A-level PSYCHOLOGY. PSYB3 Child Development and Applied Options Report on the Examination. June Version: 1.0

Transcription

1 A-level PSYCHOLOGY PSYB3 Child Development and Applied Options Report on the Examination June 2013 Version: 1.0

2 Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk Copyright 2013 AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved. AQA retains the copyright on all its publications. However, registered schools/colleges for AQA are permitted to copy material from this booklet for their own internal use, with the following important exception: AQA cannot give permission to schools/colleges to photocopy any material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within the centre.

3 REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION A-LEVEL PSYCHOLOGY PSYB3 JUNE 2013 Unit 3 (PSYB3): Child Development and Applied Options General Comments Most students attempted answers to the required number of topics, although it was evident that, in cases of scripts demonstrating insufficient knowledge and understanding, more revision would have been useful. As usual in the summer series, many of the entries were from re-sitting students. Probably as a consequence, a significant number of weaker answers lacked relevant knowledge, showed inappropriate selection of material and were generally insubstantial. Where students did have the necessary knowledge, they sometimes lacked the required skills of discussion and evaluation. For example, students would include appropriate material such as a relevant study, but sadly failed to use it to answer the question. In 12-mark answers, many students are still following outlines of studies with methodological criticisms, which, although valid in relation to the study, did nothing to address the question. Poor quality of language often detracted from the content, where barely intelligible sentences failed to convey students ideas sufficiently clearly to enable examiners to award credit. Such difficulty in framing ideas into sensible sentences might, in part, be due to the way in which most students use computers for any extended writing outside of the examination, and thus have little, if any, practice formulating their thoughts and ideas into sentences before putting pen to paper. It might be useful for some students to have more practice hand writing pieces of extended written work so they recognise the imperative of thinking about what they want to say before they start to write. On a more positive note, some excellent scripts were seen, where students used ample knowledge to produce thoughtful discussions that engaged with the question requirements. Whilst it is possible to achieve high grades with what are largely pre-prepared answers, the very best marks rightfully go to those students who demonstrate their ability to construct a line of argument, make pertinent links across different areas of psychology to support their argument, and express complex ideas simply and fluently. Section A Child Development Topic 1 Social Development Question 1 In Q01 students were asked to Describe one way, yet descriptions of a way of investigating were sometimes very vague. Of the many students who chose to write about the Strange Situation, a good number failed to mention a stranger, the key element of the procedure. Although the study did not have to be identified by name, most were identifiable from the detail of the method. A small number of answers gained no credit because they consisted of little more than vague references to behaviours such as imitation, cuddling or motherese. A few students used animal studies despite the explicit instruction not to do so. Question 2 There were many well-applied three-mark answers to question 2. Responses consisting of generic evaluation points without explicit application to the study were limited to one mark. 3 of 9

4 Question 3 For this question most students were able to identify two possible psychological explanations from the stem, although answers consisting of repetition of the stem gained no credit. Question 4 Question 4 was often very well done, with most answers covering both deprivation and privation. Weaker answers often consisted of pages of studies, especially case studies such as Genie and the Koluchova twins, sometimes described in unnecessary detail. Unfortunately, discussions in this type of answer tended to focus on issues irrelevant to the question, such as ethics and general methodological points, which were not linked in any sensible way to the question. Some students included studies which were hardly relevant, such as Ainsworth. Students who wrote pre-prepared essays, most usually, Discuss Bowlby s theory of maternal deprivation, tended to gain limited credit as the material presented was only partially appropriate. Topic 2 Cognitive Development Question 5 Where the focus was on a study, the answers tended to score well. The most commonly seen studies for question 5 were either object permanence work or Baillargeon s impossible event studies. Weak responses focussed on concepts rather than the way of investigating. Thankfully, few students used totally inappropriate material, such as work on conservation. Question 6 Evaluations were generally well done for question 6, with many full mark answers. The issue of validity of the dependent measure was often raised although the term itself was rarely used, and some students referred to the problem as being one of reliability. Question 7 In question 7, most students correctly identified the concept of egocentrism, although, a few tried, unsuccessfully, to formulate an answer based around Amy s lack of object permanence. Application was usually quite straightforward, she cannot see him, so she thinks he cannot see her, except where students simply re-iterated the stem. Question 8 Question 8 was one for which students seemed quite well prepared, although in many cases the terms scaffolding and ZPD were not adequately outlined. For example, it was quite rare to see a complete definition of scaffolding which included reference to the support structure being gradually withdrawn as the child s competence increases. Many weaker answers consisted of bullet-type lists of descriptive points followed by similarly economical lists of evaluative points. Discussion points frequently involved contrast with Piaget, although these contrasts were often no more than unexplained statements, such as, Vygotsky said children were apprentices, but Piaget said they were scientists. 4 of 9

