Join TSR now and get all your revision questions answeredSign up now

OCR G542 Psychology Monday 18th May *OFFICIAL THREAD* Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BethCx)
    Ive just looked on a few websites too and it also says day 5 but Im not sure!
    http://www.bbcprisonstudy.org/bbc-prison-study.php?p=40 definetly day 5 actually!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gemmax6x)
    Oh god I don't know then! The textbook definitely said day 7 but I guess if there is a video saying day 5 then maybe both will be accepted, sometimes there's variations in how things are published yknow like how some things aren't included in certain studies, I don't think we'd lose a mark for that though that was just an extra bit of knowledge!
    I just looked on here:
    http://www.bbcprisonstudy.org/bbc-prison-study.php?p=40
    the official website says day 5 so I dont know why your textbook says day 7!!!
    it will be fine, Im sure they will accept some differences
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BethCx)
    I just looked on here:
    http://www.bbcprisonstudy.org/bbc-prison-study.php?p=40
    the official website says day 5 so I dont know why your textbook says day 7!!!
    it will be fine, Im sure they will accept some differences
    Oh god! That's so annoying, especially as it was the textbook our teacher actually gave us!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BethCx)
    Well no one will be able to get the official answers but I did psychodynamic for the last question and said:
    Strengths:
    1) Informed consent - thigpen - she chose to go their (included fine details etc!) then said why it was a strength!
    2) Deception - lack of deception involved - action research - they were treating the patient whilst documenting observations and qualitative/quantitative data and therefore had no reason to lie as they were simply forming conclusions and treatments around information given (included fine details and said why a strength).

    Weaknesses:
    1) Distress - Thigpen - possibly iatrogenic, intergration - killing off two of the alters and leaving one but unknown who they would leave and the fact they had to access her repressed memory of kissing her dead grandmothers forehead in order to get to the root of her condition (fine details and explain why a weakness)
    2) debrief - wasnt sure about this but said in thigpen she was not debriefed properly possibly due to the fact that they still did not know much about MPD and therefore could not debrief her to completely give her peace of mind - BUT because she wasnt debriefed she never knew that her condition could return - which it did with 21 alters - therefore this could also cause distress (fine details and explain why a weakness)

    This could be wrong but I was put on the spot and thought of the best things I could haha!
    Thankyou haha! I can't remember what i put much as i did section C first and then section A and B
    I think i just remember saying how the psychodyanmic approach has ethical concerns and the good things about it like they give consent, and for weaknesses I put that they can cause things to get worse like in T+C eve white could only change personalities through hypnosis and at the end of the case study she didn't need hypnosis because it got worse.

    Probably wrong but i think i tried my best
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    those maguire questions were a joke, you seriously needed to know nothing about maguire to get the marks because you just used the scattergraph...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Can anyone remember the Section B questions for milgram, apart from the first one 'why was it done' (background)? Trying to self mark!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BethCx)
    Well no one will be able to get the official answers but I did psychodynamic for the last question and said:
    Strengths:
    1) Informed consent - thigpen - she chose to go their (included fine details etc!) then said why it was a strength!
    2) Deception - lack of deception involved - action research - they were treating the patient whilst documenting observations and qualitative/quantitative data and therefore had no reason to lie as they were simply forming conclusions and treatments around information given (included fine details and said why a strength).

    Weaknesses:
    1) Distress - Thigpen - possibly iatrogenic, intergration - killing off two of the alters and leaving one but unknown who they would leave and the fact they had to access her repressed memory of kissing her dead grandmothers forehead in order to get to the root of her condition (fine details and explain why a weakness)
    2) debrief - wasnt sure about this but said in thigpen she was not debriefed properly possibly due to the fact that they still did not know much about MPD and therefore could not debrief her to completely give her peace of mind - BUT because she wasnt debriefed she never knew that her condition could return - which it did with 21 alters - therefore this could also cause distress (fine details and explain why a weakness)

