Help thread for undergrad psych students

This is a really good idea.

I was wondering if anyone has any advice on preparing for essays in exams? I have the module outlines which seem to say what topics the essays could be on but I'm not sure how many studies should I try and use? They're a 45 minute essay worth 100% of my first year mark. It's different doing coursework when you have the question in front of you and can then research it but in an exam are they more leniant? Also does anyone know any good websites or books for undergrad psychology students on writing essays and how to study? Or anywhere with example essays which got a first?

Thank you.

Hey

I can't really give you revision tips because we all have our own learning styles. However, I find the best way to revise is to do lots of practice questions; normally questions will ask you to critically discuss a topic which means present both sides of the argument and draw a conclusion. For instance, if you were studying aggression in psychobiology a potential question could be 'critically discuss the extent to which aggression is influenced by nature'.

I have always received high 2:1's and firsts in essay exams if you need example answers

Well, there is the FAQ: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1200984

But I've done psychology as both an undergrad (graduated with a 1st) and as a postgrad so if anyone has any questions let me know.

Hi, thank you so much that was really helpful. I would love to see some example answers, I've tried looking online for some to no avail so if you didn't mind sharing some for me to look at I would really appreciate it. Thank you.

First off, congrats on your first that is an amazing achievement. I was wondering what your general study schedule was after lectures? How much further reading did you tend to do and for exam-based essays how many studies did you tend to use and what did your exam prep consist of?

Sorry for all the questions.

What topics are you being examined on?

Thanks!

After lectures I tried to just write up my lecture notes more neatly, but nothing much more than that. I did tend to do a lot of further reading, both stuff that was on the reading list and also beyond, so I had a Word document for each lecture with all of my further reading.

Exam-based essays were probably my weakness (poor memory) but it does depend on the question being asked. If it was more theoretical, then I'd try and pop in a reference every other sentence. If it was more about critiquing methods, then I'd go into more depth re: the methods of a couple of papers and perhaps only have 8 - 10 references in an essay.

Exam prep was me trying to make sense of all of my reading, haha. I'd try and get to the point where I'd have a sentence or two about each study (as showing further reading by introducing even a single novel reference apparently impresses the examiners). If I'm honest, I hated exams and prepping for them but by my final year, I had gotten to the point where the lecture was very much just a basic intro to a concept, and most of what I wrote about in exams was my own stuff (aside from in modules or lectures were lecturers emphasised that they 'expected' certain things to be said, in which case I just did as I was told).

Hope that helps a bit.

Developmental, neuroscience, forensic psychology, educational psychology, consumer psychology, sports psychology


Thank you, that was really helpful.
How much time do you reckon you spent outside of lectures going over things on average?

Thanks!

After lectures I tried to just write up my lecture notes more neatly, but nothing much more than that. I did tend to do a lot of further reading, both stuff that was on the reading list and also beyond, so I had a Word document for each lecture with all of my further reading.

Exam-based essays were probably my weakness (poor memory) but it does depend on the question being asked. If it was more theoretical, then I'd try and pop in a reference every other sentence. If it was more about critiquing methods, then I'd go into more depth re: the methods of a couple of papers and perhaps only have 8 - 10 references in an essay.

Exam prep was me trying to make sense of all of my reading, haha. I'd try and get to the point where I'd have a sentence or two about each study (as showing further reading by introducing even a single novel reference apparently impresses the examiners). If I'm honest, I hated exams and prepping for them but by my final year, I had gotten to the point where the lecture was very much just a basic intro to a concept, and most of what I wrote about in exams was my own stuff (aside from in modules or lectures were lecturers emphasised that they 'expected' certain things to be said, in which case I just did as I was told).

Hope that helps a bit.

would you be able to give some tips on how to answer a 'critically discuss research' question please?

Someone recently PM'ed me a similar question so I'll copy and paste my answer here:

It does depend a lot on the sort of paper you're reading, i.e. whether it's more of a neuroscience paper or something in social psych, for example. But there are lots of things you can look at- the methodology (does it address the question the authors have asked in the intro? Is it flawed in any way- are there any major confounds, do they lack controls, is it the most appropriate method to use considering the theory, is it novel or different in any way to previous paradigms?), the theory (are the authors aware of the surrounding literature? Do they interpret the literature appropriately? Do their findings reveal anything about the underlying theory, do they extend the theory in any way?) and even just the way it's written. With regards to the last point, it's worth bearing in mind that all papers have to go through a review process to get published in a journal so the more papers you read, the more you'll spot things such as an additional experiment seeming a bit out of place (probably because a reviewer asked them to add it at short notice) or hasty caveats that sound as though a reviewer has asked them a difficult question that they struggled to answer...

It is tough when you're a first year because every paper (and every journal) is different. I wouldn't say I have a particular strategy as such, but by this point it's more second nature to me, whilst at first it's tricky to pick up on when something isn't quite right. If I were you, I'd focus on the basics:
- Have they answered the question they set out to answer?
- Are the methods appropriate? Are there any major confounds?
- Have their findings extended the field in any way? Is this paper important? Does it fit into the literature?

I guess that's the major stuff. I hope that helps a bit!

Thankyou! I'm a final year and have never had a 'critically discuss research' essay question before!!

would you be able to give some tips on how to answer a 'critically discuss research' question please?

Whereabouts do you study? Is it a straight psych degree?