Www.psych205.com



Mark Scheme for Mock exam Unit 1 November 20185905521463000Q1.Which two of the following are types of conformity? Shade two boxes only. [AO1 = 2]B and DQ2. Briefly discuss two criticisms of Zimbardo's research into conformity to social roles (AO3 = 4)?LevelMarksDescription23 – 4Discussion of two criticisms is clear and coherent. Some detail/expansion may be lacking for 3 marks.11 – 2Two criticisms may be present but briefly stated/identified only. Alternatively, one criticism only may be presented.?0No relevant content.Possible criticisms and discussion:?????????Ethical issues: lack of informed consent, whether or not the consent gained was sufficiently informed; deception; lack of protection from psychological harm – whether or not the distress should have been anticipated.?????????Zimbardo playing a ‘dual-role’. Zimbardo’s own behaviour affected the way in which events unfolded, thus the validity of the findings could be questioned.?????????Methodological issues: sample bias; demand characteristics/lack of internal validity; lack of ecological validity/mundane realism and their implications for the findings.?????????Accept positive points if justified: led to reform of real prisons; valuable insight into human nature, etc.?????????Note that a discussion of two ethical issues/criticisms could gain full marks.Q3. Describe one way in which deception has been dealt with in social influence research.?AO3 = 2Deception has been dealt with by:?????????Presumptive consent?????????Prior general consent?????????Retrospective consent?????????Debriefing.1 mark for a brief answer and a further mark for elaboration. For example, gain presumptive consent (1 mark) by asking people similar to the participant if they think it is OK to do the experiment (further mark for elaboration). Candidates may answer this generically or they may refer to a specific study. For example, Milgram debriefed his participants (1 mark) he reassured them that they were normal and answered all their questions (further mark for elaboration).Q4.Two psychology students were discussing the topic of social influence.‘I find it fascinating how some people are able to resist social influence’, said Jack.‘It must be the result of having a confident personality.’‘I disagree’, replied Sarah. ‘I think resisting social influence depends much more on the presence of others.’Discuss two explanations of resistance to social influence. As part of your discussion, refer to the views expressed by Jack and Sarah in the conversation above.[AO1 = 6, AO2 = 4 and AO3 = 6]?LevelMarksDescription413 – 16Knowledge of two explanations is accurate and generally well detailed. Discussion is thorough and effective. Application to the stem is appropriate and links between theory and stem content are explained. The answer is clear, coherent and focused. Specialist terminology is used effectively. Minor detail and / or expansion of argument sometimes lacking.39 – 12Knowledge of two explanations is evident. Discussion is apparent and mostly effective. There are occasional inaccuracies. Application to the stem is appropriate although links to theory are not always explained. The answer is mostly clear and organised. Specialist terminology mostly used effectively. Lacks focus in places.25 – 8Knowledge of two explanations is present but is vague / inaccurate or one explanation only is present. Focus is mainly on description. Any discussion is only partly effective. Application to the stem is partial. The answer lacks clarity, accuracy and organisation in places. Specialist terminology used inappropriately on occasions.11 – 4Knowledge of explanation(s) is limited. Discussion is limited, poorly focused or absent. Application is limited or absent. The answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies and is poorly organised. Specialist terminology either absent or inappropriately used.?0No relevant content.AO1 ContentKnowledge / description of two explanations of resistance to social influence (usually those named on the specification and implied in stem):?????????locus of control – people with an internal locus of control more likely to resist pressure to conform and less likely to obey than those with an external locus of control; people with an internal locus of control believe they control own circumstances; less concerned with social approval. Credit measurement of locus of control (Rotter, 1966)?????????social support – defiance / non-conformity more likely if others are seen to resist influence; seeing others disobey / not conform gives observer confidence to do so; description of forms of social support – disobedient role models (obedience), having an ally (conformity); explanation of why these produce resistance, eg breaks unanimity of group in conformity situations, challenges