A2 Psychology B'ers

Teacher predictions for PSYB3: (She predicted this years PSYB1 and 2 essays perfectly)

Social Development: Friendships
Forensics: Measuring Crime, or discuss both types of profiling
Schizo/Mood Disorders: Treatments for mood disorders

Wow, she was spot on! (I did social and mood disorders).
Has she got any predictions for PSYB4? :biggrin:

Reply 81

dmet

8

Original post by HNY

Teacher predictions for PSYB3: (She predicted this years PSYB1 and 2 essays perfectly)

Social Development: Friendships
Forensics: Measuring Crime, or discuss both types of profiling
Schizo/Mood Disorders: Treatments for mood disorders

Excellent predictions from your teacher! Do you have a PSYB4 prediction by any chance?

Reply 82

figuresk8rstudent

3

Original post by Sazi007

I think it went quite well in places, loved the mood disorders essay question and the forensic essay question! Didn't do so well on the social development essay though!

How did everyone else do?

I thought same for both. Got cognition 12 marker so wrong :-(

Reply 83

dmet

8

I relation on PSYB4 on key approaches 12 marker questions. Do each of these essays have to refer to a topic ie, autism or SZ for example and refer to a relevant study plus reference to reductionist holistic etc. What else do I need to include for A02 marks. Self teaching doesn't give advise on the exam requirements so I'm working blind. Thank you

Reply 84

vickyA95

That was so stressful. The questions weren't very complex on my topics tbh which is making me worried about PSYB4.

At least research methods are coming up :smile:

anyone got any predictions on the approaches and debates essays?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 85

Abbiedaniella

Original post by CheesusCrust

First two questions on substance abuse.. Fu*k.

Example of health promotion/education intervention? Had no idea.. 2 marks lost.
2 limitations of health promotion/education? Wtf? 4 marks lost..

What did everyone put for the a/b/c/d questions? I had B and C, but the second one I'm not sure..

Overall, wasn't that bad.. Nice 12 marker on mood disorders and substance abuse, ok 12 marker on social development..

Also, what did people put as to why it's good to observe same children over long period of time? I've put less extraneous variables as participant variables are constant = higher validity.. Not sure that's what they will be looking for.

I did the same q's as you!
For the example of health education/promotion I said about giving information on negative effects to a group of people, telling people that there are other conditions/implications linked to it etc. Can't remember exactly what I put.
For the 'limitations' or however it was worded, I put how it has been found (Moher et al) that it is not always effective towards large groups of people, but individual focus is more important with behavioural techniques etc. I also put how the model who is giving the information should be similar/high status - especially for teenagers, in order to prevent them from smoking for example..

With the longitudinal one I said about how it could possibly help to establish a cause and effect of the child's development and behaviour; how they may be aware of other variables such as IQ due to having contact with the children etc.

I'm sure you've done fine! :-)

Reply 86

HNY

Original post by dmet

Excellent predictions from your teacher! Do you have a PSYB4 prediction by any chance?

Original post by smile-sweetly

Wow, she was spot on! (I did social and mood disorders).
Has she got any predictions for PSYB4? :biggrin:

I'm pretty sure these are the predictions:
Approaches: Biological or Psychodynamic essay. Likely a compare/contrast.
Debates: Is psychology a science?
Research Methods/Stats: Design a study question likely.

I'm fairly confident in her predictions, they have been almost 100% accurate so far, only getting the forensics question in PSYB3 wrong.
Obviously still revise everything though, nobody can predict the future! :smile:

Reply 87

dmet

8

Original post by HNY

I'm pretty sure these are the predictions:
Approaches: Biological or Psychodynamic essay. Likely a compare/contrast.
Debates: Is psychology a science?
Research Methods/Stats: Design a study question likely.

I'm fairly confident in her predictions, they have been almost 100% accurate so far, only getting the forensics question in PSYB3 wrong.
Obviously still revise everything though, nobody can predict the future! :smile:

Biological seems likely from looking at past papers. Could you help me with the A02 marks I understand we need to link to a topic and link to other studies. Is there anything else I should include. Thank you

Reply 88

Sazi007

2

Original post by figuresk8rstudent

I thought same for both. Got cognition 12 marker so wrong :-(

Don't worry, I'm sure you will have done well enough in the other questions to balance it out. I didn't even look at the cognitive one, what was it?

Full steam ahead to Unit 4!

Reply 89

figuresk8rstudent

3

Original post by Sazi007

Don't worry, I'm sure you will have done well enough in the other questions to balance it out. I didn't even look at the cognitive one, what was it?

Full steam ahead to Unit 4!

You had to describe two face recognition theories. Went on to explain feature analysis and holistic forms theory!

Reply 90

Nima123

2

For debates i think free will and determinism or idiographic and nomothetic may come up as it hasn't come up yet...

Reply 91

daizy

Original post by HNY

I'm pretty sure these are the predictions:
Approaches: Biological or Psychodynamic essay. Likely a compare/contrast.
Debates: Is psychology a science?
Research Methods/Stats: Design a study question likely.

