Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by psychemma)
    Which study are people doing as their study in detail for schizophrenia? Is it ok to do Gottesman & Shields?
    I'm doing gottesman and shields so should be fine


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarceyKuypers)
    I'm doing gottesman and shields so should be fine


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Ok that's good, I didn't want to do Goldstein because I find it so confusing!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarceyKuypers)
    I don't know anyone who has said they've been able to finish the paper in time, you'd think edexcel would give us more time considering the very few people who actually do finish it.. I wouldn't worry about finishing it, just make sure the rest of your answers are good enough.. I've been told that the grade boundaries are always low on the paper because it's so hard to finish
    Soo true. This is why (I think) I'm going to do the 18 marker first (gonna limit myself to 25 mins), then the 12 marker. The idea is to save the small questions until last so I can rush those, as oppose to rushing the essays, not finishing and getting capped
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by psychemma)
    Ok that's good, I didn't want to do Goldstein because I find it so confusing!
    What do you find confusing about it? I like it because the results are easy to remember

    I haven't looked at it since we did it 3 months ago and I think the results are 1.12 and 2.24. It's a study looking into whether men or women have a harder time with schizophrenia.

    I can still remember some evaluation if it'll help:
    Generalisability: included men and women of different ages

    Reliability: used 2(?) independent psychiarists to help with rediagnosis so high in inter-rater reliability

    Application: Found men have a worse time so should be more help available
    - Also shows DSM has problems with reliability as the ppts were originally diagnosed with DSM2(?) and she rediagnosed with DSM3(?) and found many were no longer 'considered' schizophrenic by DSM3's criteria

    Validity: Used quantitative data (mean number of rehospitalisations) aswell as qualitative data (info on marital status, occupational status etc.)
    - However lacks validity as sample was 18-40 year olds, research shows 9% of women don't experience their first major episode until 40+, so these women could suffer more

    Ethics: rediagnosed schizophrenics which brings bad memories back and just reminds them when they may have found ways to cope
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rileystringer1)
    You sure?

    So for example, imagine we get in the exam on Tuesday and one of the questions is "Compare the biological explanation for schizophrenia with one other (6)". I write something like: The dopamine hypothesis explains schizophrenia as being caused by over-activity at synapses in the brain that are sensitive to dopamine. The social causation hypothesis suggests that the cause of schizophrenia is living in highly urbanised, densely populated areas of low economic status.

    How many marks would I get? None, because I've describe two theories, I haven't made an explicit comparison. If it wanted two theories described plainly, it would ask for it.

    I don't want to make anyone panic or say that I know what the mark scheme will look like, but I do know that in a comparison question you have to actually make comparisons rather than just stating how the explanations differ.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Let's take the 2011 Clinical 12 marker as an example:
    Describe one explanation for schizophrenia and compare this with one other explanation. Comparisons include considering similarities and/or differences.(12)

    Change "schizophrenia" to "criminal/anti-social behaviour" and this is almost identical to our question.

    For this question, if you described dopamine hypothesis then described social causation hypothesis, you'd get 4-6 marks (Either description done very well and little/no comparisons OR vice versa OR both done but limited)

    To get 7-9 marks you need:
    Candidates' answers will show good knowledge with understanding of the focus of the question and will include some explicit comparisons. • Explanation done well • Both similarities and differences are likely to be attempted, with at least one comparison elaborated. Some use of evidence
    It said describe social learning theory and compare with one other explanation of crime or something. Therefore, you'd get six marks for a good description of SLT (A01 as it asked for describe.) then, if you said 'conversely/on the other hand self fulfilling prophecy explains Nicole's behaviour as XYZ' the use of the word 'converse/on the other hand' is an explicit comparison because you're saying SLT says but on the other hand SFP says this. That's all the question was asking for, if it was an evaluation, then you'd do similarities and differences


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Can someone please send their notes on the key issue "understnading schizophrenia"? A sample answer as well would be excellent. Our teacher got pregnant and abandoned us before we got notes for that.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rileystringer1)
    Are you actually doing research methods? :lol:

    There has never been a question asking for an exemplar study for a research method, and if one comes up I will just use what I know like
    Lab - loftus+palmer
    Field - yuille and cutshall
    Natural - charlton
    Observation - ainsworth
    Content analysis - my practical
    Case study - Genie
    (Original post by rileystringer1)
    Are you actually doing research methods? :lol:

    There has never been a question asking for an exemplar study for a research method, and if one comes up I will just use what I know like
    Lab - loftus+palmer
    Field - yuille and cutshall
    Natural - charlton
    Observation - ainsworth
    Content analysis - my practical
    Case study - Genie
    Yes I'm doing one that I have already done but the point is still in the spec so it's probably worth you looking at it?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Julieplec)
    It said describe social learning theory and compare with one other explanation of crime or something. Therefore, you'd get six marks for a good description of SLT (A01 as it asked for describe.) then, if you said 'conversely/on the other hand self fulfilling prophecy explains Nicole's behaviour as XYZ' the use of the word 'converse/on the other hand' is an explicit comparison because you're saying SLT says but on the other hand SFP says this. That's all the question was asking for, if it was an evaluation, then you'd do similarities and differences


