1. Internal exam paper 1
Feedback

2. Section A

3. QS 1a Abigail scenario – suggest 2 closed questions that could be used in her questionnaire (2)
E.g. Do you find that art students are easy to get a long with? Yes or No. (1)
The question must be related to the perceptions of art students by science students and the options must be clear (I.e. Yes/No or on a scale of 1 to 5 where one is strongly agree and 5 is strongly disagree)

4. Qs 1b- Explain how Abigail can use one type of interview (2)
The answer has to be contextualised and must refer to one type of questionnaire.
Point – type of interview
Explain/justify – How could she do this?
E.g. Abigail could use a structured interview to investigate the science students perceptions of art students. This would allow Abigail to standardise her set list of questions and ask every science students the same question without deviating from the set list.

5. QS 1D – Explain why researches use SD (2)
Researchers use the standard deviation (SD) to measure how spread the data is from the mean. The lower the SD the more clustered the scores are to the mean.
Researchers may use the SD as it is more representative of the whole data set. It uses all of the scores in the data to working out how disperse the data is rather than just the Highest or lowest score when calculating the range.
Just providing a definition or description of SD is not sufficient as the QS asks you to explain why researchers use SD (each point must be justified)

6. 1e) With reference to social identity theory explain why science students may be prejudiced towards the art students (6)
There are three stages
Social categorisation - explain and apply by giving example (2 marks) in/out groups
Social identification – explain and apply by giving example apply (2 marks) absorbing beliefs/characteristics
Social comparison – explain and apply by giving example apply (2 marks) comparing in group to out group – bias towards outgroup and in group favouritism to boost self esteem

7. 1F) Explain how individual differences can explain prejudice (4)
Lack of knowledge in regards to RWA
Submission – what is this? How does it relate to prejudice?
Aggression - what is this? How does it relate to prejudice?
Conventionalism - what is this? How does it relate to prejudice?
OCEAN – Common mistakes
Common answer: The more open the less prejudice. This is not accurately explained.
Cohrs et al. found a negative correlation between openness and RWA and concluded that the higher in openness someone scores, the less RWA and therefore the less prejudiced they are.

8. 2. Definition of stratified sampling and strength
This type of question requires A01 and A03 knowledge of sampling techniques
You get this type of questions for any of the sampling techniques and of course you get could be asked for more A03

9. Q3 – check the question
Milgram conduced a number of laboratory experiments studies into obedience.
Evaluate Milgram’s research into obedience. (8)
Not just Milgram’s 1963 original study – variations should be evaluated too.
How can you do this? Spend a few minutes coming up with a plan for a 8 marker.

10. 10 mins - to review and ask questions
Review section A
Choose a questions to rewrite using feedback – how does this improve your answer?

11. Section B

12. How can you improve this answer?
Qs 4 Using schema theory explain why Liam and Emily have given different directions to the food hall
Knowledge of schema and knowledge of how they can affect memory and recall are essential
Key words:
Cognitive framework
Interpreting events/information
Previous experiences
Helps us make sense of…
‘Fill in gaps’
Each point should be directly linked to the scenario
How can you improve this answer?

13. 4b 2 weaknesses of reconstructive memory
Common mistake – Providing lots of detail on Wynn and Logie Study without explaining why this research may question the validity of reconstructive memory
Common mistake – Stating that this theory is reductionist because it doesn’t provide enough detail - this is not what reductionism is about
Key words for reductionism/holism
Oversimplified/basic
Complex
Reconstructive memory is one of the models that has a strong ‘holistic’ argument
Why?
Why is this a problem?

14. 5- Explain your key question
Common mistake – not using theories or research to explain your key question
The question requires you to apply this knowledge to your key question
Due to the wording of the question you should refer the WMM as well as other theories (models) or research (e.g. from Holmes or supporting evidence from WMM)
Please refer to the revision session on the key question for examples.

15. 6 a & 6b - explain IV and DV using Sarah’s research
What is an IV – what is the IV in Sarah’s research? (2 marks)
What is a DV – what is the DV in Sarah’s research? (2 marks)
Answers must be contextualised I.e.
DV – The dependent variable is what Sarah has to measure to see if the independent variable (type of word) has had an effect on recall.
So, Sarah has to measure how many words (either acoustically similar or dissimilar) are correctly recalled our of 15.

16. 6c and D – draw a bar graph and state one conclusion
Common mistakes:
Missing out the X axis label
Incorrect Y label or title (i.e. not referring to mean scores) 6D
Common mistake was to provide the result rather than state what the results tells us (a conclusion).
The results show that acoustically dissimilar words are easier to recall than acoustically similar words.

17. QS 7 Evaluate Case studies (8)
Careful with conclusions!
QS 7 Evaluate Case studies (8)
Common mistakes/issues:
No choosing the ‘strongest points’
i.e. ethics may be a problem but it is not as relevant as low generalisability.
If you are only providing 2 points it is particularly important to choose your points carefully to construct a strong argument.
Not providing the correct evidence to support your point.
E.g. generalisability – evidence should be related to the fact that HM and his injury and cognitive deficits were unique. I.e. researchers have never had another case exactly like his. Just referring to general knowledge about HM does not support the point.
Great use of triangulation as a strength though!

18. 10 mins on Section B Review section B
Choose a questions to rewrite using feedback – how does this improve your answer?

19. Section C (12 marker)

20. Qs 8 Evaluate how well research in social psychology and cognitive psychology has met the code of ethics and conduct
A01?
A03?
Knowledge of the code of ethics is essential – the guidelines must be explained by using examples from the research. How did they break guidelines?
You should also refer to the standards (respect, responsibility, competence, integrity)
Example PEC plan
P – Research in social psychology has not met the code of ethics and conduct fully, due to controversial studies such as Milgram (1963).
E – Milgram study ………
Right to withdraw – what is it? How did he go against it?
Deception – how did he deceive pts?
Protection of pts – What is this? What does the code state? How do we know this was violated?
C – so?

21. Working on Qs 8 – how can you improve your answer?
Plan an answer
Start re-writing you PECs

22. H/W review/redo answers from your paper