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

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by themoocher)
    Did ya'll read the maguire graph properly? It was the /change/ in volume of hippocampus. It went from like -8 to +8, so it wasn't a positive or negative correlation because the volume decreased then increased?
    the line of best fit showed a positive correlation, both co variables increased (not necessarily at the same rate)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JgR1997)
    Did anyone else find it difficult to think of results in milgram? I said 60% gave 450v, 100% gave 300v, participants showed signs of distress for example biting lips and sweating, I also said that many were concerned for the welfare of the learner and asked whether he was okay, and said that when people protested to continuing they did actually continue when prompted to by the experimenter and said one participant had a mental breakdown and experimenters had to intervene to take that participant out of the experiment. I just don't think I wrote enough for 8 marks, it didn't fill up the space given, I dunno if that's just my squished handwriting or... I dunno
    I believe 65% gave 450v. The rest is all good, I think.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tasmins)
    Yeah it means the background so milgram - WW2 are the germans different
    Piliavin - kitty genovese
    rosenhan - Schizophrenia, stickyness of psychiatric labels, DSM
    Flipping hell, I messed up! I know it's only 2 marks, But I think it's already tight enough as it is :/
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by em1123)
    For people that done Milgram on section C...

    What did you write for findings? I wrote literally all I could remember which I thought was everything but it was only like half the page and wasn't quite 8 points...
    - 100% (40/40) of the participants obeyed to 300 volts, at which point 5 refused to continue.
    - The remaining participants administered one further electric shock (315 volts), at which point 4 participants refused to continue.
    - 65% of participants fully obeyed to 450 volts.
    - Participants showed signs of nervousness and tension (they sweated, trembled, groaned, stuttered and dug their fingernails into their flesh).
    - 3/40 participants had full-blown, uncontrollable seizures (1 was so bad that the study had to be halted).
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rstlss)
    Am I the only one who found Section A harder then section B & C?
    I just really hope I got an A, I messed up on the Monkey study, Griffiths & Reicher & haslam. I lost around 12 marks just there alone so leaving me with a best of 48/60, take into account some other mistakes around 44? I think I did really well on the other 30/36? & 20/24? Really hoping I didn't mess up to bad on the section A and some of my guesses were right. Would be really gutted if I don't get an A :'(
    I totally agree with you. Thought I would fly by section A as its usually just simple straightforward details that I kinda know. But some of the questions were vague and not clear what they were asking for so I don't know if I got those right plus I've now realised I've made stupid little mistakes and missed details!!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by annieprincess)
    I believe 65% gave 450v. The rest is all good, I think.
    Oh yeah sorry, typing error, thankfully I did put 65% in the exam, do you remember what the griffiths section A questions was?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by em1123)
    I totally agree with you. Thought I would fly by section A as its usually just simple straightforward details that I kinda know. But some of the questions were vague and not clear what they were asking for so I don't know if I got those right plus I've now realised I've made stupid little mistakes and missed details!!
    Man, If I open that paper and see a B my hearts gonna sink, cause I know I easily could've gotten an A :/
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rstlss)
    Man, If I open that paper and see a B my hearts gonna sink, cause I know I easily could've gotten an A :/
    B is still good though! And I think everyone usually does better than they thought they done because we all just naturally over think things. I'll just be happy with a C so I don't have to retake
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JgR1997)
    Oh yeah sorry, typing error, thankfully I did put 65% in the exam, do you remember what the griffiths section A questions was?
    Something to do with state two ethical issues raised in this study? Something along those lines...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CurleysWife)
    Something to do with state two ethical issues raised in this study? Something along those lines...
    Oh yes I remember, ethical issues upheld in the study
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JgR1997)
    Oh yeah sorry, typing error, thankfully I did put 65% in the exam, do you remember what the griffiths section A questions was?
    Oh, that's good then!

    The Griffiths question was asking about the ethical issues upheld in the study.

    I didn't understand the phrasing - whether it meant which ethical guidelines they followed, or didn't follow.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by annieprincess)
    Oh, that's good then!

    The Griffiths question was asking about the ethical issues upheld in the study.

    I didn't understand the phrasing - whether it meant which ethical guidelines they followed, or didn't follow.
    i said one ethical issue upheld was the result was confidential
    the second one inform consent as it was a volunteer sample
    do you think that right
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by annieprincess)
    Oh, that's good then!

    The Griffiths question was asking about the ethical issues upheld in the study.

    I didn't understand the phrasing - whether it meant which ethical guidelines they followed, or didn't follow.
    I spokeabout how they addressed possible ethical issues, so confidentiality participants details were not published eg age, gender, occupation and then also debriefing because participants were asked whether or not they would like to listen to the verbalisations they had made (basically I repeated what had previously came up on a markscheme)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tasmins)
    the line of best fit showed a positive correlation, both co variables increased (not necessarily at the same rate)
    both both the variables didn't increase because it wasn't the volume of the hippocampus, it was the change in volume. Maybe i'm reading it wrong but i assumed -8 mean't the volume decreased
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by annieprincess)
    Maybe. I just didn't think it would get marks, so I wrote about something else.
    Thats fine but I think it would haha
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by themoocher)
    both both the variables didn't increase because it wasn't the volume of the hippocampus, it was the change in volume. Maybe i'm reading it wrong but i assumed -8 mean't the volume decreased
    so what did you put for the answer
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by veryscared123)
    so what did you put for the answer
    I said something like, at 200 months the volume of the hippocampus increased, but i may have read the graph wrong.

    It was a conclusion though, not a finding so i doubt it's right, idk, im second guessing myself!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by themoocher)
    I said something like, at 200 months the volume of the hippocampus increased, but i may have read the graph wrong.

    It was a conclusion though, not a finding so i doubt it's right, idk, im second guessing myself!
    yh i think i got confused by the graph too i put no correlation but positive is right
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by themoocher)
    I said something like, at 200 months the volume of the hippocampus increased, but i may have read the graph wrong.

    It was a conclusion though, not a finding so i doubt it's right, idk, im second guessing myself!
    I wrote the exact same thing tho cus I went back and saw that it went from negative to positive and changes my answer!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lizcookk)
    I wrote the exact same thing tho cus I went back and saw that it went from negative to positive and changes my answer!
    oh thank god!! when i first read it i was like no this it too easy.... so then i properly read it but im not sure whether i over thinking it aha!
 
 
 
Poll
Would you rather

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.