legitimacy of authority figure.Credit other acceptable explanations of disobedience / defiance and non-conformity, eg:?????????being in an autonomous state; previous experience; gender; culture; high level of moral reasoning; reactance / the ‘boomerang effect’.Credit also the inverse of factors usually used to explain conformity and obedience, eg (lack of) uniform; (increased) distance between participant and victim / authority figure; (reduced) group size; (lack of) ambiguity of task.Credit knowledge of relevant evidence, eg Gamson et al (1982), Schurz (1985), Feldman and Scheibe (1972), Milgram (1963), Asch (1951).AO2 Possible application:?????????Jack suggests that dispositional factors in resisting social influence are more important?????????Sarah indicates that situational factors are more powerful?????????‘strong personality’ could be read as having an internal locus of control that makes someone better able to resist social influence?????????‘what other people are doing at the time’ relates to whether ‘they’ are seen to be conforming / obeying, suggesting social support is influential in resisting social influence.AO3 Possible discussion points:?????????commentary on two explanations of resistance to social influence?????????use of evidence to support / illustrate the influence of the explanations chosen, eg specific studies of defiance / non-conformity and / or variations of Asch's and / or Milgram's basic experiments that demonstrated increased resistance?????????use of real-world examples to illustrate the explanations?????????other social psychological concepts / processes used to support discussion of the explanations, eg influence of social support may be explained by reduced normative pressure, minority influence?????????comparison / analysis of the relative power of the explanations?????????discussion / analysis of different forms of resistance, eg independent behaviour vs anti-conformity.Credit other relevant discussion points.Only credit evaluation of the methodology used in studies when made relevant to discussion of the explanations.-8572521336000Q5.Annie can still skateboard even though she hasn’t skated for many years.Germaine can still recall what happened on his first day at university even though it was ages ago. Billy remembers the names of the tools he needs to repair the broken tap.Identify two types of long-term memory and explain how these are shown using examples above.(4 marks)Candidates chose two of the three possible answers1 mark: for each correct application in recognising (naming/identifying) each type of long-term memory by matching to the person in the stem.Plus1 mark each for knowledge of a feature of the type of memory explained in the context of the behaviour in the stem.?????????Annie’s case/remembering how to skateboard is an example of procedural memory (1) because she is remembering an action or muscle-based memory (1).?????????Germaine’s case/remembering what happened is an example of episodic memory (or autobiographical memory) (1) because he recalls the events that took place at a specific point in time (1).?????????Billy’s case/remembering the names of tools is an example of semantic memory (1) because he remembers factual/meaningful information (1).Q6. Outline one study that has investigated the effect of anxiety on eyewitness testimony. (4 marks)Candidates must select a study which clearly relates to both anxiety and eyewitness testimony. For full marks there must be some reference to what was done and what was found.In Loftus's (1979) weapon focus experiment more participants correctly identified a person holding a pen (49%) than a person holding a knife covered in blood. Loftus and Burns (1982) found participants who saw a violent version of a crime where a boy was shot in the face had impaired recall for events leading up to the accident. Peters (1988) found participants who visited a healthcare centre were better able to recognise a researcher than a nurse who gave an injection. However, in a real life study Yuille and Cutshall (1986) found witnesses who had been most distressed at the time of a shooting gave the most accurate account five months later. Also Christianson and Hubinette (1993) found victims of genuine bank robberies were more accurate in their recall than bystanders.4 marks??Accurate and reasonably detailedAccurate and reasonably detailed answer that demonstrates sound knowledge and understanding of one study into the effect of anxiety on eyewitness testimony.There is appropriate selection of material to address the question.3 marks??Less detailed but generally accurateGenerally accurate but less detailed answer that demonstrates relevant knowledge and understanding of one study into the effect of anxiety on eyewitness testimony.There is some evidence of selection of material to address the question.2 marks??BasicBasic answer that demonstrates some relevant knowledge and understanding of one study into the effect of anxiety on eyewitness testimony, but lacks detail and may be muddled.There is little evidence of selection of material to address the question.1 mark??Very brief and or flawedVery brief or flawed answer that demonstrates very little knowledge of one study into the effect of anxiety on eyewitness testimony.Selection of material is largely inappropriate.0 marksNo creditworthy material.Q7. Describe and evaluate the multi-store model of memory. Refer to evidence in your answer.