This exam was a godsend! Such good questions! I also managed to predict all but one of the 4 questions correctly, meaning all the ones I'd revised most came up! (I just looked at the previous questions from papers and seen which was most likely to be asked).
I studied Intelligence/Forensic/Abnormal. Amazingly, I'd ONLY revised for the aetiologies of depression question (BIG risk) and it came up!
In my Intelligence answer, I wrote about prenatal factors of the development of Intelligence (including maternal smoking, drinking and taking of drugs), the postnatal factors (diet/breastfeeding) and then the effect of education and culture.
For my Forensic answer on EWT, I wrote about 4 factors: leading questions, cognitive interview, facial recognition and weapon focus. This was by far my best answer!
For Abnormal, I looked at the Monoamine Hypothesis, Learned Helplessness and Cognitive Vulnerability.
What did everyone else write about for these questions?
On another note, unfortunately, my teacher believes that the grade boundaries will increase 'substantially', based on the fact that the boundaries increased so much for PY3 this year despite average marks remaining the same - (there has been a cock up with the fairness of the exam in comparison to other exam boards and so they are having to equalise them). I hope not though!!
Also, a load of my friends were actually encouraged by their teachers to make up the names of researchers if they couldn't remember them! This is because the examiner will not have the time to research/look for evidence that they even exist, and so positively marks! I didn't do this, because I thought it was a risky tactic - especially if one student describes the research, accurately giving the name, and the same piece of research is described by someone else who gives a ficticious name! After all, exams are marked by the same examiner, by center!