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

AQA A2 Psychology PSYA3/PSYA4 Revision Thread 2016 Watch

Announcements
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onica)
    I'm just checking through my folder and for psychological explanations for schizophrenia, my essay includes cognitive and psychodynamic explanations, but would dysfunctional families be a relevant one or should I just leave it out?
    II've not heard of that one, how about expressed emotion or double blind theory, double bind theory has tons of A02 points, also out of interest how much A02 points do you have for the cognitive and psychodynamic explanations.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Guys what is the structure you would
    Use for a 10 marker on research methods??
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by louise.18)
    Hope this is of use!
    Discuss issues associated with the classification and/or diagnosis of schizophrenia (8 marks + 16 marks):

    Issues related to the classification and diagnosis of schizophrenia (SCZ) includes reliability and validity. Reliability means that there is good consistency over time and between different clinicians diagnosis of the same patient, whereas validity refers to how accurately SCZ is diagnosed.

    Issues with reliability first arise due to the main diagnostic tools having differing diagnostic criteria for SCZ. Consequently, diagnosis is inconsistent between different parts of the world, which is not helped by the DSM being culturally bias towards Americans. This was highlighted by Copeland (1971), who found that when diagnosing the same patients, US clinicians diagnosed SCZ in 69% of cases, whereas UK clinicians diagnosed SCZ in just 2% of the same cases. This raises clear issues of reliability between the ICD and DSM in diagnosing SCZ, as diagnosis should be universal. Also, despite claims for increased reliability in the DSM, there is still little evidence that the DSM is routinely used with high reliability by mental health clinicians. This was demonstrated by Whaley (2001), who found inter-rater reliability between health professionals using the DSM was as low as 0.11 in diagnosis of SCZ. This therefore implies that the DSM tool is unreliable for diagnosing SCZ. Also, there is also no physical cause that can be conclusively measured for SCZ, and so a great deal of emphasis is placed in the patients ability to report symptoms retrospectively, of which they may not accurately describe. The interpretation of symptoms is therefore subjective and down to the person doing the diagnosis. This means that varying skill, knowledge and experience of health professionals can also affect reliable diagnosis between them.

    Furthermore, Rosenhan (1973) also demonstrated the limitations of diagnostic classification, after illustrating that psychiatrists could not reliably tell the difference between the sane and insane (scz sufferers). This therefore provides further evidence that there are issues with the reliability of the classification and diagnostic system of SCZ. However, the study was carried out 30 years ago and methods of diagnosis have improved, such as the the use of the standardised interview schedules to assess patients and the ICD and DSM being bought more in line with one another in order to improve the reliability diagnosis. But, the ICD and DSM still do not entirely agree on the subtypes of SCZ, with the DSM recognises 5 and the ICD 7 subtypes. This questions the reliability in diagnosis, as a sufferer could be diagnosed as one type of SCZ according the the DSM and a different type using the ICD, and this can also have major implications such as the sufferer receiving the wrong treatment.

    Reliability and validity are linked together, and if health professionals cannot conclusively agree who has SCZ (low reliability), this raises the question of what it actually is (validity) and whether our understanding of it is sufficient. However, Schneider developed the First-Rank symptoms that he believed distinguished SCZ from other disorders e.g. delusions of being controlled, hearing hallucinatory voices. The belief was that the existence of these would make diagnosis more reliable and thus more valid. However, issues with validity arise as such symptoms overlap with other disorders such as depression, with Ellason and Ross noting that people with dissociative identity disorder (DID) actually have more schizophrenic symptoms than people diagnosed with it. This raises the issue of comorbidity, as symptoms that appear to fit with SCZ may be a combination of other illnesses that resemble it, therefore affecting the validity of diagnosis and making treatment difficult. However, attempts are being made to ensure that the boundaries between different disorders are clear, which will help to increase reliability and validity of SCZ diagnosis. However, misdiagnosis can have major consequences for those diagnosed as it can lead to individuals being labelled by their scz diagnosis. While labelling can be helpful in terms of providing the appropriate treatment, it can be stigmatising and lead to self-fulfilling prophecy. This highlights major ethical concerns as a person can only ever be classed as schizophrenic in remission and not cured, meaning such a label may stay with them and resultantly affect other areas of their life. Although, it could be argued that having a label for your illness is comforting to some individuals.

    Another aspect of validity is the issue of prognosis. Diagnosis of schizophrenia has low predictive validity as it is unable to predict the outcome of how the disorder develops and how people respond to treatment, which also compromises the validity of diagnosis of SCZ. However, that fact that 20% do recover to their previous level of functioning does suggest that the current diagnosis of SCZ is not completely invalid.