(16 marks)Marks for this question: AO1 = 6, AO3 = 10?LevelMarksDescription413 – 16Knowledge is accurate and generally well detailed. Evidence is clear. Discussion / evaluation / application is thorough and effective. The answer is clear, coherent and focused. Specialist terminology is used effectively. Minor detail and / or expansion of argument sometimes lacking.39 – 12Knowledge is evident. Evidence is presented. There are occasional inaccuracies. Discussion / evaluation / application is apparent and mostly effective. The answer is mostly clear and organised. Specialist terminology is mostly used effectively. Lacks focus in places.25 – 8Some knowledge is present. Focus is mainly on description. Any discussion / evaluation / application is only partly effective. The answer lacks clarity, accuracy and organisation in places. Specialist terminology is used inappropriately on occasions.11 – 4Knowledge is limited. Discussion / evaluation / application is limited, poorly focused or absent. The answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies and is poorly organised. Specialist terminology either absent or inappropriately used.?0No relevant content.AO1Marks for accurate description of the model including information about the characteristics (duration, capacity and coding) of each store; linear / information processing model; related types of forgetting; transfer from sensory to STM via attention; description of rehearsal loop. Some marks can be credited for the same information conveyed by an accurately labelled diagram if there is no other creditworthy information provided.AO3Marks for analysis which might include discussion of the issue of rehearsal as a requirement for transfer of information to LTM; criticisms of aspects of the model by comparison with other models, such as arguments that the STS and LTS are not unitary stores; explanation of primacy and recency effects in serial position studies; coding confusion in STM; discussion of the nature of deficits in case studies of neurological damage. Credit evaluation of the methodology of studies only when made relevant to the discussion of the model.Credit use of evidence.Likely studies include: Murdock (1962) Glanzer and Cunitz (1966), Peterson and Peterson (1959), Craik and Watkins (1973), Conrad (1963 / 4), Baddeley (1966), Milner et al (1978), Blakemore (1988), Craik and Tulving (1975), Hyde and Jenkins (1973), and Working Memory studies such as Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan (1975), Hoosain and Salili (1988).Q 8. Write an appropriate, fully operationalised hypothesis for this research (3 marks)Directional hypothesis – 0 marksNon-directional but unclear, clumsy, not operationalised-1 markNot fully operationalised but IV and DV and clear-2 marksFully operationalised-3 marksExample- There will be a difference in the amount of seconds in a 3 minute period that secondary caregiver fathers or primary caregiver fathers spend interacting with their children.Q 9. Calculate the sign test value of s for this research. Explain how you reached your answer.(2 marks)S=2 (1 mark), 2 – so S=2 as lowest value (2 marks)Q 10. With reference to the critical values in Table 1, explain whether or not the value of s that you calculated is significant at the 0.05 level (2 marks)If critical value is not mentioned or is incorrect- 0 marksIf critical value is correct but not fully justified then-1 markN=16, 2 tailed, 0.05 so CV= 3 and so as 2 is less than CV it is significant -2marksQ 11. Explain two ways in which the researcher could improve the reliability in this study (4 marks)Up to 2 marks for explaining two ways you could generally improve reliability of an observation e.g. have more than one observer, train the observers, fully operationalize behavioural categoriesFurther 2 marks for linking to THIS research e.g. The observer carried the observations on the fathers himself and so to improve reliability he would need to get at least one other observer to ensure the observation was not ……Q 12. Identify one behavioural category that could be used in this observation (1 mark)Anything that would be relevant here as interacting Smiling, sticking out