The Student Room Group

AS Psychology AQA PSYA1/2 Revision Thread 2015!

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Shay0812
how much detail did you have to give when describing the MSM did you have to mention all of the studies behind encoding, duration and capacity e.g. baddeley, peterson and peterson? bc I felt like that was a lot of detail for just 6 marks. roughly what kind of things did you have to mention for 6 marks?


I just spoke about the three stores, how information moves between them, and then how each one encodes, the capacity and the duration. I also mentioned the rehearsal loop and drew a diagram of the model.
Original post by emmacls12
IA-willing to explore, don't react when mother leaves, low stranger anxiety and avoid contact on her return
IR- unwilling to explore, very distressed on separation (high separation anxiety), high stranger anxiety and both seek and reject on mothers return and not easily soothed


Would this get 4 marks?


Posted from TSR Mobile
A few queries of mine:

Firstly, do they knock marks off if you've done "too much"?

Secondly, for the question about how to conduct a random sample, was it appropriate to describe two different ways? (I did putting all names into a hat and another way is using a random number generator)

Thirdly, Loftus was an appropriate study for anxiety, right?

Fourthly and lastly, I kind of waffled on the 12-marker and wrote evaluation points such as reductionism and determinism. Are these creditworthy?
Original post by stillsoul
A few queries of mine:

Firstly, do they knock marks off if you've done "too much"?

Secondly, for the question about how to conduct a random sample, was it appropriate to describe two different ways? (I did putting all names into a hat and another way is using a random number generator)

Thirdly, Loftus was an appropriate study for anxiety, right?

Fourthly and lastly, I kind of waffled on the 12-marker and wrote evaluation points such as reductionism and determinism. Are these creditworthy?


Because it is random sampling they need to use a random technique so I said that a researcher can stand outside the large day care and ask mothers if they are interested in their child taking part in the experiment

:s-smilie::s-smilie:

Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 8 years ago)
...
Just one to run by you guys; would appreciate honest answers.

For my two MSM criticisms.

1) There must be ways other then rehearsal for information to pass from STM to LTM. Case study KF; greatly impaired STM but intact LTM.

Is this a valid example or a bad one? I feel like I'll get one mark. Birthdays/smells would have been a better example; we don't rehearse 'em, but we remember 'em.

2) It offers an oversimplified view of human memory; for example, long term memory can be broken down further into episodic, procedural etc.

Probably a more valid point?

Gutted I forgot about the verbal/visual criticism for KF. Any others you would have gone with?
Original post by JuliusSeizure
Because it is random sampling they need to use a random technique so I said that a researcher can stand outside the large day care and ask mothers if they are interested in their child taking part in the experiment

:s-smilie::s-smilie:

Posted from TSR Mobile


Thats opportunity sampling no?
What about shacffter who found evidence for 4 long term stores going against the idea of unitary LTM in the multi store model?
Also case of kf brain damage showed inability to deal with verbal info but normally processed visual info suggesting stm isn't unitary.
I also said how the working memory model emphasises process of memory but multi store only emphasises structure so is another limitation.
to evaluate Bowlby I used the Czech Twins and how they formed attachments even after the critical period and were not maladjusted, would that apply?
For the ao2 points for the 12 marker.
strengths were research support by tronick et al supporting bowbly that attachment and caregiving was universal.
Schaffer and Emerson supported bowlbys monotropy concept as they found the PCG was the most important.
then I wrote sroufe in a longitudinal study concluded that there was a link between secure attachment and social competence supporting bowlbys continuity hypothesis.

Weaknesses was rutter suggested the multiple attachment model where all attachments infants form were integrated into one and equal going against bowlbys concept of monotropy.
Kagen suggested the temperament hypothesis where attachment depends on temperament of child as well
and I said the learning thenry contradicts bowlbys theory as it suggested attachment forms through learning and isn't a innate and biological process.

My ao1 was good I think. I mean I think I've done enough for the ao2 but what u guys think.
Thanks
I think that's quite enough, do you think the Minnesota and McCarthy study count too?
Reply 1611
Is the 12 marker split into 6 and 6, I did the AO1 of bowlby and 1 strength and 2 weaknesses I couldn't remember the last point. Will 3 points be okay in getting 8-10 marks? I wrote about 2.5 pages on it...
Original post by SEGHaynes
Also, what do you think the grade boundaries will be like? in all the previous years its usually about 50 marks or more out of 72 to get an A. Do you think the same will apply roughly for this year?

I think that they will probably be around the 57-60 mark for an A
Original post by Rik21
Do you think it's possible for an A to be 80% and so on?


Yeah I think so... I don't think the grade boundaries could make a huge jump, maybe 4/5 marks more I hope


Posted from TSR Mobile
Can a weakness of anxiety be that there's individual difference, what's perceived as a threat by one may not by other ?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by M.Edres
Can a weakness of anxiety be that there's individual difference, what's perceived as a threat by one may not by other ?


Posted from TSR Mobile


Yes thats correct


Posted from TSR Mobile
Could I write about yuile and cutshalls 13 witnesses to a Canadian bank robbery and accuracy being 100% 4 months later despite 2 leading questions as the answer for anxiety and EWT?
1st NO

2nd it would be ok if explained properly

3rd no the study is called Johnson and Scott

4th no not really it was more like rutter an the sensitive period an also the theory was 'post hoc' otherwise based on assumption
Guys i feel like i did really well on this exam on all questions apart from the last. I got it completely wrong as I talked about the learning theory instead of bowlbys theory. What grade do you think ill be able to get with 95% correct on all the other parts? And is there anything I can do about my costly slip up?
Since it was on anxiety (WFE) shouldn't the A02 be regarding Christianson & Hubinette,not Yullie Cutshall who were for Misleading Information?

Quick Reply

Latest