[Lollyage]

Is anyone else finding this module IMPOSSIBLE? 54 studies/topics, having to remember 10 marks worth for each, the 15 mark evaluation which is structured unlike anything we've ever done before, the countless debates and issues which we have to know how to apply to every single study... OCR basically have done everything possible to make us fail this module, and I need 82/100 to get an A overall in psychology (although I am retaking G544 as I got a high B) so right now, this is basically the bane of my life. Anyone feeling the same?

Also please share any revision tips! Personally I'm just trying to make sure I have detailed notes on every study and topic, which I should have finished doing by the end of this weekend. No idea where to even begin for part b though .. Help?

[Lollyage]

Anyone? C'mon guys!

[Lollyage]

K one last shot.. Bump?

[JessChappers01]

(Original post by Lollyage)
Anyone? C'mon guys!

Hey omg i feel exactly the same its soo hard! how can they expect soo much of us!! one of my teachers keeps saying we need to talk about issues such as determinism and things yet anouther teacher has just told us to talk about reliability validity and things like that whats your teacher said?
& we dont use the text book because my teachers said its rubbish :/ do you know anywhere online to get good notes for B questions?

[helloholls]

At he beginning of the year of I seriously thinking I was gonna fail but i think its getting better xD I dont know about your teachers but in my class we double-up on a lot of studies so now i only have like 40 to learn, which is a bit better But I'm not liking the 'tops' you have to do before the study. They seem to be a bit annoying. Also, there have been some WEIRD B questions in the past. Had a look the other day, and there was the 'appropriateness' of approaches used in something. Sucked xD

[amyamyamyxxx]

(Original post by Lollyage)
Is anyone else finding this module IMPOSSIBLE? 54 studies/topics, having to remember 10 marks worth for each, the 15 mark evaluation which is structured unlike anything we've ever done before, the countless debates and issues which we have to know how to apply to every single study... OCR basically have done everything possible to make us fail this module, and I need 82/100 to get an A overall in psychology (although I am retaking G544 as I got a high B) so right now, this is basically the bane of my life. Anyone feeling the same?

Also please share any revision tips! Personally I'm just trying to make sure I have detailed notes on every study and topic, which I should have finished doing by the end of this weekend. No idea where to even begin for part b though .. Help?

im pretty stressed about this exam too haha!! i have more than 54 studies to learn we have like 70 which sucks even more! although i do only need 30/100 to get an A ... i dont really have revision tips as there is so much to learn! im just working through booklet at a time and testing myself on them as i go :/ part B Qs you cant do much revision as long as you know basic evaluation issues and can tell when to use methodological issues or theoretical then you should be fine <3

[sasha165]

this is my first A2 exam in June :/
all i've been doing is part a essays fro each study and then evaluating for and against for each study for part b

[Liindsayanne]

Only part i'm struggling with is remembering the details and timing on section B questions, no way i can fit it all in in 20 minutes takes me 30-35 every time i attempt one, getting me really annoyed thinking i'm going to run out of time

but whatever the section b says think of any issues/debates that link to it and mention anything you can. my teacher suggested around 3 issues and 1 debate per question but thats whats taking so long when i write them!

[seventwoseven]

Has anybody's teachers predicted what's going to come up for forensic or health?
Often on here I've gone by people's teachers predictions and it's really helped
(I self-teach with books etc so this would be reeeeally useful!)

[Mizz_S]

@seventwoseven .. there is no prediction with the G543 paper at all unfortunately. They can literally ask you anything!

some of you are mentioning difficulty in answering the part b's, which are a total life wrecker!!! but I've found that if I evaluate the study as I go, i find it very useful (I mean whilst revising them individually)

here's a basic guideline:

10 marker

*whats the question asking? say it is asking about Health Belief Models then name the 3 models.
*then go on to talk about the study itself (usually asks to describe one piece of research - make sure you talk about results!!!). if its asking in general such as 'describe the models in to health belief' then talk about the models such as the different components to HBM/Locus of Control/Self-Efficacy

15 marker

*intro to talk about the key word (e.g. effectiveness [what is it?])
*3 PERCy paragraphs demonstrating strengths and weeaknesses or evaluative points
P=point ... E=explanation ... R=research ... C=critique [follow this structure to have a coordinated structure]
*finally end with a conclusion summarising your views etc ...



for evaluation purposes ... this is the 'system I use currently. GRAVER =
Generalisability,
Reliability,
Appliability/usefulness,
Validity,
Ethics,
Research Method
(GRAVER is the acronym)

then the other one I use is STANDERS =
Situational vs Dispositional
Type of data (qualitative/quantitative)
Approach
Nature vs Nurture
Determinism vs Free Will
Ethnocentric bias
Reductionism vs Holism
Scientific?

Just to note, I am going to be sitting this exam in June for the first time as well

Let me know if it was useful

[NikkiB12]

Have such a terrible teacher for this subject! absolutely no help with exam practice etc!! so dreading this exam!
any suggestions as to what to include or how to set the essays out?