5 Topic 3 Moral Development Question 9 There was frequent confusion for question 9, with a fair proportion of students apparently unaware of the meaning of distributive justice. Many wrote about dilemma research or moral comparison research. Question 10 For those who did choose an appropriate study, evaluations in question 10 tended to focus on the issue of validity. Question 11 It was surprising to see how few students named prosocial reasoning for question 11, even though the stem was clearly one where there was a choice about whether or not to help another person. Many answers consisted of complex accounts of the stages of prosocial reasoning as described by Eisenberg, which were then linked to the scenario, sometimes without success. Question 12 Knowledge of Kohlberg s theory was variable, with some comprehensive stage-by-stage accounts. Less well-informed students tended to list the levels/stages and describe the Heinz dilemma in great detail. Unfortunately, many of the discussions focused almost exclusively on the dilemma method rather than the theory. Evidence that was offered was not always linked to the question, but instead appeared as a stand-alone paragraph with no link, either to what had preceded it or to what followed. Section B Applied Psychology Options Topic 1 Cognition and Law Question 13 Most answers to question 13 and question 14 gained credit, with VIPER accepted as an alternative to sequential for question 14. Question 14 Most answers to question 13 and question 14 gained credit, with VIPER accepted as an alternative to sequential for question14. Question 15 Some excellent responses to question 15 were seen, where students gave clear well reasoned explanations based on the difference between absolute and relative judgements. Weaker answers focused on issues of time and cost but could nevertheless gain some credit. 5 of 9

6 Question 16 A significant number of students apparently missed the instruction at the start of question16, and carried on the theme of line-up/identification in this sub-section, thereby forfeiting marks. Most successful responses were centred on the use of the cognitive interview, although answers consisting solely of description, gained a maximum of two marks. Question 17 Relatively few students engaged with the stem in question 17, presenting instead a pre-prepared response to the slightly different question, Discuss the false memory debate. For those who did focus on evidence in this area, there were useful discussions about whether or not it is possible to recover a repressed memory and of the evidence that memories can be implanted. Material offered as evidence ranged from empirical work by Loftus to anecdotal accounts of case histories. Even more so than in other topic areas, many students simply failed to access what should have been easy AO2 credit because they failed to link evidence they had presented to the question in any way. Topic 2 Schizophrenia and Mood Disorders Question 18 Question 18 was answered well by students using a variety of explanations. Of those taking the biological route, some offered a global biological explanation, whilst others stuck to one aspect of biology, for example, neurochemistry. Many students accessed three or four marks here, although some omitted any discussion, thereby forfeiting two marks. Question 19 Question 19 was very well answered by most students. Question 20 Question 20 was less well done. Treatments were often named rather than outlined and there was frequent failure to explain how the treatment would help, other than to say that it would make Lola happy. Question 21 Question 21 presented problems for two reasons. Firstly, many students mistakenly presented community care as a treatment. Secondly, even where two legitimate treatments were offered, there was minimal comparison. Where community care was offered as a treatment, it was often evident that students understood that it is an alternative living arrangement, which, in itself, does include treatment. Some students even said so. Wherever it was noted that, whilst in community care, treatments such as social skills training might be available, then this could be credited as one of the treatments. Those students who did present community care as a treatment tended to score marks in the bottom two bands. That said, even students presenting two legitimate treatments often scored quite poorly because they failed to compare. 6 of 9

