in the other thread, do you want to go through the order of the PY2 book? e.g. Asch, Milgram, Rahe, Bennett-Levy an Marteau etc.

[Miracle Day]

(Original post by Sesshomaru24U)
I'm pretty sure that's it? except for reliability and validity being swapped around.
By the way in the other thread, do you want to go through the order of the PY2 book? e.g. Asch, Milgram, Rahe, Bennett-Levy an Marteau etc.

Erm, can we start with Milgram please?

I haven't even started Bennett-Levy yet haha.

[Miracle Day]

(Original post by Luxray)
A note to all users: please dont go copying my essay word for word or redistributing without permission. I spent A LOT of time on these essays. I'm talking 150+ hours

Okay I got it.

Thanks man! I won't copy it.

[Luxray]

(Original post by Miracle Day)
But I thought I could follow

Method
Sample
Validity
Reliability
Ethical issues

and get 12/12?

Firstly, its not possible to go through all of those in detail in an essay (buh I'm sure you already knew that). For some of those essays, I had studies, off the top of my head I think Orne and Holland argued that Milgram's study lacked internal validity due to participants actually knowing that the shocks were not real and merely followed demand characteristics. But Milgram commented that after the experiment, 75% of participants thought it was real.

edit: can't believe I still remember that!

[Miracle Day]

(Original post by Luxray)
Firstly, its not possible to go through all of those in detail in an essay (buh I'm sure you already knew that). For some of those I had studies, off the top of my head I think Orne and Holland argued that Milgram's study lacked internal validity due to participants actually knowing that the shocks were not real and merely followed demand characteristics. But Milgram commented that after the experiment, 75% of participants thought it was real.

edit: can't believe I still remember that!

Wow. This goes against everything my teacher's taught me lol. They said just to use these for the external research

[Sesshomaru24U]

(Original post by Miracle Day)
Erm, can we start with Milgram please?

I haven't even started Bennett-Levy yet haha.

Do you just want to do 2 studies? like social psychology = Asch & Milgram.
When do you want to do it?

[Miracle Day]

(Original post by Sesshomaru24U)
Do you just want to do 2 studies? like social psychology = Asch & Milgram.
When do you want to do it?

By tomorrow. Yes we'll do them to. They're my favourites haha.

[Luxray]

(Original post by Miracle Day)
Wow. This goes against everything my teacher's taught me lol. They said just to use these for the external research

Do the examiner reports make no mention of studies in methodology?

[mel0n]

(Original post by Miracle Day)
But I thought I could follow

Method
Sample
Validity
Reliability
Ethical issues

and get 12/12?

Validity has a lot more than simply whether there is internal or external validity. You could talk about a lot more than that. But to be fair I followed a similar pattern when I wrote my methodology essay and it wasn't looked upon badly by the marker There is no one specific way of writing the essay, so someone could have done something totally different and still gotten high marks - hope it goes well!

[Luxray]

wtf, I provide essays and someone negs me. Makes me wonder why I should bother helping =/

[Luxray]

(Original post by mel0n)
Validity has a lot more than simply whether there is internal or external validity. You could talk about a lot more than that. But to be fair I followed a similar pattern when I wrote my methodology essay and it wasn't looked upon badly by the marker There is no one specific way of writing the essay, so someone could have done something totally different and still gotten high marks - hope it goes well!

what happened to the avatar with the two stick people.

[mel0n]

^ I want it back but can't find it!

[Miracle Day]

What else was the aims of Rosenham? It said somewhere personality vs situation or something but what does that mean?

[Miracle Day]

(Original post by Sesshomaru24U)
x

Looking at the Examiners reports to work out what came up last year.

Aims and Procedures had to be Bennet-Levy - Fear of animals

Spoiler:

Show

Most candidates attempted this question and there was a clear range of responses. Higher end answers included relevant, accurate and detailed description of evidence which included pre-publication research evidence of evolutionary explanations for phobias and/or contrasting learning theory explanations of phobias. Weak answers tended to be vague summaries of evolution, without a clear link to phobias. Aims, as with previous examination sessions, were generally poorly described with many candidates relying on recycling the title of the article or describing procedural information. Pleasingly very few candidates included just discussion of context OR aims.