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    it said compare with at least one other explanation
    when they say compare they mean similarities and differences (which would have helped if they said that, they do sometimes)

    if you wrote it out like how you said youre only making one comparison
    other comparisons are (slt and sfp): both from social approach, both ignore bio factors, both have supporting evidence e.g, etc then you could bring in Eyncks personality theory compare it with slt
    the comparing is how you pick up A02

    i mean i hope you're right, then i'd be getting more than 5/6 marks but i think i am.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Julieplec)
    It said describe social learning theory and compare with one other explanation of crime or something. Therefore, you'd get six marks for a good description of SLT (A01 as it asked for describe.) then, if you said 'conversely/on the other hand self fulfilling prophecy explains Nicole's behaviour as XYZ' the use of the word 'converse/on the other hand' is an explicit comparison because you're saying SLT says but on the other hand SFP says this. That's all the question was asking for, if it was an evaluation, then you'd do similarities and differences


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Okay. Your opinion is yours à chacun ses goûts, if you think you're getting any more than 6 for describing instead of making comparisons then good 4 u

    (Original post by beccyyyy)
    Yes I'm doing one that I have already done but the point is still in the spec so it's probably worth you looking at it?
    Nah in my opinion it's not worth learning like 10 research methods with studies
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chickenfoot)
    it said compare with at least one other explanation
    when they say compare they mean similarities and differences (which would have helped if they said that, they do sometimes)

    if you wrote it out like how you said youre only making one comparison
    other comparisons are (slt and sfp): both from social approach, both ignore bio factors, both have supporting evidence e.g, etc then you could bring in Eyncks personality theory compare it with slt
    the comparing is how you pick up A02

    i mean i hope you're right, then i'd be getting more than 5/6 marks but i think i am.
    I agree with this which is why the max I'll get is 6 :lol:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Can someone possibly give me one strength of Beck's cognitive explanation for depression that doesn't involve research evidence as I don't like the one I have written down already
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rileystringer1)
    I agree with this which is why the max I'll get is 6 :lol:
    what grade/mark do you think you got overall?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Does planning an experiment come up in every paper? Our teacher seemed to forget that was on the spec, and has never mentioned it..

    Apart from the headings they give you as a guide, is there anything else you should include? Or any tips you have?

    Do you have to know things like, Mann-Whitney U and Chi- squared, because I've forgotten all about those! :confused:

    Thanks!!!
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lillyjox)
    Does planning an experiment come up in every paper? Our teacher seemed to forget that was on the spec, and has never mentioned it..

    Apart from the headings they give you as a guide, is there anything else you should include? Or any tips you have?

    Do you have to know things like, Mann-Whitney U and Chi- squared, because I've forgotten all about those! :confused:

    Thanks!!!
    My teacher gave us a pneumonic for planning an expt (and yes i think it does always come up):
    S ample
    T echniques
    E xperimental Method
    E thics
    M ethodology
    D ata
    And I don't think you have to learn about those things... hope this helps!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by psychemma)
    Can someone possibly give me one strength of Beck's cognitive explanation for depression that doesn't involve research evidence as I don't like the one I have written down already
    I have:
    Research has shown that depressed people have negative thoughts and that the cognitive explanation for depression is backed up by both self-report data and other measures. The model is evidence based because there is a lot of research to support it

    The cognitive model takes into account genes, early experiences and learning and suggests that developmental issues can lead to certain thinking patterns and core beliefs that predispose someone to depression

    I hope that helps
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lillyjox)
    Does planning an experiment come up in every paper? Our teacher seemed to forget that was on the spec, and has never mentioned it..

    Apart from the headings they give you as a guide, is there anything else you should include? Or any tips you have?

    Do you have to know things like, Mann-Whitney U and Chi- squared, because I've forgotten all about those! :confused:

    Thanks!!!

    Our teacher told us to learn: My very easy structure helps planning/designing studies

    Method
    Variables
    Ethics
    Sample
    Hypothesis
    Procedure
    Design
    Stats testing

    Just try to include all these and you should be fine, although I am not sure on stats tests myself You don't need to know them in detail though I don't think
    Offline

    2
    Can someone explain what falsifiable is for Is Psych a science? I do it in philosophy and seem to have got it confused!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone know how many studies we should know for the reliability/validity of the DSM?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sophia.lega)
    Can someone explain what falsifiable is for Is Psych a science? I do it in philosophy and seem to have got it confused!
    if something is falsifiable then it can be proved wrong

    For example, take the 5 AS approaches - cognitive is scientific because of using controlled methods like experiments etc so can be replicated by others and therefore falsified - opposing evidence found and the contrastingly to this the psychodynamic approach is not scientific because very subjective and measuring the unconscious is hard & not open to direct testing - makes the theory unfalisifiable

    Hope this helps!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PensiveChicken)
    Anyone know how many studies we should know for the reliability/validity of the DSM?
    You don't need to know a certain amount, I would say about 3 for reliability and the same for validity


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.