Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>

OCR AS Psychology: G542: Core Studies - Wednesday 5th June 2013

Scroll to see replies

Thank you sooo much again for the advice and I'll make sure I study at the beginning since I leave stuff last minute every time and it's really starting to bug me as I know I could do better so ill work hard and hopefully that will pay off if I revise little everyday haha :biggrin:

Well, you can see just how hard I'm revising right now

I'm sure it will all work out in the end with your course, though. Best of luck!

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 821

qs2xo

Original post by clonedmemories

I will be, yes! How about you?

omg yes i am! revising for core studies and options is just too much!
what subtopics are you revising? im only revising stress, disorders, turning to crime and after a guilty verdict

Reply 822

clonedmemories

Original post by qs2xo

omg yes i am! revising for core studies and options is just too much!
what subtopics are you revising? im only revising stress, disorders, turning to crime and after a guilty verdict

I'm not actually revising core studies at the moment (I retook in January for exactly that reason despite my school telling me not to!). I'm just lurking this thread in an epic burst of procrastination!

I'm not too sure. I'm more thinking I'll revise the chapters I like, because, for example, I love health promotion but despise theories of health belief. The same with something like witness appeal, which I love, and reaching a verdict, which I can't get my head around. (I generally hate jury studies - they're all too similar!) I'll just hope the exam's nice and brings up the bits I like! I really like the first two sections of stress (well, when we have two studies that we do twice, what's not to like!?), but hate treatments.

Reply 823

wolalala

if baron cohen comes up, what can be the possible 6marks or 8marks? Thanks in advance

Reply 824

wolalala

Original post by clonedmemories

EV might be a good one. They wouldn't use Maguire for that, but the other three would fit.

Self-report wouldn't work, however, the experimental method would. This would link to the quantitative data thing as well.

Validity might not be a bad one to look at either, and of course EV falls into this as well as a lot of other stuff! Particularly for Maguire and Baron-Cohen which were both high in validity particularly (despite Baron-Cohen being low in EV!)

ohh okay Thank you so much , do you know which studies used self report?

Reply 825

wolalala

does anyone have the improvements, implications and results for Sperry, Reicher and Haslam and Baron-Cohen please? Thanks in advance!

Reply 826

clonedmemories

Original post by wolalala

ohh okay Thank you so much , do you know which studies used self report?

For self-report, there are surprisingly few studies at AS as I've discovered! Dement and Kleitman is the best one, or at least, the one I like to use. Otherwise, you could argue Rosenhan from the perspective of the pseudopatients reporting their experiences. Freud could also come into this with Hans recounting his dreams, but the use of leading questions here makes it a little bit of a dodgy one to use at best.

Reply 827

>Username<

Is anyone else drained from Psychology? I just want it to be over. There's too much content and its dragging on...

I'm also extremely worried. Section A is my worst section! I don't even know every study. :frown:

Reply 828

jodie.irwin27

Original post by clonedmemories

studies that used self-report:

loftus and palmer (questionnaire)
freud (interview)
Dement & Kleitman (questionnaire/interview)
Thigpen and Cleckley (interview)
Griffiths (questionnaire)

:smile:

Reply 829

sophiarodrigues

improvements for reicher and haslam, sperry, baron cohen, and loftus and palmer?

Reply 830

Billie Jean

Heyy guys I'm soo stuck on the results for Freud could anyone possibly outline all the results for me because I'm sure I'm missing a few off from the preoccupations, fears, phobias, dreams and fantasies! ;( thank you soooo much because I'm just afraid they might ask on the section A bit something about the results :/

Reply 831

lankan-gurl

Does anyone know if we will be asked a question based on the background of a core study? Has a question ever came up on a past paper before?

Reply 832

clonedmemories

Original post by lankan-gurl

Does anyone know if we will be asked a question based on the background of a core study? Has a question ever came up on a past paper before?

I think it is possible and that it has come up once on a part B. It was only a 2 mark question, however!

Reply 833

lankan-gurl

Original post by clonedmemories

I think it is possible and that it has come up once on a part B. It was only a 2 mark question, however!

Do you think it is worth revising for though because it did only ever come up once and that was in January 2009 and it never came up after that?

Also by any chance do you know what generalisation is I kinda know but I can't really define it.

Reply 834

clonedmemories

Original post by lankan-gurl

I would say to learn it if you can, but that there are more important things to be learning - better to learn the facts of the studies more than anything! The only two I would think they might ask you on the background of are Reicher and Haslam with the SPE and Samuel and Bryant with Piaget.

Generalisation means, essentially, to what extent can the results be applied to a population. This is generally to do with the people in the sample and can involve age, gender, location, educational background, as well as the general size of the sample and other factors that may be specific to studies, such as Maguire and right-handedness. Studies can be good in some areas of generalisation and bad in others: Samuel and Bryant had a large sample size, a mix of genders and a spread of ages across the stages they were looking at. However, all the children were from the same area and had received very similar education. I hope this helps!

Reply 835

jodie.irwin27

Original post by sophiarodrigues

improvements for reicher and haslam, sperry, baron cohen, and loftus and palmer?

Improvements for Baron Cohen:
1. show participants film clips (including full body shots of people, and context to the situation) instead of the eyes task. This would increase the ecological validity as in real life situations where people use TOM, other factors such as body language and context to a situation are used to help.
2. increase the sample size to at least 50 participants in each group, with an equal amount of males and females. more valid and generalisable (especially to females), however, may be difficult to find 50 people who have autism/tourette syndrome

improvements for Loftus and Palmer:
1. produce a staged car crash using dummies and let participants watch in real life instead of watching videos. increased ecological validity as factors which weren't included in watching a video of a car crash are involved (for example when you witness a real car crash, trauma can take place which could affect your memory of the event). however, ethical issues as participants may suffer from psychological harm. also demand characteristics
2. Increase the sample size by using various different ages of participants, not just students. increased validity and generalisability as students are said to have a better memory due to memorizing details