AQA A2 Psychology PSYA3/PSYA4 Revision Thread 2016

Im kind of worried i may have wrote PSYA3 instead of PSAY3??? Does this matter...

I wrote PSYA3... Is this wrong?

Hi, they asked this question back in January 2011 and the mark scheme doesn't mention writing about more than one explanation.

It says this
The focus for this question is onevolutionary explanations, and approaches that are not evolutionary, such as social learningtheory, media effects, and deindividuation cannot earn marks. Within the evolutionaryapproach aggression is usually contextualised as increasing the chances of reproduction andsurvival of genes, and this is likely to be the most popular route for AO1 marks. Material onaggressive displays, especially in young men, aggression linked to sexual jealousy, andevolutionary explanations of group display, could all be relevant to the question. For marksabove Basic there must be a clear focus on aggression.

For genetics I primarily focused on Holland, the twin study, the concordance rates and what not, methodological evaluation that and one debate (i think), then evolutionary with the AFFH and debate on that, and how it doesnt explain why females only got it. I did two, so hoping thats alright tbh

Nail research methods. 35/72 which is 49% of the paper. Lessens how well you need to do for whatever other topics you'll be doing. Going by last year's boundaries for PSYA4:Essentially, if you wanted an A you'd need to get 22 marks in total. That's not even a whole Section A or C :P

well basically I did alright in all of the questions, other than the gender schema theory question which was one of the only topics I hadn't revised and therefore I had absolutely no clue what it was and just couldn't even attempt it, so that's a guaranteed 20 marks gone hahaha

I don't understand haha how is the maximum mark 83?

Yeah but it was only 4 marks A01...

AO1 was 4 marks,

I wrote about warfare for the 4 marker on aggression, is this right? :/

Yes, someone posted something about an examiner's report with this. I'm fairly sure they'll accept group displays - if you look at the spec, infidelity and jealousy and groups both come under the "evolution and aggression" section. So there's no need to worry They usually do specify if they want infidelity/jealousy or groups.

It may be a bit late to say this, but if they don't mention a specific sub topic, they're being nice and giving you a whole range to talk about. The fact that you got a bit confused is normal I guess, but, you might get a few marks based on evolution... however, without referring it aggression it'd be hard to say. Studies being made up is difficult to say as true or not but good luck. As for reductionism, once again, this is context dependent on how you said it but yes it's a valid criticism for evolutionary explanations in general as it simplifies aggressive behaviour to solely genetic factors ignoring other factors in the process.You shouldn't get marked down for mentioning one only. I personally mixed and matched between group and sexual jealousy+infidelity but that was because I found that easier. If you have enough content for one, it should be fine since it didn't specify any sub topics.If you wrote what you'd normally write for a Sexual jealousy+ infidelity essay worth 8+24, yes. If you didn't, then no.A mix is fine, either is fine as long as enough is wrote.100 UMS is max per paper? If we go by last year's boundaries 57 at least.
Yea, you still get AO2/3 for mentioning how they support but you'll lose out on methodological evaluation marks.

PS.

Yesss I did Holland too! I'm glad you said that - you're the first person I've seen to talk about Holland/twin studies for genetics, was starting to get worried!

I don't understand haha how is the maximum mark 83?

Thank you haha - I was certain I was okay once I read the specification but it is still a slight worry lol

I wrote about warfare for the 4 marker on aggression, is this right? :/

Hahah just saw someone put johnson et al as a fake researcher