tongue etcQ 13. Evaluate research into the effects of institutionalisation (4 marks)There are several evaluation points you could have here- extraneous variables so can’t establish cause and effect, effective longitudinal research, application to real life BUT it must be linked to the effects of institutionalisation for full marks. Possible to give 4 for one evaluation if fully Peeled, elaborated and linked.Strengths of research into the effects of institutionalisation like Rutter’s ERA studies are that they show us that recovery from severe privation is possible and in studies of high scientific quality.The findings show that those like Bowlby who previously believed the effects of privation was irreversible were exaggerated and with a move to a loving environment as quickly as possible most institutionalised children can make full recoveries.Also the studies were longitudinal and expertly carried out despite unavoidable issues with extraneous variables so the children were followed over many years and so we are able to see the real life, long term effects of institutionalisation.These studies are also continuing into the future so we will be able to see even longer term effects and as the findings are from scientific and reliable research (the findings are similar in all of the studies) we can have faith in the results and in what they show us about the effects of institutionalisation.Q 14. Discuss research into the influence of early attachment on childhood and adult relationships (8 marks)Ao1 credit-Bowlby’s theory of the internal working model – primary attachment relationship as a template for later relationships.Continuity hypothesisPrototype vs revisionist perspective Hazan and Shaver’s types of adult relationships and the links with Ainsworth’s secure, insecure-avoidant, insecure-resistant types ? Relationships in later childhood – stages of friendship: eg Selman’s Or any other relevant researchPossible discussion points: ? Evidence to support or challenge Bowlby’s internal working model ? Evidence to support/contradict continuity of attachment type from childhood into adulthood and across generations: eg Fonagy, Steele and Steele 1991, Main 1985, Hazan and Shaver 1987 ? Implications of findings re continuity: eg determinism ? Practical implications: eg bullying in childhood, relationship stability in adulthood ? Issue of cause and effect – research that shows a link cannot establish causality ? Validity of measures of attachment – where used to discuss influence of earlyToo simplistic as life events have impact-as long as actual examples how. Q 15 a) What is meant by ‘statistical infrequency’ as a definition of abnormality? (2 marks)2 marks?for a clear and accurate explanation of the term ‘statistical infrequency’ as a definition of abnormality.1 mark?for a weak, muddled or very limited explanation.Content:?A person’s trait, thinking or behaviour would be considered to be an indication of abnormality if it was found to be numerically (statistically) rare / uncommon / anomalous.b) Evaluate the statistical infrequency definition of abnormality (4 marks)Marks for this question: AO3 = 4 Level Marks Description23-4Evaluation is relevant, generally well-explained and focused. The answer is generally coherent with effective use of specialist terminology.11-2Evaluation is relevant although there is limited explanation and/or limited focus. Specialist terminology is not always used appropriately or is absent.0No relevant content.Possible content:Objective way of defining abnormality Subjectivity of cut-off pointsOverlooks desirable behavioursQ16. Outline Ellis’ ABC model and give one limitation of research into this explanation (6 marks)AO1 – 3 marksAO3 – 3 marksPossible content – AO1Ellis emphasises the role of the situation or event that can trigger irrational thoughts that could lead to depression. Ellis used the ABC model to explain how irrational thoughts affect our behaviour and emotional state. A refers to an activating event B is the belief about why the event occurred, which can be rational or irrational. Someone with depression would likely have irrational beliefsSource of irrational beliefs can stem from mustabatory thinkingC is the consequence- the feelings and behaviour the belief now causes. Irrational beliefs lead to unhealthy emotions which are present in depressionExamples of each of the ABC model can be used to help explanation Possible content – AO3Issue with causation - most evidence linking negative thinking to depression is correlational and doesn’t indicate negative thoughts as a cause of depressionAn interactionist approach may be more appropriate - attempting to explain why or how depression occurs is complex therefore it could be argued that trying to explain depression from a purely cognitive standpoint