Procedures had to be - Rodenhan's procedures

Spoiler:

Show

This question was answered very well by most candidates. Successful candidates had included clear, accurate step-by-step descriptions of Rosenhan's procedure. They commented on the various devices included in Rosenhan's published article. Some 'house-styles', that were evident in answers of candidates from certain centres, were good at giving students a reasonably good mark but were perhaps limiting students in obtaining the top mark band as they did not include enough detail or were repetitious. Some candidates confused Rosenhan's research with Langer & Rodin and so did not receive credit, but even those candidates who achieved poorly in other questions were able to produce at least reasonable answers for this question.

Results and Conclusions had to be - Loftus and Palmer

Spoiler:

Show

This question was answered poorly by many candidates. (This may be due to the fact that it is a question that has been asked before and so those candidates who tried to predict the questions were ill-prepared for it.) Although an excellent mark could have been achieved with Loftus & Palmer's two experiments, many candidates made frequent errors in the estimated mph's or confused the order of adjectives. Conclusions offered for the two experiments also tended to be very similar and some of the conclusions that were offered were quite vague, e.g. "eyewitnesses are not accurate".

Evaluate - Gibson and Walk (this made me laugh because it's so true)

Spoiler:

Show

Most candidates attempted this question and wrote answers which attained good marks. Although most candidates are now using generic themes around which to structure their answers, weaker answers make little or no application to the actual research. Candidates with basic answers tended to offer a 'shopping-list' of criticisms with a few of the issues discussed in depth. Higher end answers utilise methodological themes such as reliability, validity, sampling and/or ethical issues etc, however they also clearly apply this knowledge to Gibson & Walk's research. They are also capable of writing a more considered and balanced discussion e.g. "One ethical issue may be protection of participants from psychological harm as some of the infants used in Gibson & Walk's research may have become distressed. But these are infants and they frequently cry, so is this really an ethical issue?"

Evaluate - Buss

Spoiler:

Show

This answer was generally not answered as well as question 4. Many candidates continue to claim that a 'strength' of Buss's research is that it contains over 10,000 participants or that a 'weakness' is that some of the sample groups contained over a thousand whereas another contained less than 100 without any real discussion of the 'representativeness' of the samples.
Higher end answers tend to include discussions of issues such as the reliability and validity issues of using a questionnaire to gather data about mate preference. Many candidates noted the fact that there were few ethical issues relating to this research, but few explained why this might be so. Some candidates discussed the 'practical applications' of the research, but unless it explicitly addresses some aspect of the methodology, this sort of discussion isn't really creditworthy.

Alternative Evidence - Asch

Spoiler:

Show

It was pleasing to see how many more candidates attempted this question. Most candidates 'recycled' context evidence as the basis of their discussion, which is a perfectly acceptable technique. It is a shame however that many candidates are still relying on just describing the alternative evidence for the bulk of their answer, rather than assessing what the evidence means in relation to Asch's research. Still, most candidates who attempted this question are achieving a basic to reasonable mark.

Stupid WJEC. If you're going to hide the past paper from us so we don't guess what might come up, don't write a stupid examinations report about it!

[Miracle Day]

Just thinking.. what are the chances that they'll reuse the same question twice in a year.. out of 10 case studies..

That could be like 6 less answers I have to revise.. like a day.. might be worth doing imo.

[Sesshomaru24U]

(Original post by Miracle Day)
Just thinking.. what are the chances that they'll reuse the same question twice in a year.. out of 10 case studies..

That could be like 6 less answers I have to revise.. like a day.. might be worth doing imo.

That's what I was thinking as well xD I'm going over all the past papers to see if they used any of the same ones, I'll tell you when i'm done.
Also, for the evaluation of the methodology; what else have we got xD

Edit: Long story short.... we need to learn everything....

[Miracle Day]

(Original post by Sesshomaru24U)
That's what I was thinking as well xD I'm going over all the past papers to see if they used any of the same ones, I'll tell you when i'm done.
Also, for the evaluation of the methodology; what else have we got xD

They haven't, except for once which was last January.. what's the chances it'll be done again?

Read Results and Relugations for Loftus and Palmer 3 posts up from this one .

[Sesshomaru24U]

(Original post by Miracle Day)
They haven't, except for once which was last January.. what's the chances it'll be done again?

Read Results and Relugations for Loftus and Palmer 3 posts up from this one .

LOL xD 'most candidates did bad because it came up last time... long story short, they failed'
I'm going to revise it all. I would rather not take the risk to be honest.

[Miracle Day]

(Original post by Sesshomaru24U)
LOL xD 'most candidates did bad because it came up last time... long story short, they failed'
I'm going to revise it all. I would rather not take the risk to be honest.

Yeah I'm starting to feel the same.

Also, the average grade in PY1 and PY2 is a D hahaha