Mock Exam Feedback Paper 3 2019

Reminder about paper 3 itself You will write all answers in an answer booklet not on ‘little lines’ after each Q. SO – Help the examiner by leaving space between each answer. Use as much paper as you want. You might want to come back to something so leave a few lines Always write the question number You do the options Sz, Gender and Forensics. There are other options e.g. developmental psych, relationships, aggression. SO DO NOT ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS. Good idea immediately open paper, find the sections you don’t do and put a line through it.

How close are you to the next grade down or the next grade up? Grade Boundaries Check the adding-up on your paper to make sure no errors have occurred A* 73 – 96 A 64 – 72 B 55 – 63 C 45 – 54 D 35 – 44 E 26 – 34 U 0 - 26 How close are you to the next grade down or the next grade up?

Q.3- levels of explanation For full marks, you must explain how explanations vary from those at a lower or fundamental level focusing on basic components or units to those at a higher more holistic multivariable level. Holistic e.g. cultural explanation Reductionist e.g. genetic explanations

Q.4- hard vs. soft determinism You must give a comparison word to get any credit, e.g. ‘whereas’ or ‘however’ To get more than one mark, you must apply your explanation to a behaviour Example: Hard determinism the view that all behaviour is caused by forces outside a person’s control whereas soft determinism is the view that behaviour is not caused by external events but by their own wishes/conscious desires. …….. Give example from the stem.

Q.5- nature nurture essay This was marked according to the banding system on the mark scheme, rather than giving a separate mark for AO1 and AO3 Part of your evaluation should focus on the merits of the interactionist approach Students are not correctly defining the debate. The debate is whether biological or environmental factors have the greatest influence on behaviour. It doesn’t ‘look at’ the influence of biology and environment Similarly, the discussion should focus on the debate, not just an evaluation of biological and/or social theories A lot of discussion points were not linked back to the debate.

Gender Q.7 You must have a contrast word, such as ‘whereas’ to get any credit, otherwise you have not described a difference For example: In the stability stage, although the child understands his/her own gender remains fixed in spite of outward changes such as hair length, he/she believes that the gender of others might change if outward appearance changes. However, in the constancy stage they know that everyone’s gender is fixed in all situations and would not be swayed by superficial characteristics like hair length.

Q.9- outline (AO1) Your outline must make reference to gender development, otherwise you will score zero for AO1 Some students wrote far too much about the Oedipus complex for a three mark outline You should briefly outline the process for both sexes (doesn’t have to be equal). Don’t say ‘Freud’s explanation of gender identity ‘includes’ the Oedipus/Electra complex. According to Freud, gender identity occurs in the phallic stage of as a result of the resolution of the Oedipus/Electra complex

Q9- Evaluation (AO3) The evaluations must relate (link back) to the gender part of the theory. In other words, must explain why (for example) the theory of gender development is likely to be wrong, particularly if you have used the point about the concept of penis envy being outdated in modern society, to get credit, you must link back to how this means that the theory cannot adequately explain gender identity in modern times, as the girl would not have the motivation to identify with the mother without it Little Hans is fairly weak evidence for the theory, so use of it should be focused on the unscientific nature of the research evidence Better points could include: Use of evidence to support/challenge e.g. children from ‘atypical’ households do not have sex-role identification problems. Evidence to show that children show gender typical behaviours before the age of 4/5 (looked at this for gender schema theory) Lack of testability of concepts e.g. Oedipus complex being unconscious and non falsifiable. (link back to gender!!)

Q.10a Include the data in your response Include a comparison statement “the recall of activities of watching TV was almost extremely high (47/50), but recall for ironing was only 23/50. “ 3 marks for explaining why….. What is a gender schema Why does it explain the results above- more likely to recall info that fits with the schema Less likely to remember info that doesn’t fit with schema e.g. ironing because this information is ignored.

10.b Although it was a very straightforward question, a lot of answers were very unclear or inaccurate. “The researchers use whoever is available at the time and willing to take part in the study” Not just “willing participants”

10.c Your answers should make reference to the fact that the sample in the study are children. It should be related to that particular study There is no need to explain what unstructured interviews are, you won’t get any credit for this