    This could be wrong but I was put on the spot and thought of the best things I could haha!
    I wrote a similar answer to you!
    strengths :
    -Not put at harm by doing things/tasks out of their comfort zone (Freud: observed in natural environment doing normal everyday things not asked to do anything abnormal or dangerous)
    -Not deceived , often aware of their phobia (Hans knew he had a phobia of white horses; subconscious fear of father castrating him) ; use psychoanalysis by making them aware of reasons and not deceiving them by it

    weaknesses:
    -longitudinal as they often use case studies so may become distressed by being studied for a long period of time (Thigpen & cleckley - 100+ hrs of interview , 14 months recalling negative childhood events and the use of regular hypnosis to study unconscious could have caused her to say things that she originally may not have want to if it wasn't for her subconscious state)
    -unaware they can withdraw as it isn't obvious they are being studied as they are not taking part in a task for example (Hans was not necessarily aware he was being studied for his phobia so couldn't tell his father to stop asking him questions as part of the study)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Psychodynamic approach strengths and weaknesses relating to ethics

    Honestly found is quite hard but could think of more for psychodynamic than physiological

    Strengths
    - Not deceived ? I just put about how Eve and Little Hans were aware of why they were being tested
    - Mental illness - related it to that how Eve would of been so confused about these black outs with out the diagnosis... ethical

    Weaknesses

    - Observer involvement in studies - they found 'eve black sexy' and because she had a mental illness she could of been open to abuse
    - Stress - 100 hours + interviews which could be stressful, Hans being told he sexually desires his mother.. stress

    Honestly just gonna hope for around 7 marks because it was really hard
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    e
    (Original post by tasmins)
    Can anyone remember the Section B questions for milgram, apart from the first one 'why was it done' (background)? Trying to self mark!
    4 marks - describe how quantitative data was gained
    6m - strengths and weaknesses of quantitative data
    8m - results
    8m -discuss the ethical issues
    8 - suggest and evaluate improvements for ethical issues
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Overall, I think that was an OK paper, but I don't know if the crap I said about ethics in the 12 marker was actually legit
    (Original post by gemmax6x)
    It was day 7, the textbook says day 7?
    I was asking about exactly this earlier! I think day 7 was when it was planned to be manipulated, but day 5 was when it was actually done (I don't know why textbooks can just say this). I wrote that it was manipulated on day 5 "according to the study's website" in my answer.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I put that when permiabiltymwas decreased, the cognitive alternatives were introduced as they had to work toghter.
    I blagged it will I get 0 marks
    And what's was the answer to the second part of reicher and Halsam
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I cba reading back over all the comments. But from this page it seems similar to what I did.

    Section A: Very generic questions, definitely liked my answers for Maguire, Sperry, Baron-Cohen, Savage-Rumbaugh (surprisingly) and hated them for Milgram, Thigpen & Cleckley and Rosenhan (that second point was impossible, I only got the behaving sane one).

    Section B: Piliavin, Milgram or Bandura. Whilst I'd revised more for Piliavin, I hadn't gone over the results in enough detail and felt I'd get a more balanced grade with Milgram (quant data for Bandura?? never seen it). I was really happy with my answers on results and ethics, not so sure on the changes but I hadn't had much practice doing those.

    Section C: Psychodynamic or physiological. I'd revised psychodynamic for this so selected it. First 2 questions were generic. Third one was just a nuisance. I put T&C used qual/quant data but Freud only used qual for difference. Then put that they both used observations and interviews to gather information (I was struggling with what to put) but I'd reasoned my point well.

    THEN THE MONSTER. Oh my lord what were they thinking? I was so prepared for them not doing it again then they went ahead and did it. I put this:
    Confidentiality, e.g. Little Hans was not his real name and was used to protect his identity. Then some babble about how it doesn't damage reputation.
    Informed Consent, e.g. EW gave her consent by showing up to their hypnoses sessions and whatnot. Then same babble.
    P.O.P, e.g. EW suffered horrible blackouts on a more regular basis then babble.
    Right to Withdraw, e.g. Little Hans did not get the option to withdraw from research once it started (then, you guessed it, babble).