    Further issues arise as we are still unclear as to what causes SCZ, meaning classification, diagnosis and even treatment become difficult, as without knowing what causes it it is hard to fully classify. Moreover, the fact that the DSM and ICD have been revised numerous times further suggests that SCZ is not fully understood. However, revisions of the DSM and ICD does highlight that there is an increase in the current understanding of SCZ and its characteristics, and having the current diagnostic tools are arguably better than having nothing at all, as careful diagnosis can lead to effective treatment programmes, which would otherwise, not be offered.
    Thank you!!!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by qwertyuipdoe)
    Guys what is the structure you would
    Use for a 10 marker on research methods??
    The experimental design questions are so annoying.

    But I do something like this:
    Hypothesis (Although it may not be credited if a previous question has asked about this)
    IV/DV
    Group design (Some questions specify which one, if it does this is just basically outlining what kind of group design that is an evaluating it)
    Extraneous variables such as standardized instructions, environmental etc. All of them get marks so just throw them in.

    I don't think I've missed anything?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yasx_)
    Thank you!!!
    I know this wouldn't gain marks but it would enhance the answer if a few clinical characteristics were added :-)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunDun111)
    II've not heard of that one, how about expressed emotion or double blind theory, double bind theory has tons of A02 points, also out of interest how much A02 points do you have for the cognitive and psychodynamic explanations.
    My teacher gave us a sheet and the heading was dysfunctional families but talks about expressed emotion and double bind so I guess it's right. Silly me, I thought the explanation was dysfunctional family!

    I mean I'm a bit confused with cognitive. I know you can talk about the two models in your outline, such as the Frith model and Hemsley model, but I had a look at the past papers that had psychological explanations, and the mark scheme said that you wouldn't get credit for mentioning the Hemsley model as it's not relevant. The mark scheme didn't mention about psychodynamic explanations either
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone have tips on remembering the differences between reliability and validity and internal/external for each?

    They all sound the same and no matter how much I read over it it flies out of my head immediately


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone have access to the leaked 2015 paper that didn't get released??
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone have access to the leaked 2015 paper from last year??
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by кяя)
    Does anyone have tips on remembering the differences between reliability and validity and internal/external for each?

    They all sound the same and no matter how much I read over it it flies out of my head immediately


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Reliability = consistency
    Example: getting the same result every time is reliable
    Validity = accuracy/truth
    Example: getting the correct result is valid

    Internal validity = are they measuring what they think they're measuring
    Example: does doing more past papers improve results or is it really the number of apples you eat that improve results?
    External validity = how well the results generalise outside the experiment (real world, people etc.)
    Example: are 45 year old females really representative of all gamers?
    Hope this helps If it doesn't then let me know.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Masuma98)
    Does anyone have access to the leaked 2015 paper from last year??
    I have a hard copy.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Masuma98)
    Does anyone have access to the leaked 2015 paper that didn't get released??
    Yh for schizophrenia it was clinical characteristics (4)
    Out line Biological explanation(4)
    Evaluate bioogical explanation(16)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Any predictions for schizophrenia or addiction
    Is it likely that clinical characteristics or psycholgical explanation could come up
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Giving rep to those who have helped in this thread so far.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    For media pro and antisocial behaviour when talking about the SLT is it ok to talk about Bandura's Bobo doll study?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by evekay)
    in exactly the same boat, pray for us

    that's a shout though, what happens if you miss the whole section on addiction?
    Haha yaa hmm you might scrape a D or low C

    what is the grade you need in psychology?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miajohnsonhall)
    it was not terrible, not great either! it really felt like they were trying to catch us out :-( how did you find it?
    yeah i felt the same, i think 2/3 essays went ok but the other one i feel like i messed up a bit...but i'm just gonna try and forget about it now
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Marli-Ruth)
    Yeah! Lots of repeating questions which no-one was really prepared for! Maybe they'll do the same with unit 4?

    Lots of people did I think! On the aggression! How did you mess up? Was it the whole plural thing?
    yep it was the plural....i think i included both but not sure..i was trying to write as fast as i can so i can't remember. And that sucks! i didnt bother learning the essays that came up last year and i was lucky as they didnt ask anything this year but then i heard about the ppl doing gender and i realised i probably shouldnt risk it for psya4 :/
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Is it too late to start revising for this exam?? I need a B fml
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lucytal)
    For media pro and antisocial behaviour when talking about the SLT is it ok to talk about Bandura's Bobo doll study?
    for antisocial behaviour, yeah. Cos it's about the negative effects of media.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
  • 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.