The Student Room Group

AS Psychology AQA PSYA1/2 Revision Thread 2015!

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Marli-Ruth
I stupidly forgot to mention about the critical period!!!!������������������������������
mentioned everything else though!
Could I still get 12/12

yep description has needs only around 5 points for six marker, you would have to do roughly 2/3 pages of evaluation though - eg 2/3 different points is what i did (schafer and emerson + harlows monkeys)_
Original post by imrhuss
LOOL


What's so funny???? Was my point wrong then 😳😳😳😳
can they mark you down for being messy? I started to draw a diagram of the MSM but drew it too big so scribbled it out. would they mark me down for that?
Original post by TrojanH
yep description has needs only around 5 points for six marker, you would have to do roughly 2/3 pages of evaluation though - eg 2/3 different points is what i did (schafer and emerson + harlows monkeys)_

I did Lorenz and Harlows :frown:
Then evaluated the down sides of why we can't generalise to humans blah blah blah
But then I ran out of time!
Wrote quite a bit on evaluation!
Is that okay? Still 12/12?
Can someone show me what an appropriate diagram for MSMM is lol cause I drew a diagram and then added a few sentences after
Original post by Marli-Ruth
Can someone show me what an appropriate diagram for MSMM is lol cause I drew a diagram and then added a few sentences after


YOU CAN DRAW A DIAGRAM?????????????????? :eek:
Original post by billymccreith
Strength; highly standardised procedure, so easily replicable!

It asked why it would be useful for investigating attachment.

Demand characteristics; mothers work out what the aim of the experiment is (i.e. determining characteristics of attachment type) but they change their behaviour accordingly i.e. more attentive to the child.


I said that the strength of it was that it tells us about the three types of attachment? :frown: I got confused with the question, would that still get me some marks?
Original post by Marli-Ruth
I did Lorenz and Harlows :frown:
Then evaluated the down sides of why we can't generalise to humans blah blah blah
But then I ran out of time!
Wrote quite a bit on evaluation!
Is that okay? Still 12/12?


I also supported Lorenz but it depends really... did you use enough terminology? That's the one thing I hate about the subject - the strange and unneccessary terminology to describe simple things, guess it keeps psychologists in their 'special clubs' :biggrin:
Most people on here write 3/4 thorough evaluation points, just refer to any AO2 evaluation mark scheme for reference and if you believe your essay meets the criteria then judge for yourself. They either mark quality / quantity... and pretty much everything in between.
Original post by Marli-Ruth
Can someone show me what an appropriate diagram for MSMM is lol cause I drew a diagram and then added a few sentences after


This should be sufficient?
http://i.imgur.com/FX4QWQa.png
Original post by Marli-Ruth
Can someone show me what an appropriate diagram for MSMM is lol cause I drew a diagram and then added a few sentences after


I think this is right.
(Don't underestimate the power of paint)
Multi-store model.png11.8KB
6 marker on ethics in SS what did u guys say?
Original post by TrojanH
I also supported Lorenz but it depends really... did you use enough terminology? That's the one thing I hate about the subject - the strange and unneccessary terminology to describe simple things, guess it keeps psychologists in their 'special clubs' :biggrin:
Most people on here write 3/4 thorough evaluation points, just refer to any AO2 evaluation mark scheme for reference and if you believe your essay meets the criteria then judge for yourself. They either mark quality / quantity... and pretty much everything in between.


I tried too lol :frown:
Such as innate, imprinting, etc
Original post by Layleexx
I think this is right.
(Don't underestimate the power of paint)


Ok good!
Mine was a lot more detailed lol but along those lines! :smile:
Like I included encoding capacity duration etc x
Original post by TrojanH
This should be sufficient?
http://i.imgur.com/FX4QWQa.png


Mine was exactly like that more or less!
I had stimulus from environment before sensory memory but that's the only difference!
Original post by Onion Ring
YOU CAN DRAW A DIAGRAM?????????????????? :eek:


LOOOOL yeah 😁😁 :biggrin:
Original post by Marli-Ruth
Ok good!
Mine was a lot more detailed lol but along those lines! :smile:
Like I included encoding capacity duration etc x


Yeah I pretty much did the same. I drew that diagram then described how it's a linear diagram, and how each separate store has different characteristics (encoding and all that). Should be okay. :smile:
For the question on anxiety I wrote about Deffenbacher's meta analysis. Is this wrong?

Also for the question on the strengths of the strange situation I wrote about how a lot if research has found consistent results in that they have all found secure attachment to be the most common. Is this also wrong?
Original post by ALevels101
For the question on anxiety I wrote about Deffenbacher's meta analysis. Is this wrong?

Also for the question on the strengths of the strange situation I wrote about how a lot if research has found consistent results in that they have all found secure attachment to be the most common. Is this also wrong?


No that's correct! Not too sure about the SS one though! Sounds okay though!
I wrote it was done in lab settings so high control of EV so can try to infer cause and effect. Also can replicate to test for reliability due to the fact it's done in a lab and so has standardised instructions!
Not sure what I've written is 100% correct though!
Original post by Kiranjott
Yea? I said that it has interrater reliability because similar results are found. When takashi did the same study(using the strange situation) he got similar results to ainsworth


That would be CONCURRENT VALIDITY. Inter-rater reliability refers to different observers within ONE study, having high levels of agreement between each other.
Original post by ALevels101
For the question on anxiety I wrote about Deffenbacher's meta analysis. Is this wrong?

Also for the question on the strengths of the strange situation I wrote about how a lot if research has found consistent results in that they have all found secure attachment to be the most common. Is this also wrong?


The culture thing is right :-)

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you