Commentary on Candidate Evidence. Psychology (Higher): Assignment

Transcription

1 Commentary on Candidate Evidence Psychology (Higher): Assignment SQA 1 of 8

2 Commentary on candidate evidence The evidence for this candidate has achieved the following marks for each stage of this course assessment component. Candidate 1 The candidate was awarded 4 marks. In the first paragraph, the candidate analyses their findings by referring to their mean results. They relate the parts (the mean values) to the whole (their experimental hypothesis). Note the use of analytic language, such as This is shown through., whereas. showing a difference of, This suggests that, and in the paragraph below, However (2 marks). The candidate has then gone on to analyse the findings by referring to, in this instance, their median and range values. They relate the parts (the median and range values) to the whole (their research aims/hypothesis) (2 marks). Candidate 2 The candidate was awarded 2 marks. The first sentence at the start of the paragraph is enough to attract a mark for evaluation. The candidate has then gone on to explain how an extraneous variable noise could have become a confounding one (ie one that impacted on the results of their study), therefore an analysis mark can be given. Candidate 3 The candidate was awarded 2 marks. The first paragraph gains a mark for evaluation. The candidate goes on to give the potential impact of this extraneous variable on the interpretation of their findings, and gains a mark for analysis by doing so. Note that it is not enough to say and this may have affected results : the candidate must go on to say why/how to gain a mark for analysis. SQA 2 of 8

3 Candidate 4 The candidate was awarded 2 marks. The candidate gains 1 analytic mark for explaining how their primary research results relate to one of the background research studies presented in their introduction. Analysis marks can also be gained by making links between the candidates findings and relevant theories/approaches, eg the biological approach. Another analytic mark gained in this paragraph for, again, making a link between their own findings and those of background studies. Candidate 5 The candidate was awarded 1 mark. 1 analytic mark given for linking the findings of the research to that of Jenness. The last part of the paragraph would attract no marks in itself (it would be more relevant to the Introduction section of the report), but it does set up the final sentence, which does attract a mark for analysis, as the candidate makes a specific link between the concept of ISI and their own findings. Candidate 6 The candidate was awarded 2 marks. This real-world application would gain one mark for analysis, but as the candidate goes on to relate this application to supporting research, another analysis mark is awarded. Candidate Methods: ethics subsection (10 marks) The candidate was awarded 1 mark. SQA 3 of 8

4 The points made are largely generic, in that they could apply to most pieces of research. There is also scant reference to how the candidate has ensured that the BPS code of conduct has been adhered to in their own procedure. Candidate 8 Methods: ethics subsection (10 marks) The candidate was awarded 4 marks. The candidate s response does conform with the prompt to describe how the ethical guidelines have been followed and how ethical breaches have been avoided. For example, they confirmed this by signing a consent form The researchers ensured this by having no names written on answer sheets. The final point about giving participants unlimited time to recall words is also specific to the candidate s own procedure, which illustrates well the skill of application. SQA 4 of 8

5 Candidate evidence SQA 5 of 8

6 Candidate 1 Analysis of results The results of the experiment support the hypothesis that participants responses in an ambiguous task will differ if they are exposed to other people s judgements. The majority of participants who were given a pre-completed sheet gave unrealistically high estimations and therefore conformed to what they believed were other people s judgements. This is shown through the mean values which are lower and more reasonable for Group A than Group B illustrating that participants were more likely to conform when shown other supposed answers. The number of sweets in the jar was 161. Group A s mean value was 134 whereas Group B had a mean value of 336 showing a difference of 202. Group A s value is closer to the actual number than Group B s whose mean value is more than double the actual number of sweets. This suggests that conformity occurred when people were exposed to other people s estimates, supporting the experimental hypothesis. The median showed a similar trend for both groups with Group B s median being unrealistically high at 400 whereas Group A s median being rational at 150. The range of Group A s estimations, 80, indicates a relatively small extent of varied answers showing that the members of Group A had similar answers. This shows that when provided with a blank sheet participants were likely to produce reasonable and realistic estimations. However, Group B s extreme range value of 420 illustrated that not all participants conformed with only 3 out of 5 participants supporting the hypothesis. This suggests that there must be other factors explaining why individuals may not conform. Candidate 2 Analysing the possible influence of variables, other than the research variables There was background noise or distractions because the experiment was taking in the participants natural environment. This was not easily controlled and some background noise and distractions did take place. This could affect the validity of the results in this experiment as if the participants were not completely focused on the task then they have not had the time to look at the photos carefully and just wrote down their first thought. Candidate 3 An extraneous variable which could have affected the results is the environment in which the experiment took place. Participants took part in the experiment in many different rooms within the same area. This means that the results could have been influenced based on the location rather than the estimates on the piece of paper. SQA 6 of 8

7 Candidate 4 By making links between the candidates own findings and those of background studies or theories provided in the Introduction. The results agree with Hysing s (2015) study showing a negative correlation between sleep and screen use in adolescence. In Hysing s study there were 9846 participants that took part in the research whereas in this research there was a total of 40 participants involved meaning the results in the Hysing study may be more accurate and representative. The results also support Carter s (2016) study, Bernstein s (2016) study, Patel s (2015) study as they all have similar results. Each study shows that the participant has poor quality of sleep and daytime sleepiness due to spending time on an electronic device before bed. Candidate 5 When looking at what is being studied in this investigation, the results show that people do conform when shown previous false estimates. Jenness (1932) study compares in terms of results to this investigation. Both show that participants will conform towards a group norm when exposed to the thoughts of peers. Although the procedures of the experiments differ, the results were comparable when identifying conformity. The reason behind these results could be either of the two reasons identified by Deutsch and Gerrard (1955); Normative Social Influence (NSI), where a person yields to group pressure because they want to fit it with the group, and Informational Group Influence (ISI), where a person conforms because they are unclear of the situation and look to other people for guidance. In this experiment, it is more likely to be ISI as the task set was ambiguous, and in this circumstance people will want to conform to the previous guesses because they believe that these people are more informed about the task than themselves. Candidate 6 By relating the implications of the candidate s primary research findings in terms of real world application or suggestions for new research within this topic (new research must be substantially different to the candidate s primary research). This research signifies that diagrams, posters and mind maps are a more effective way of preparing for an exam than writing alone. Many students already use mind maps to improve the number of items they can retain at one time. Bower et al. (1969) identified the importance of categorising items into smaller subsections. His work highlighted the influence of organising information into conceptual categories, e.g. when trying to remember different models of the same car the list may begin from the oldest model to the newest model. SQA of 8

8 Candidate Candidate evidence for Ethics in the Methods section of the report All participants signed a consent form (Appendix A) where everything was explained. They knew what they were agreeing to. All participants were treated with respect at all times, and data was kept confidential. Participants were informed that it was not a knowledge or intelligence test and they should not feel bad about the answers given. All participants were informed of the right to withdraw at any time, if they decided not to continue with the experiment. All participants were debriefed; they were given detailed information of the research and researcher s expectations (Appendix C). Candidate 8 In line with British Psychological Society (BPS 2010) regulations, a number of ethical issues were considered during this research. All participants that took part where over the age of 16, they confirmed this by signing a consent form. Confidentiality and anonymity was protected throughout the research. The researchers ensured this by having no names written on answer sheets prohibiting any tracing of results back to participants. Participants were debriefed following the research which informed them of the real purpose of the research and took away any deceit from the research. The participants were given the chance to ask questions following the instructions and the debrief which gave them assurance and protected their well-being. They were given unlimited time to recall the words which minimised their stress levels. SQA 8 of 8