7 Topic 3 Stress and Stress Management Question 22 There were many well-informed and exceptionally detailed responses to question 22, such that a fair number of students gained full marks here. Occasionally, the application was focused on just one character rather than both as required in the question. Weak responses appeared to be built on fairly flimsy knowledge of fight or flight and thus did not include any meaningful explanation of why Mannie regularly became ill. Question 23 Both aspects of question 23 were usually well done, although not all answers were linked explicitly to workplace stress. A number of students who tried to offer hardiness as a personal variable seemed unaware of the three elements of hardiness; challenge, commitment, and control. Those who had a sound grasp of the concept of hardiness tended to score well on application as at least one of the three elements could be linked to Mannie/Jilly. Question 24 Answers to question 24 were variable. Many students completely failed to explain the terms, problem-focused and emotion-focused, or got their definitions the wrong way round. Others launched straight into a list of strategies, some anecdotal, without even stating whether it was emotion-focused or problem-focused. A large number of students offered two or more paragraphs on defence mechanisms without ever identifying them as emotion-focused. Social support content that might have been used appropriately often was not, since to form legitimate content for this question it was necessary to argue that seeking social support could be seen as a strategy. Whether or not this would count as emotion-focused or problem-focused would depend on the type of social support, for example, instrumental support could well be problem-focused, whereas esteem support would be more likely to be emotion-focused. Topic 4 Substance Abuse Question 25 Question 25 was generally well-answered with many references to taking personal control and to specific programmes. A considerable number of students were under the misapprehension that Prochaska s model of behaviour change is a self-management programme. Reasoned discussion in the context of Prochaska s model did gain credit, although this was quite rare to see. Question 26 In Question 26, outlines were normally sufficient to gain at least one knowledge mark, although there was occasional confusion with fear-arousal. References to learning how to resist group pressure and making a public commitment were surprisingly rare given that these are distinguishing components of any social inoculation programme. Unfortunately, applications were often vague reiterations of the preceding outline without tangible links to smoking in teenagers or to the school context. Indeed, some suggestions were about other substances altogether, such as alcohol. 7 of 9

8 Question 27 Basic social psychological concepts were reasonably well covered for question 27, although high level discussion was not much in evidence. For some students, Experts are divided triggered discussion about alternative explanations, although, unfortunately, these sometimes became the main focus of the answer. Some very astute students picked up on the salience of the stem as a media report and presented considered discussions of the role of the media as a social factor in substance abuse. Topic 5 Forensic Psychology Question 28 Most students were limited to two marks for question 28 because discussion was rarely seen. Some fared even worse as they suggested roles that were not identified in the stem, eg reform. Others who stated that one role was punishment could only be credited where it became evident later in the answer that they were talking about retribution, as the word punishment appeared in the stem. Question 29 Many students presented creditworthy outlines of anger management for question 29, most easily accessing marks by briefly describing some or all of the three stages. Poorer responses used vague references to counselling or channelling anger. Discussions were mostly satisfactory, although there were many unsubstantiated assertions about time and cost, and many unsupported references to effectiveness or lack of effectiveness. Question 30 Question 30 was probably the worst answered question on the whole paper and it was quite evident that many students knew little at all about Eysenck s theory as it relates to offending. There was widespread confusion over traits and types, explanations of the key traits neuroticism and extroversion were often very limited and sometimes quite wrong. A substantial number of students could not even identify the criminal personality as someone with a high E and high N score. Discussions were generally very weak and mostly focused on problems with the EPI without any link back to implications for Eysenck s theory of criminal personality. Knowledge of the inherited aspect of the personality and links to the nervous system were rare, with the consequence that the attempted discussion point, Eysenck ignores biology, misfired completely. Even allowing for the fact that this was the last question answered by many students, it is evident that Eysenck s theory or the criminal personality needs to be better addressed. 8 of 9

9 Mark Ranges and Award of Grades Grade boundaries and cumulative percentage grades are available on the Results Statistics page of the AQA Website. Converting Marks into UMS marks Convert raw marks into Uniform Mark Scale (UMS) marks by using the link below. UMS conversion calculator 9 of 9