[Vibb]

Hi, does anybody know what Bruce's study is about it comes under Forensic Psychology, Making a case : interviewing witnesses?

[haggle2]

(Original post by Mizz_S)
15 marker

*intro to talk about the key word (e.g. effectiveness [what is it?])
*3 PERCy paragraphs demonstrating strengths and weeaknesses or evaluative points
P=point ... E=explanation ... R=research ... C=critique [follow this structure to have a coordinated structure]
*finally end with a conclusion summarising your views etc ...



for evaluation purposes ... this is the 'system I use currently. GRAVER =
Generalisability,
Reliability,
Appliability/usefulness,
Validity,
Ethics,
Research Method
(GRAVER is the acronym)

then the other one I use is STANDERS =
Situational vs Dispositional
Type of data (qualitative/quantitative)
Approach
Nature vs Nurture
Determinism vs Free Will
Ethnocentric bias
Reductionism vs Holism
Scientific?

Just to note, I am going to be sitting this exam in June for the first time as well

Let me know if it was useful

Looks like a good guide, one problem I've had though:

I got a question just asking me to evaluate the reliability of the interviewing witnesses section. The problem is that Bruce and Loftus are both very reliable, but Fisher is not! How am I supposed to evaluate them as a whole if they're completely different?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[seventwoseven]

(Original post by haggle2)
Looks like a good guide, one problem I've had though:

I got a question just asking me to evaluate the reliability of the interviewing witnesses section. The problem is that Bruce and Loftus are both very reliable, but Fisher is not! How am I supposed to evaluate them as a whole if they're completely different?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Compare and contrast them?
Evaluate the two good ones, then compare them to the bad one and say why it was an issue. I'd see that in a way as being BETTER because then you can say that even though there's reliable studies, there's also Fisher's, and then you can point out the issues with Fisher's and then conclude.

I don't actually know the studies you're talking about though so that might be useless advice :P

[jessplease]

Im finding it hard to remember percentages for the studies, do you think if i dont remember then because i know the results i can just use words to describe rather than percentages?
For example:
Ford and widiger found that psychologists were more likely to diagnose Women with HPD and Men with Antisocial personality disorder
OR
Ford and widiger found that women were diagnosed with HPD 46% of time whereas men only 12% of time

If i describe in detail the results without the percentage would that be enough?

[Lollyage]

Sorry I kinda abandoned this thread, psych revision ruining my life and all

I've found making mind maps really useful, a mind map for each of the sub-topics e.g. upbringing, cognition and biology in turning to crime and putting all the key facts on it.
For section B, even though someone else has already given better advice, try to do PEEC for every paragraph (point, example, evaluation, counter-argument).

I hate the counter-argument part, what's the point in basically contradicting what you've just said? Stupid OCR

[Lollyage]

(Original post by jessplease)
Im finding it hard to remember percentages for the studies, do you think if i dont remember then because i know the results i can just use words to describe rather than percentages?
For example:
Ford and widiger found that psychologists were more likely to diagnose Women with HPD and Men with Antisocial personality disorder
OR
Ford and widiger found that women were diagnosed with HPD 46% of time whereas men only 12% of time

If i describe in detail the results without the percentage would that be enough?

I'm told that as long as you know the study well and understand it, there's no need to agonise over minor details like exact numbers and percentages. It is of course a good idea to try and remember as many as you can though, maybe make cue cards with numbers on one side and the study they correspond with on the other so you can test yourself?

[Lollyage]

(Original post by haggle2)
Looks like a good guide, one problem I've had though:

I got a question just asking me to evaluate the reliability of the interviewing witnesses section. The problem is that Bruce and Loftus are both very reliable, but Fisher is not! How am I supposed to evaluate them as a whole if they're completely different?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Fisher's work is reliable in the sense that the cognitive interview has clear, standardised procedures which allow replication.
But to answer your question, generally for a question like that I'd do 2 paragraphs on why research is reliable and one on why it isn't, so you're fine with arguing that Fisher's study lacks reliability due to self report or something.

[amyamyamyxxx]

(Original post by jessplease)
Im finding it hard to remember percentages for the studies, do you think if i dont remember then because i know the results i can just use words to describe rather than percentages?
For example:
Ford and widiger found that psychologists were more likely to diagnose Women with HPD and Men with Antisocial personality disorder
OR
Ford and widiger found that women were diagnosed with HPD 46% of time whereas men only 12% of time

If i describe in detail the results without the percentage would that be enough?

my teacher said you wont loose any marks at all as long as what youve wrote is accurate and you have the general results then all is fine!

[amyamyamyxxx]

quite a lot of you seem to be worried over section B questions!... we use this structure
Point
Example (study)
Conclusion
CA/EX- counter argument or extended point (link to another issue)
C- overall conclusion

(x2)

on all my mocks ive been getting 15/15 on my answers ... this model works well! ... in section B Q's you dont necessarily have to refer to all three pieces of evidence in the section, 2 is fine!! ... you need to include at least 5 issues to get full marks in a 15 mark B question - hope this helps!!!