AQA A2 Psychology PSYA3/PSYA4 Revision Thread 2016

Could you mark my sexual selection essay in that case? If you dont have time its fine just wondering.

Two theories: Money et al proposed that when a biological male or female is born and labelled as such, the exeriences, treatments and labels shape their gender development through social influences. Proposes prenatal interaction with biological factors. If a child is treated as a boy, regardless of gender, they will accept this as their gender identity provided this is done before the sensitive age of 3.

Social role theory - Wood et al. Evolutionary explanations are able to explain physical differences, but not psychological differences. Physical differences lead to different role allocations, so men and stronger and take the role of hunting, females, childcare. These different roles lead to psychological differences with men being more aggressive and women gentle. This can also explain aggressive behaviour with men being more aggressive causing testoterone release and women are gentle due to childcare experience. Social roles form based on these difference susggesting it is a social construct rather than biological.

This is AO1.

Bruce Reimer went against this. He was raised female under the advice of Money who thought if he was treated as a girl before the sensitive age of 3 he would adopt the gender identity. He didn't and was in constant turmoil, depressed till he found out the truth and transitioned back to male at 18, stating that he was relieved. This suggests how biology can ovveride social factors.
He had a twin brother who may have influenced his gender development through similarities in appearance.His exposure to his bro may have been a confounding varable.

Gearhart et al looked at 14 genetically born males with almost no penis raised as female. At 16, 8 transitioned back to male. It's important to note that 6 reamined female giving support to the theory as nurture and environment appeared to mitigate for biological factors.

Smith and Lloyd dressed babies in non-gender s[ecific clothing and gave them male or female names. Females were treated in feminine way, males masculine way supporting MOney's theory that gender development is affected by how those are perceived and treated by others.

Bradley et al reported on ne case of a man who had sex reassignment surgery after an accident to his penis. He showed male behaviours but identified as female suggesting biological factors do not determine gender identity.

The theory shows how nature and nurture interact with biological sex being based on physical differences which leads to different roles causing psychological differences. Nature is highlighted through Bruce Reimer, nurture is highlighted with Bradley et al.

The rest of the evaluation is above in a different post.

What do you include in that?? One study and a few eval points i mean 4 marks for a01 and then 8 for a02and a03? How would you structure that

Just wondering, if a question solely comes up as "evalute" for 16 marks, would you just jump into evaluation without making any mention of the theory. For example, Bandura's study supports SLT as an explanation of aggression...
You would also need to include methodological and IDA to boost evaluation marks of course. But are studies if you mention if if supports or refutes relevant to just evaluate questions or should I just talk about methodological issues of the the studies??

thank you!! turns out i have an essay on this but i didn't know it was the biosocial approach:P

Well, writing the whole essay out wasn't a complete waste cuz it helped me to recall the info

Well, writing the whole essay out wasn't a complete waste cuz it helped me to recall the info

Can someone please explain Sheldon et al's study for the Reward/Need theory? I'm having trouble linking it back to the theory


Posted from TSR Mobile

can someone explain what imposed etic is?

For biological explanations of anorexia for eating behaviours is says "including neural and evolutionary" on the specification. So does that mean the it will come together like infidelity and jealousy or could it come separate for a full 24 marker? Evolutionary explanations have no research evidence so it would be hard for a 24 marker. know I'm asking silly questions, but just in case

can someone explain what imposed etic is?

Are you sure it's not imposed ethic?

Sure- Yep! Pm it me

I think they usually just tell you to explain the biological explanation or psychological explanation, and neural would come under biological, whereas I think evolutionary would come on its own! Question about the psychological approach appeared last year so I wouldn't worry about it