I'm fairly confident in her predictions, they have been almost 100% accurate so far, only getting the forensics question in PSYB3 wrong.
Obviously still revise everything though, nobody can predict the future! :smile:

Hope it isn't Psychology as a Science, hate it :frown:

((( any help any one any where?

Reply 92

KateMitchell

Sorry not sure where to post but I'm hoping someone might be able to explain the significance thing to me... I know that a type one error is more likely if the researcher is too optimistic and rejects their null hypothesis when it should have been kept and then a type 2 error happens when they are too stringent and reject their research hypothesis and keep their null hypothesis when the research hypothesis was actually right...
What I can't get my head around is that type 1 errors are more likely when a high level of significance is selected and type 2 when a low level of significance is selected...
If a higher level of significance makes it more likely for a type 1 error to occur because they are being too optimistic in thinking their hypothesis is correct.... Why is it a higher level? Because if they are accepting that chance occurs more often/is more likely... surely that would mean they would be less likely to accept their alternative hypothesis because they think that there is more possibility the results are due to chance?
Can you work out where I am going wrong?

Reply 93

sunnysideup12

8

I've only just realised our answers in PSYB4 have to be synoptic - was no mention of this in my textbook so just realised when I looked at past papers. Does anyone know how best to relate the answer to another topic? Is it best to learn multiple studies - any areas particularly useful for several debates?

Original post by figuresk8rstudent

You had to describe two face recognition theories. Went on to explain feature analysis and holistic forms theory!

Isn't this correct? From the spec: "Explanations for face recognition, including feature analysis and holistic forms."

My brain was a bit on meltdown after my English exam in the morning and although I'm sure the rest of the answer was pretty good, I kept referring to Feature Analysis Theory as Feature Integration Theory. Realised as soon as I left the room. Eek. Hope it doesn't matter TOO much?!

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 94

vickyA95

Original post by KateMitchell

Sorry not sure where to post but I'm hoping someone might be able to explain the significance thing to me... I know that a type one error is more likely if the researcher is too optimistic and rejects their null hypothesis when it should have been kept and then a type 2 error happens when they are too stringent and reject their research hypothesis and keep their null hypothesis when the research hypothesis was actually right...
What I can't get my head around is that type 1 errors are more likely when a high level of significance is selected and type 2 when a low level of significance is selected...
If a higher level of significance makes it more likely for a type 1 error to occur because they are being too optimistic in thinking their hypothesis is correct.... Why is it a higher level? Because if they are accepting that chance occurs more often/is more likely... surely that would mean they would be less likely to accept their alternative hypothesis because they think that there is more possibility the results are due to chance?
Can you work out where I am going wrong?

Are you on about the equal to or less than either 0.5 or 0.05 that chance was a factor? I have no idea on the whole statistics complicated side of research methods so I'm just stabbing in the dark now

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 95

CuriousQuestioner

9

Original post by KateMitchell

Sorry not sure where to post but I'm hoping someone might be able to explain the significance thing to me... I know that a type one error is more likely if the researcher is too optimistic and rejects their null hypothesis when it should have been kept and then a type 2 error happens when they are too stringent and reject their research hypothesis and keep their null hypothesis when the research hypothesis was actually right...
What I can't get my head around is that type 1 errors are more likely when a high level of significance is selected and type 2 when a low level of significance is selected...
If a higher level of significance makes it more likely for a type 1 error to occur because they are being too optimistic in thinking their hypothesis is correct.... Why is it a higher level? Because if they are accepting that chance occurs more often/is more likely... surely that would mean they would be less likely to accept their alternative hypothesis because they think that there is more possibility the results are due to chance?
Can you work out where I am going wrong?

This is exactly the problem I had in lesson! Our teacher asked us to guess what level a type one was more likely at and I thought it was obvious, when it was low because they decide to be optimistic against the statistics. I've decided that the way to look at is to make it better is that as it has high levels it makes them optimistic that it is right because of the high levels, but really it was wrong.

Just don't think about it too hard :biggrin:

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 96

livealittle

8

This might be a stupid question to ask but when you do the test-retest why do you leave time between the two tests:/

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 97

livealittle

8

Original post by daizy

Hope it isn't Psychology as a Science, hate it :frown:

((( any help any one any where?

My teacher thinks that might come up!
I hope it's not the scientific method essay-.-

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 98

sunnysideup12

8

Original post by livealittle

This might be a stupid question to ask but when you do the test-retest why do you leave time between the two tests:/

Posted from TSR Mobile

I haven't revised this yet so I might be wrong but I would think it's because there might be extraneous variables such as time/environment. If you do the two tests back to back then these variables would affect both conditions. For example, it might be a really sunny day.

If you leave time then the chance of the same extraneous variables affecting both tests (and thus making the results less valid) are reduced.

:smile:

Reply 99

livealittle

8

Original post by sunnysideup12

I haven't revised this yet so I might be wrong but I would think it's because there might be extraneous variables such as time/environment. If you do the two tests back to back then these variables would affect both conditions. For example, it might be a really sunny day.

If you leave time then the chance of the same extraneous variables affecting both tests (and thus making the results less valid) are reduced.

:smile:

Thanks research methods is not my favourite :frown:

Posted from TSR Mobile

A2 Psychology B'ers

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you