may not be appropriate.17. a) Outline?two?characteristics of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Refer to Gavin in your answer. (4 marks). AO1 = 2 AO2 = 2?LevelMarksDescription23 – 4Outline of characteristics of OCD is clear. Application to the stem is clear. The answer is generally coherent with effective use of terminology.11 – 2There is limited / partial explanation of the characteristics of OCD and application to the stem. Explanation of OCD characteristics is clear but the application is missing or inaccurate OR application is clear but the explanation is missing or inaccurate. The answer lacks accuracy and detail. Use of terminology is either absent or inappropriate.?0No relevant content.Possible content:?????????A cognitive characteristic would be an irrational belief or persistent recurring thoughts – catastrophic thinking such as: ‘my family is in danger and might get trapped in a house fire’.?????????An emotional characteristic would be feeling anxiety or the reduction of anxiety such as: ‘worry about them’ or ‘feeling calm after making sure a fire cannot start’.?????????A behavioural characteristic would be performing a repetitive action such as: switching plug sockets six times.Credit for two characteristics of OCD, if student offers three, credit the best two.17 b) Discuss neural explanations of OCD. Refer to Gavin in your answer. (8 marks)Marks for this question: AO1 = 3 and AO2 = 2 and AO3 = 3Level MarksDescription47 - 8Knowledge of neural explanations are accurate with some detail. Application is effective. Discussion is thorough and effective. Minor detail and/or expansion of argument is sometimes lacking. The answer is clear, coherent and focused. Specialist terminology is used effectively.35 - 6Knowledge of neural explanations are evident but there are occasional inaccuracies/omissions. Application and/or discussion is mostly effective. The answer is mostly clear and organised but occasionally lacks focus. Specialist terminology is used appropriately23 - 4.Limited knowledge of neural explanations are present. Focus is mainly on description. Any application/discussion is of limited effectiveness. The answer lacks clarity, accuracy and organisation in places. Specialist terminology is used inappropriately on occasions11 - 2Knowledge of neural explanations are very limited. Discussion/application is limited, poorly focused or absent. The answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies and is poorly organised. Specialist terminology is either absent or inappropriately used0No relevant contentPossible content:AO1:low levels of serotonin - normal transmission of mood-relevant information does not take place which means mood, and sometimes other mental processes, are affected e.g. it can make them edgier and more hyperaware of their environments than usual, resulting in increased OCD-related behavioursPiggott et al (1990) found that drugs which increase the level of serotonin in the synaptic gap are effective in treating patients with OCD, suggesting that serotonin is a contributory factor.High levels of dopamine have been linked to OCD. This may be because dopamine is thought to influence concentration which could explain why OCD individuals experience an inability to stop focussing on obsessive thoughts and repetitive behaviours.The orbital frontal cortex sends a message of panic to the caudate nucleus. In a brain of an OCD sufferer, the caudate nucleus is faulty and sends this potentially faulty message of panic to the thalamus, which then sends a strong signal back to the OFC that carries out an action. This will keep repeating on a loop, which is why someone with OCD performs compulsions, which are repetitive rituals.Research has found sufferers of OCD have elevated levels of activity in the orbitofrontal cortex and the caudate nucleus (located in the basal ganglia).PET scans of patients with OCD have shown higher levels of activity in the OFC. The orbitofrontal cortex is part of a brain circuit; one of the functions of this circuit appears to be turning sensory information into thoughts and actions. Primitive impulses, for example to check and clean, arise from the orbitofrontal cortex in response to sensory inputs.AO2:‘gripped with the thought that my family is in danger ‘ High dopamine – inability to stop focussing on obsessive thoughts and repetitive behaviours.‘switch each socket on and off - press each switch six times’ – Low serotonin - Obsessive checking - hyperaware of their environments.