    I'd be surprised if I get into double figures on that q but could someone say what they put for that q. And the Rosenhan one on section A.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gdowning11)
    Can someone help?I think section A was good for some of it, just the Sperry, Pilivian and Reicher and Haslam that I know i got wrong... do you think that even if i got these questions wrong that it would ruin my chances of passing?Section B went good and Section C was average

    do you think these section A errors will lower it or will it not matter?
    also can anyone get the answers to the last question? thanks
    Well, say, at a minimum you lost 12 (4x3) marks in Section A (48/60), 10 marks in Section B (26/36) and 10 in Section C (14/24), you'd still manage a B. However, it's unlikely that you'll get full marks in Section A besides those 3 questions, so take that as you will.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For Piliavin btw, I put Critical area early and adjacent area early, would I lose many marks for saying for each, 4th station after 20 seconds (rather than 70 seconds or whatever it was).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiytt)
    Well, say, at a minimum you lost 12 (4x3) marks in Section A (48/60), 10 marks in Section B (26/36) and 10 in Section C (14/24), you'd still manage a B. However, it's unlikely that you'll get full marks in Section A besides those 3 questionDescribe how the developmental approach could explain phobias, so take that as you will.
    That would be an A, it equals 88 marks, it's 81 to get an A!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I
    (Original post by Funeroonie)
    e

    4 marks - describe how quantitative data was gained
    6m - strengths and weaknesses of quantitative data
    8m - results
    8m -discuss the ethical issues
    8 - suggest and evaluate improvements for ethical issues
    thank you!!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiytt)
    Well, say, at a minimum you lost 12 (4x3) marks in Section A (48/60), 10 marks in Section B (26/36) and 10 in Section C (14/24), you'd still manage a B. However, it's unlikely that you'll get full marks in Section A besides those 3 questions, so take that as you will.
    48 + 26 + 14 = 88 - thats a definite A!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    There was also a 2 marker on why the research took place.
    Idk about Bandura but Piliavin was due to that Kitty woman who got raped and killed outside a block of apartments. And Milgram was because he wanted to show that americans wouldn't be as obedient as nazis were during ww2 (obviously wrong, but we won't know that before it takes place).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Section A:

    Loftus I said control was randomising the position of the critical q in the questionnaire given to p's
    This would avoid order effects and allow for cause and effect to be established by avoiding extraneous variables therefore improving validity

    Baron Cohen eyes task
    All pictures of same area of face, all black and white, all same size and all magazine photos displayed to p's with 2 mental states underneath which were semantic opposites and complex and simple mental states were used. The target word was decided by panel of 8 judges who unanimously decided on the target word. P's had to pick the right one.

    Savage
    Pointing board was a laminated version of the lexigram and wasn't used by Sherman and Austin as it wasn't clear what they were pointing at. Data from it gathered by real time observations by researchers.

    Milgram
    40 men from New Haven area in America aged 20-50 from a range of occupations such as postal clerks and labourers
    Strength is that due to being from a range of occupations it is generalisable

    Reicher
    Cognitive alternative operationalised by introduction of 10th prisoner the trade unionist
    This aimed to give the prisoners new ideas as to how to deal with their situation

    Piliavin
    Critical early; model would stand in critical area and help victim 70 seconds after they collapsed
    Adjacent early ; model stood in adjacent area and helped victim 70 seconds after they collapsed

    Bandura
    Male aggressive model caused more physical aggression in both boys and girls
    Female aggressive model caused more verbal aggression in girls

    Samuel and Bryant
    One judgement and standard 2 question conditions
    One judgement was where the child was asked the question after they had seen the transformation take place e.g after the counters had been spread out

    Maguire
    Variables were time spent as taxi driver and volume in right posterior hippocampus
    Conclusion was there was a positive correlation

    Sperry
    Can't remember the qs

    Dement and kleitman
    Told they should report to lab just before usual bedtime and to avoid caffeine and alcohol on day of study but to eat normally
    Once there they had electrodes placed on them; EEG, dog and emg electrodes and placed in a dark quiet room

    Rosenhan
    They acted normally and joined in on ward activities
    They took notes of their observations of interactions between staff and patients

    Thigpen and cleckley
    Eve White had iq of 110 but eve black had iq of 104
    In the EEG measure eve white and jane had 11 cycles per min but eve black had 12.5 cycles per min

    Griffiths
    Ethical issues upheld were consent and withdrawal
    Consent: although didn't gain consent of ps he obtained informed consent of the amusement park owner
    Withdrawal: ps had right to withdraw after 60 gambles and could object to using the fruitskill machine


    Those were my answers, hoping they weren't too bad !
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    That was a very easy exam.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling about your A-level results?

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.