1. Paper 3 mock feedback

2. Reflecting on the mock
You will be given a reflection sheet. You will complete column one as we go through the feedback - write down the topic areas (in red on the following screens) for questions you lost marks on. After we have gone through the feedback, you will complete the last two columns – ‘was this because of’ and ‘what to I need to do now’

3. Issues and debates 1. - Beta bias Most identified a relevant example.
Some did not make it clear how it demonstrates beta bias
2. 1 – Reductionism and Holism
Descriptions of reductionism lacked accuracy: Reductionism - reduces behaviour down to smaller, simpler aspects. Holism – emphasis on the whole person.
Application – simply quoting each Dr wasn’t enough – had to use the information to explain why reductionism/holism relates to each Dr.

4. Issues and debates
2.2 - How to deal with ethical issues Had to say how they deal with ethics – ‘keep all information on depression gathered from the interview anonymous and confidential’ rather than just saying ‘take into account confidentiality’

5. Issues and debates 3. Nature-nurture essay
Some answers did not outline what the debate is about i.e. the importance of heredity and environment in determining behaviour
Generally there was good knowledge of each side of the debate however outline of these sometimes lacked appropriate terminology.
Generally there was good use of evidence to support each side of the debate
Arguments for and against the nature/nurture debate were lacking (e.g. difficult to consider these as separate as nature affects nurture, better to use an interactionist approach)
Generally there was good use of topics but a lot of answers lost focus on discussing the debate and ended up describing the explanations/theories from the topics

6. Gender
8. Atypical sex chromosome patterns Generally answered well. Remember this is for 3 marks though, you get 2 marks for a clear outline of the syndrome which should include physical and psychological features (best to always include the chromosome pattern as well) 9. Role of hormones in gender development Most marks were lost for not making specific links to gender-related behaviour. E.g. maternal behaviours for females Some mixed up Oestrogen with Oxytocin.

7. Gender and RM – Remember RM questions can come up on ANY paper!
10. 1 – Primary and secondary data Most mentioned it is data collected first hand/directly. Some didn’t make distinction with secondary data so missed out on 2nd mark – Evaluation of primary data Most got one or two marks here but answers often lacked clarity. Answers -can have more control over variables, data is more likely to be focussed on the purpose of the research – choosing inferential stats tests Poor performance on this question – you must revise the inferential stats table!

8. 11. Psychodynamic theory of gender development
Too much emphasis on outline.
Emphasis needs to be on resolution of Oedipus/Electra complex
Explicit reference to internalising gender-related behaviours
Evaluation lacked focus on gender development
Temporal validity point was not well explained
Little Hans study wasn’t used well – lacked focus on gender
Challenging evidence was hardly used
Falsifiability was a good point to use but had to refer specifically to concepts specifically related to gender (the oedipus/electra complex)

9. Schizophrenia
16.1 – negative symptoms of SZ Speech poverty was often mixed up with disorganised speech. Needed brief outline for 1 mark not just name symptom. 2nd mark was for elaboration 16.2 – drug therapies for SZ Simply repeating parts of the scenario received limited marks – needed to use the information to explain why atypical’s would be better 16.3 – CBT Remember effectiveness and appropriateness when evaluating treatments Often vague strengths were given that were more descriptive than evaluative e.g. ‘it helps people understand their sz as it shows them delusions are not real.’ Better answers explained why this was good or gave evidence to support effectiveness

10. 17 – psychodynamic explanations of SZ
Could have used double bind, EE or cognitive explanations (meta-representation/central control) Outline of explanation/s were sometimes muddled or too brief.
Some answers referred to biological explanations or diathesis-stress which was not relevant to the question
Generally there was good use of supporting evidence.
Evaluation points related to the issues with how these were investigated were often not well linked back to explanation of SZ.
Effectiveness of family therapy was a good point to use however this often wasn’t linked back to how this supports the explanation.

11. Forensic
30 - Geographic profiling Generally answered well – just remember brief outline for one mark (what is it), elaborate for second mark (e.g’s, further explanations) 31 – problems defining crime Generally answered well – just remember to make it clear why it is problematic – Experimental designs Many answers didn’t actually explain why this was an advantage for this study – just identifying controls for individual differences wasn’t enough 32.2 – Sign test The answer was 2 – many either got this wrong or didn’t answer the question.

12. 32.3 – interpreting critical values and significance
Poor performance, generally because previous question was answered wrong.
33 – ways of measuring crime
Generally this was answered ok. However:
Some answers had vague descriptions of the ways of measuring crime.
Most answers included relevant evaluation points but there was a lack of clear elaboration and/or discussion of these.

13. 34 – top down profiling
The question asks you to distinguish – limited to 2 marks if you did not make a comparison.
There were quite a few answers that were very list-like – stronger answers took one or two aspects and spoke about how these differ between the two types
e.g. Organised offenders show evidence of having planned the crime in advance whereas disorganised offenders show little evidence of planning – this means organised offenders often target their victims which differs from disorganised offenders who are more spontaneous, spur of the moment act.

14. Reflecting on mock Follow the instructions below:
Complete the ‘Was this because of…’column:
Think about why you lost marks and what you need to do now to ensure you do better in your final Paper 3 exam.
Now, complete the ‘What do I need to do now?’ column.
This must be SPECIFIC.
E.g. Questions where you received no marks:
If you have issues with understanding the topic area – I will attend a subject extension to go over this with a teacher, then I will redo the question to improve and get it marked in a sub ext.
If it is a lack of revision - I will revise the topic area and redo the question to improve. I will then take it to a subject ext. to be re-marked.