The Student Room Group

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

Scroll to see replies

Original post by --K
Validity, Self-reports, laboratory Experiment etc..


Oh I see, well last year it was observation, so I doubt it will be that this year. And the year before that was about Quantitative/Qualitative data so try going over experiments and self reports. But PLEASE go over everything because you never know! OCR can be harsh...
Original post by Lyrical Prodigy
I don't know how OCR expects us to know every detail of each study??!! They could ask us anything! The exam is so spontaneous... If Savage-Rumbaugh, Dement and Kleitman and Sperry come up together in Section B I'll literally cry...

Ill cry with you if I dont see Baron and physiological
Original post by --K
Ahh I Got that one :frown: But Thankyou anyway, Espeically for the evaluation, Yours is far moree better :redface: Do you have any predictions of what issue might come in section b? :smile:

I have noooooooooooo idea. it would be really great if milgram was in section b though as its really easy to evaluate as the sample was fully male and there were lots of ethical concerns
Reply 1123
Original post by Lyrical Prodigy
Oh I see, well last year it was observation, so I doubt it will be that this year. And the year before that was about Quantitative/Qualitative data so try going over experiments and self reports. But PLEASE go over everything because you never know! OCR can be harsh...

Thanks For The Advice :biggrin: Validity, Ecological V & Self reports have not appeared yet, so I'm thinking It's going to be one of them ...
Anyone have any good information for the Behaviorist perspective? :frown:
Original post by random1234567
Can you give some examples :colondollar: haha


Strengths of Validity in Baron-Cohen:

The main strength of this experiment is the control of variables. Variables were controlled such as intelligence, sex and developmental disorders. The researchers were able to ensure that the differences between the scores of the three groups of participants were something to do with being autistic.
Furthermore the experiment was standardised in the way that every participant was tested in the same way. The use of standardised procedures in the way the photographs were presented ensured that the researchers could claim with some certainty that the independent variable which is the characteristics of autism was causing the dependent variable that is performance on the Eye Task.

(Because most of the procedures were standardised, it will be easily replicable (reliability) so that researchers can conduct the study again in the future, The high control of variables allow for the data to be high in validity i.e- this means the aim of the research will be answered to more of an extent)

Weaknesses of Validity in Baron- Cohen:

The validity of the Eyes Task can be questioned. That is, is the Eye Task may not be actually measuring theory of mind. However, the researchers defend the validity in a number of ways. First, the target words are actual mental state terms. Secondly, these are not just emotion terms, but include terms describing cognitive mental states. This is therefore more than just an emotion perception test. Thirdly, the pattern of results from the Eyes Task mirrored the pattern of performance on the Happ? Strange Stories task - an existing advanced theory of mind task. Finally, the deficit on the Eyes Task was not mirrored on the two control tasks, suggesting that the poor performance by participants with autism or Asperger syndrome was not due to the stimuli being eyes, or to a deficit in extracting social information from minimal cues, or to a subtle perceptual deficit, or to basic emotion recognition. The researchers also noted that some of the participants with autism or Asperger syndrome had university degrees, yet scored poorly on the Eyes Task suggesting s this aspect of social cognition is independent of general intelligence.

(Lol, i'm afraid you might have to know that much detail, you know... just in case)
Really worried about this exam :'( I just have no motivation I don't know why every time I pick up all my notes I just end up turning on the laptop or tv argh :'( this Is the last night before the exam and I've pretty much left it to the last minute and I barely know any of the major details for all the studies I've made notes on every single study and all the approaches/perspectives but it's my last exam and I've just lost all motivation:frown: can anyone give me some tips on how to learn all these pages and pages of study notes...? :') I'd be really grateful if someone helps me out with this <3
Reply 1127
Can anybody give me a similarity and difference for the Individual Differences approach? Cheers.
Reply 1128
Original post by Simran Mars Foster
Could you give me some pointers on what you write for question c on section C please!
theres also riecher and haslam
Original post by Simran Mars Foster
Anyone have any good information for the Behaviorist perspective? :frown:


Yeah, I just typed this out from an information sheet my teacher gave to me

Behaviourist perspective:

The behaviourist perspective was a dominant approach in psychology for the first half of the 20th century and has left psychology with some useful techniques.


The main assumption of the behaviourist perspective is that all behaviour is learned and shaped by the environment. For example in the Bandura et al. study it is demonstrated how aggression is learned and shaped by role models.
The behaviourist perspective also argues that in order for psychology to be scientific it should focus on observable behaviour which can be objectively measured rather than on things like cognitive processes which can only be inferred.

A main strength of the behaviourist perspective has been the development of useful applications. Behaviourism offers very practical ways of changing behaviour from for example therapies through to advertising. However at the same time this does raise an ethical issue as if the behaviourist perspective is able to control behaviour who decides which behaviour should be controlled or changed. A further important contribution of the behaviourist perspective has been the emphasis on objective and scientific ways of studying behaviour. However, this does raise the issues of generalisation as it is difficult to generalise finding from laboratory studies and especially so when generalising from non human animals to humans

Perhaps the main problem with the behaviourist approach occurs because by not focusing on cognitive processes it is only giving a partial explanation of human experience. However the influence of the behaviourist perspective can be seen in more modern perspectives such as the cognitive behavioural approach which still takes a behaviourist approach but recognises the role of cognition. Bandura's research can be seen as taking a cognitive behavioural approach.