‘I worry about them being trapped in a house fire’ – OFC sends worry message about family being trapped in house fire to the caudate nucleus which is faulty and sends faulty message to thalamus leading to Gavin obsessively switching the plugs on and off six times.AO3:Supporting evidence - Hu (2006) compared serotonin activity in 169 OCD sufferers and 253 non-sufferers, finding serotonin levels to be lower in the OCD patients therefore supporting the link between low levels of serotonin and OCD.A review of brain-imaging research shows elevated activity in the orbital region and the caudate nucleus has been found consistently in OCD patients compared to healthy controls. After treatment, activity in these brain areas reduces to a level comparable to that of controls as found by Saxena and Rauch (2000).Issue with causation Attachment mark schemeWrite an appropriate, fully operationalised hypothesis for this research (3 marks)Directional hypothesis – 0 marksNon-directional but unclear, clumsy, not operationalised-1 markNot fully operationalised but IV and DV and clear-2 marksFully operationalised-3 marksExample- There will be a difference in the amount of seconds in a 3 minute period that secondary caregiver fathers or primary caregiver fathers spend interacting with their children.Calculate the sign test value of s for this research. Explain how you reached your answer.(2 marks)S=2 (1 mark)14 +, 2 – so S=2 as lowest value (2 marks)With reference to the critical values in Table 1, explain whether or not the value of s that you calculated is significant at the 0.05 level (2 marks)If critical value is not mentioned or is incorrect- 0 marksIf critical value is correct but not fully justified then-1 markN=16, 2 tailed, 0.05 so CV= 3 and so as 2 is less than CV it is significant -2marksExplain two ways in which the researcher could improve the reliability in this study (4 marks)Up to 2 marks for explaining two ways you could generally improve reliability of an observation e.g. have more than one observer, train the observers, fully operationalize behavioural categoriesFurther 2 marks for linking to THIS research e.g. The observer carried the observations on the fathers himself and so to improve reliability he would need to get at least one other observer to ensure the observation was not ……Identify one behavioural category that could be used in this observation (1 mark)Anything that would be relevant here as interacting Smiling, sticking out tongue etcEvaluate research into the effects of institutionalisation (4 marks)There are several evaluation points you could have here- extraneous variables so can’t establish cause and effect, effective longitudinal research, application to real life BUT it must be linked to the effects of institutionalisation for full marks. Possible to give 4 for one evaluation if fully Peeled, elaborated and linked.Strengths of research into the effects of institutionalisation like Rutter’s ERA studies are that they show us that recovery from severe privation is possible and in studies of high scientific quality.The findings show that those like Bowlby who previously believed the effects of privation was irreversible were exaggerated and with a move to a loving environment as quickly as possible most institutionalised children can make full recoveries.Also the studies were longitudinal and expertly carried out despite unavoidable issues with extraneous variables so the children were followed over many years and so we are able to see the real life, long term effects of institutionalisation.These studies are also continuing into the future so we will be able to see even longer term effects and as the findings are from scientific and reliable research (the findings are similar in all of the studies) we can have faith in the results and in what they show us about the effects of institutionalisation.Discuss research into the influence of early attachment on childhood and adult relationships (8 marks)Ao1 credit-Bowlby’s theory of the internal working model – primary attachment relationship as a template for later relationships.Continuity hypothesisPrototype vs revisionist perspective Hazan and Shaver’s types of adult relationships and the links with Ainsworth’s secure, insecure-avoidant, insecure-resistant types ? Relationships in later childhood – stages of friendship: eg Selman’s Or any other relevant researchPossible discussion points: ? Evidence to support or challenge Bowlby’s internal working model ? Evidence to support/contradict continuity of attachment type from childhood into adulthood and across generations: eg Fonagy, Steele and Steele 1991, Main 1985, Hazan and Shaver 1987 ? Implications of findings re continuity: eg determinism ? Practical implications: eg bullying in childhood, relationship stability in adulthood ? Issue of cause and effect – research that shows a link cannot establish causality ? Validity of measures of attachment – where used to discuss influence of earlyToo simplistic as life events have impact-as long as actual examples how. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download