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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by k.bryan4)
    Thank you so much, I'm guessing these are only used for A02, rather than a research methods question asking about the definition? So as long as I understand, for example, Schaffer and Emerson's study on the 60 infants from a working class area in Glasgow has high ecological validity because they were observed in their own home, I will be ok?

    I haven't been taught the majority of this, the evaluation in A02 seem very easy and the mark scheme never specifies that we have to state what kind of validity it holds, so it should be ok, i'm hoping
    There's always the possibility of a 1 or 2 mark question such as 'What is meant by external validity?' or 'Explain how Loftus and Palmer's research lacks external validity' etc. And it's always a good AO2 evaluation point to fall back on if you lack studies - it is easy to build on. Just comment on all of the methodology of your AO1 studies.

    And yes, your comment on ecological validity is right
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yaya sanogo)
    peer relations please, just need some solid evaluation points
    You can use Belsky's research into the effects of day care on aggression levels, as it counteracts the NICHD study's findings.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yaya sanogo)
    peer relations please, just need some solid evaluation points
    basically you need either shea (positive effects) or belsky and rovine (negative effects)

    A01 (I'm just going to list it because it'll be too much to write but..)
    Shea carried out study on 3-4 years olds in a playground in their first 10 weeks of nursery
    video taped them
    using pre-determined behavioural categories (there were 5, only really need 2/3 so frequency of peer interactions and distance from nearest peer/teacher

    discovered over time peer relations developed as for example: decrease in distance from nearest teacher and increase in frequency of peer interactions.
    Children that attended day care 5 times a week showed more development than children only attending 2 so suggested that it was in fact the day care causing the social development.

    strength is that - practical applications
    -we know understand day care can have a positive effect on a child's peer relations so high quality day cares have been introduced into poorer areas so children can access this enrichment which they could not otherwise. Improves people's lives

    negative: ignores individual differences
    -positive effects on day care could be down to other factors such as child's personality, cannot generate cause and effect from study

    negative: contradictory evidence
    -belsky and rovine for example discovered children that attended day care 20 hours or more per week under 1 were likely to be insecurely attached. so the suggestion that day care has a positive effect on a child's social development is over generalised and not complete
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dw1996)
    There's always the possibility of a 1 or 2 mark question such as 'What is meant by external validity?' or 'Explain how Loftus and Palmer's research lacks external validity' etc. And it's always a good AO2 evaluation point to fall back on if you lack studies - it is easy to build on. Just comment on all of the methodology of your AO1 studies.

    And yes, your comment on ecological validity is right
    Ok, thank you so much!
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captivated)
    Would've been a B last year. Have you done all the past papers? It must just be very small, silly mistakes you're making such as lack of elaboration.
    I'm retaking this exam that's why I'm a bit annoyed I haven't hit the 60mark. Yep, it's just lack of elaboration. I did another two past papers and got 54 in both.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by K3lvin)
    I think mine will get full marks to be honest i see nothing wrong with it
    Ok, I was just trying to help
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone know how a 12 marker involving bowlbys maternal deprivation hypothesis would come up, and if so what else would we need to include?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by k.bryan4)
    It's not deprivation though because the twin boys were put into institutional care when their mother died at a young age and then returned to their father and stepmother at 18 months old and they beat, starved and locked them in a cellar until they were found at age 7. Therefore the twin boys never had the opportunity to form an attachment, they didn't lose the attachment which is what deprivation is.

    With the genie as A02, that was a very brief description of what I'd write for it.

    mark 1: the studies into privation have further empirical support
    mark 2: for example, Curtiss carried out a study on Genie whom experienced privation at an early age. From this, Genie never developed the intellectual ability to learn how to speak. So the suggestion that prication has serious negative effects in the future has wider academic credibility
    Doesn't the twins case study show that the effects of early privation can be overcome as they recovered to have above average intelligence and good healthy relationships with their adoptive parents at the age of 21. So Genie would not back this up would it?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tylerrrrr)
    Anyone know how a 12 marker involving bowlbys maternal deprivation hypothesis would come up, and if so what else would we need to include?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    A 12 marker on that wouldn't come up, there isn't enough information on it, and it can't really be evaluated.

    What would come up is a A03 question like "Mike experiences deprivation, describe what effects this would have on him."

    And you could talk about bowlby's maternal deprivation hypothesis so the long term effects of deprivation like emotionally disturbed behaviour like bed wetting or intellectual retardation or deprivation dwarfism. You could also talk about Robertson and Robertson's PDD theory about the short-term effects of deprivation
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tylerrrrr)
    Anyone know how a 12 marker involving bowlbys maternal deprivation hypothesis would come up, and if so what else would we need to include?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The 12marker could be outline and evaluate research into disruption of attachment. So you can talk about Bowlbys maternal deprivation hypothesis and the 44 thieves study because that comes under deprivation. Then you can talk about Robertson, Robertson and Bowlby's research on the PDD model (separation).

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oiseaux)
    I think the Working Memory Model is more likely to come up compared to the Multi Store Model, since the last time WMM made an appearance as a 12 marker was in Jan 11, whereas the MSM was more recent. But then institutionalisation hasn't come up since June 10...

    I'm mostly going over my 12 markers for WMM, institutionalisation and learning theory.
    What studies are you using for institutionalisation, Rutter + tizard and Hodges?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wabbit998)
    Doesn't the twins case study show that the effects of early privation can be overcome as they recovered to have above average intelligence and good healthy relationships with their adoptive parents at the age of 21. So Genie would not back this up would it?
    That's true but you wouldn't be asked to evaluate just that study you would be asked to evaluate the research into privation, which could include hodges and tizard study where the children who were not given substitute care could never form attachments etc etc
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Guys for encoding capacity and duration I only know the Jacobs study, Peterson and Conrad is that enough?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunDun111)
    Guys for encoding capacity and duration I only know the Jacobs study, Peterson and Conrad is that enough?
    You need to know at least one study for each capacity, duration and encoding for both STM + LTM

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tylerrrrr)
    Anyone know how a 12 marker involving bowlbys maternal deprivation hypothesis would come up, and if so what else would we need to include?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The maternal deprivation hypothesis was removed from the syllabus in 2011. They cannot ask a question on it specifically, but it can still be used as AO1 and AO2 in an evolutionary explanations of attachment (Bowlby) essay if needed.

    If you read the January 2012 examiners report, it says 'some students muddled attachment and maternaldeprivation, even though the latter is not required on the specification'.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -rebecca96)
    The June 14 exam was a very difficult exam and a lot of people struggled because of how questions were worded
    Yes - I got one off a B last year so I'm retaking it this year
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NutE)
    I'm retaking this exam that's why I'm a bit annoyed I haven't hit the 60mark. Yep, it's just lack of elaboration. I did another two past papers and got 54 in both.
    Aww, I'm retaking as well. So that's the only issue with you not hitting 60? Try to really work on it as much as you can today. I'm here if you need any help
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captivated)
    Aww, I'm retaking as well. So that's the only issue with you not hitting 60? Try to really work on it as much as you can today. I'm here if you need any help
    I'm retaking even though I got an A because I am two UMS off an A overall I got three A's and a B in the four units and it was still a B overall. Joke
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dw1996)
    I'm retaking even though I got an A because I am two UMS off an A overall I got three A's and a B in the four units and it was still a B overall. Joke
    Wow! I seriously hope you smash it tomorrow with full marks. Well done on those results too that's incredible.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    do i need to know dates for all the studies? or can i just use names
 
 
 
  • 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
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • 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

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