A further problem with the behavioural perspective is that many of the practical uses of the approach such as aversion therapy and token economy systems when used as a way of changing behaviour do tend to be short lived. That is, they do change behaviour but often only for a limited time.

A study that takes the approach on the behaviourist perspective is Bandura Ross and Ross.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Skyscraper15
Um perhaps Samuel and Bryant, Reicher and Haslam and Maguire? :biggrin:

evaluating Maguire: issue-sample. improvement: include women in sample who are matched to the age of the male participants (matched groups design). and also taxi drivers from other countries eg India. Implications- more representative and generalizable BUT time consuming and more costly.

evaluating Samuel and Bryant: issue-ecological validity as it was lab exp. improvement: should take place in a primary school as a field experiment where children could do the conservation task as part of their lessons and observed by discrete researchers. implications: better EV, fewer demand characteristics BUT time consuming and would be an unrepresentative sample. (that's you sorted for section b evaluation for those studies but for section a its probs most important to learn some results of all the studies eg 2850 words acquired by Kanzi in savage rumbaugh, and 14% of participants in Griffiths used heuristics, and taxi drivers were found to have a larger posterior hippocampi than non-taxi drivers). (ps hope that helped, my brain is sizzled now haahah)

Reply 1131
Original post by Lyrical Prodigy
Strengths of Validity in Baron-Cohen:

The main strength of this experiment is the control of variables. Variables were controlled such as intelligence, sex and developmental disorders. The researchers were able to ensure that the differences between the scores of the three groups of participants were something to do with being autistic.
Furthermore the experiment was standardised in the way that every participant was tested in the same way. The use of standardised procedures in the way the photographs were presented ensured that the researchers could claim with some certainty that the independent variable which is the characteristics of autism was causing the dependent variable that is performance on the Eye Task.

(Because most of the procedures were standardised, it will be easily replicable (reliability) so that researchers can conduct the study again in the future, The high control of variables allow for the data to be high in validity i.e- this means the aim of the research will be answered to more of an extent)

Weaknesses of Validity in Baron- Cohen:

The validity of the Eyes Task can be questioned. That is, is the Eye Task may not be actually measuring theory of mind. However, the researchers defend the validity in a number of ways. First, the target words are actual mental state terms. Secondly, these are not just emotion terms, but include terms describing cognitive mental states. This is therefore more than just an emotion perception test. Thirdly, the pattern of results from the Eyes Task mirrored the pattern of performance on the Happ? Strange Stories task - an existing advanced theory of mind task. Finally, the deficit on the Eyes Task was not mirrored on the two control tasks, suggesting that the poor performance by participants with autism or Asperger syndrome was not due to the stimuli being eyes, or to a deficit in extracting social information from minimal cues, or to a subtle perceptual deficit, or to basic emotion recognition. The researchers also noted that some of the participants with autism or Asperger syndrome had university degrees, yet scored poorly on the Eyes Task suggesting s this aspect of social cognition is independent of general intelligence.

(Lol, i'm afraid you might have to know that much detail, you know... just in case)


WOW That's like perfect! :redface:
Original post by random1234567
Ill cry with you if I dont see Baron and physiological


Haha, I can just see myself in that exam hall... Lying on the floor...crying... Like someone's just died.

But yeah, this exam is seriously testing my memory.
Reply 1133
Thanks, gosh didn't think there were that many studies :/ do you have the assumptions, similarities and differences also the strengths and weaknesses cause i've lost my notes and i'm panicking :frown: I feel unmotivated to revise this perspective now :frown:


Posted from TSR Mobile
What are similarities nd differences between studies that take the Behaviorist approach?
Original post by DomQuinn
Can anybody give me a similarity and difference for the Individual Differences approach? Cheers.

difference: samples used- thigpen and cleckley have one participant (eve) whereas Griffiths had 60 subjects (44 male and 16 female, mean age 23.4 years)
similarity: both rosenhan and Griffiths make use of field experiments. (rosenhan took place in USA hospitals and Griffiths in a real gambling setting on real fruit machines).
Reply 1136
really urgent pleaaseeee! for the cognitive and social approach core studies, which of them involve self report and could someone explain how they use it please ? (also if other studies from other approach use self report too ) Thank you in advance! :smile:
Original post by --K
Thanks For The Advice :biggrin: Validity, Ecological V & Self reports have not appeared yet, so I'm thinking It's going to be one of them ...


No probs! :borat:I don't know about anybody else but... Gosh if ecological validity comes up I would be so happy!! There's tons you can say about it! Each and every study has something to say about E.V, so pray for that one, it'll be good. :tongue:
Everyone seems so confident about Physiological, I don't understand what you'd write for a 12 mark on physiological like strengths/weaknesses and what studies?
[INDENT]What are similarities and differences between studies that take the Behaviorist approach? [/INDENT]

Quick Reply

Latest