psychology 4 to 8 mark questions

Psychology 4 to 8 mark Questions

Some exam terms and what they mean.

Analyse - Take apart an idea, concept or statement and examine and criticise its sub-parts in detail. You have to be methodical and logical.

Compare - Put items side by side to see their similarities and differences – a balanced (objective) answer is required

Describe - Give details of processes, properties, events and so on.

Discuss - Describe, explain, give examples, points for and against, then analyse and evaluate the results.

Explain - Give detailed reasons for an idea, principle or result, situation, attitude and so on. You may need to give some analysis as well.

Evaluate – Strengths and Weaknesses, (at least 2 of each)a judgement in the conclusion

4 to 8 mark questions In simple terms if the question is asking you for 4 marks it is asking for 4 points to be made.

Depending on what the question is asking you it could be:

Easy just remember the PEE Structure.

1 mark Point

1 mark to support your point

1 mark another point

1 mark to support the 2nd point

Top Tip, think about the topic the question is based on. Normally the examiner will be looking to see if you understand the topic. They will NEVER ask you a large mark question if the there are not enough points to make in the section.

You can be awarded marks on how you structure the answer, so that it makes sense and follows on from the question.

An example 6 marks could be: Outline the results and/or conclusion of the __________ Study. 2 marks

1 or 2 points (to be on the safe side) of the results

1 or 2 points (to be on the safe side) of what these results could then conclude.

Describe One strength and One weakness of ____________ Study 4 marks.

These are at the end of each study in the book.

Strength

1 or 2 Strengths (to be on the safe side) and then WHY they are strengths.

Weakness

1 or 2 Weaknesses (to be on the safe side) and then WHY they are strengths.

If you are asked to comment on a study someone in the examination is conducting

Q? Describe how _____ could explain how Arthur's might effect results? 5 Marks

The first thing you must do is reference Arthur's study in the answer. If you do not do this you can only get Max 2 marks.

It has asked you about Arthur’s study so reference it back.

Then same rules apply, 1 mark one point.

PEE Structure.

Philip was always pushing over other children at school. None of the other childrenwould play with him. His teachers thought his aggression came from his biologicalmake up.(a) Describe how the biological approach might explain Philip’s aggressive behaviour. (3)

Philip is a boy so his aggression can be caused by high levels

testosterone making him aggressive/eq;

He would have inherited this aggressive gene from his mother and/or

father/eq; (ignore just ‘he could have got it from his parents, as this

could be SLT)

Philip may have abnormal functioning of the limbic system that

responds inappropriately to a trigger/eq;

His amygdala does not interpret/respond correctly and elicits

aggression/damage to this area can cause aggression/eq;

Balanced arguments Nature V Nurture

With these types of questions the examiner is looking for a balanced understanding.

Looking at Both sides.

Using the nature-nurture debate, explain why people might have phobias. (5)

Nature

Preparedness explains that some objects/animals are more likely to become phobias over others/eq;

This is due to our evolutionary past/eq;

· The objects that we are more ready to develop phobias of are likely to have caused us harm in our past/eq;

This suggests that we have a biological/innate readiness for certain phobias/eq;

We have a genetic inbuilt preparedness to fear

danger/eq;

Nature Preparedness explains that some objects/animals are more likely to become phobias over others/eq;

This is due to our evolutionary past/eq;

· The objects that we are more ready to develop phobias of are likely to have caused us harm in our past/eq;

This suggests that we have a biological/innate readiness for certain phobias/eq;

We have a genetic inbuilt preparedness to fear

danger/eq;

Nurture

Social learning says we learn phobias by observing others with phobias/eq;

Role models such as parents we identify with are modelled/eq;

If we see a role model frightened of an object we learn vicariously and avoid the object too/eq;

Cook and Mineka showed how monkeys model wild monkeys fear response to snakes/eq;

Townsend showed how a fear of the dentist is more likely if a parent also shares the fear/eq;

Classical conditioning can explain how we learn a phobia through association of the object with a fear response/eq;

Bennet-Levy and Marteau show how we are more ready to fear certain animals that we perceive as ugly and slimy/eq;

Watson and Raynor conditioned Little Albert’s fear of a white rat which supports learning of phobia’s/eq;

This supports the nurture side of the debate/eq

Both

Phobias running in families could be either nature or

nurture/eq;

We may learn a phobia through imitation or there could

be a genetic link/eq;

Mark

1 – 2 Brief or basic comments that may be limited or one-sided.

3 – 4 Both the nature and nurture debate referred to in the answer.One point made well or two basic points not wellexplained/expressed for BOTH the nature and nurture argument.May be unbalanced.

5 - 6 Good outline of both the nature and nurture argument. Onecomment must be well expressed for both sides of the debate.Answer should be balanced.

Describe the results and/or conclusions of Ramirez et al. 3 Marks

One mark per point/elaboration.

Reject purely male/female findings without reference to culture. No marks for aim(s) or procedure.

Males were more aggressive than females in both cultures/eq;

Spanish were more verbally aggressive (than Japanese)/eq;

Japanese were more physically aggressive (than Spanish)/eq;

Both cultures were equal in anger across both genders/eq;

There are cultural differences in aggression/anger/eq;

The idea of Japanese being more physically aggressive does not fit the stereotype (of being reticent)/the idea of Japanese being less verbally aggressive supports the stereotype/eq; (one mark max for conclusions about stereotype match)

Outline one possible weakness of Ramirez et al’s study. 1mark.

One mark per point/elaboration. Ignore strengths.

Participants may have lied/eq:

They may pretend to be aggressive when they are not (vice versa)/eq;

Self reports are not a measure of real life aggression/eq;

It only measures what they say they will do rather than what they

actually do/eq;

Participants may try and answer as they believe is expected of

them/the researchers/their culture/eq; This is known as demand

characteristics/eq; because they might have guessed the aim of the

study/eq;

Planning for answers Know you case studies!!!!!!!

What are the main case studies for Each Topic and what idea do they support from that topic.

Topic A Biology of the eye – Rods Cones, optic nerve, visual cortex, optic chiasma

Depth Cues – Linear Perspective, Texture Gradient, Relative Size, Superimposition, Height in the Plane.

Illusions – Distortion, After effect, Illusory contour, Ambiguous Figure.

Ponzo Illusion, Herring Illusion, Muller Lyer, Kanizsa triangle,

Gregory V Gestalt

Bartlett

Palmer

Carmichael.

Experimental method.

Topic B Structure and functions of the nervous system, How the brain sends signals.

Freud and dreams

Symbols and Dream analysis

Hobson and McCarleys theory of Dreaming (biological theory) Activation synthesis.

Comparing Dream Theories.

Case Studies – Little Hans

Topic C Whitman

King

Bandurra

Ramirez

Anderson and Dill

Charlton

Williams

Ethical Issues

Educational Psychologist

Censorship and Watershed

Topic D Questionnaires - types of questions

Phobias

SLT, Bandurra, Mineka, Bennet-Levy and Marteau, Slater and Shield

Evolutionary Theory, Seligman (preparedness),

Classical Conditioning Theory – Pavlov (make sure you know the process) Watson and Rayner - Little Albert.

UCS_____________UCR Remember 2.3.2

NS + UCS ________UCR

CS ______________CR