3Timing and attack strategy 2 hours in totalSection A and B worth 48 marksSection C worth 35 marks70 mins50 minsEvery mark counts.6 marks is the difference between a grade.
4The research methods specification RMabThe application of scientific method in psychologyThe major features of science, including replicability, objectivity, theory construction, hypothesis testing, the use of empirical methods.Validating new knowledge and the role of peer review.
5A good scientist is a skeptic. Science ≠ laboratory. Science is important.Knowledge vs belief.Test message
6The scientific process Observe behaviour around youDevelop an explanation/hypothesisProduce a research predictionConduct a study to test the prediction and get resultsDraw conclusionsRefine the explanation/hypothesisBibb Latané and John Darley
7Exam FOCUSA drug company sells special capsules claiming they will improve exam performance. Their claims are based on observations made by their own research unit involving a local school.Explain why their claim cannot be accepted as scientific evidence. Refer to some of the major features of science in your answer. (6 marks)A challenging question because candidates needed to apply their knowledge. They often knew about what makes something scientific (objectivity, replicability, etc) but seemed unable to engage with the stem. There were lots of answers involving paradigm shift, which were not relevant to this question.The teacher has only experienced one school in a particular catchment area so she has only observed a very limited number of 5 year-olds (issues of sampling and replicability).She has found out that children do not eat anything nourishing simply by chatting with the children. She has no corroborative evidence from eg parents (issues of objectivity).She uses vague phrases such as 'decent breakfast' without being clear what this means (operationalisation).She has generated a theory and made predictions based on flimsy evidence.She has not used any scientific method to lead to her conclusions eg a carefullycontrolled experiment, survey or observation.She has drawn conclusions about the effects of breakfast without considering othervariables which might affect reading skills and behaviour.
8Validating new knowledge RMabThe scientific processPeer reviewScientists find out about each other’s work by reading journal articles.Tends to reject papers that challenge conventional research.Tends to reject replications.Tends to favour well-known researchers.Is anonymity better? Or worse?Errors don’t get corrected.Web publications.AbstractIntroductionMethodResultsDiscussionConclusion
9Exam FOCUSJune 2012Design a study to test whether there is a difference in the musical ability of left-handed students and right-handed students. You have access to a sixth form of 200 students.You should:identify the design that you would useexplain an appropriate sampling method and justify your choicedescribe the procedure that you would use, including details of how you would assess musical abilitywrite a suitable debrief for these participants.(10 marks)This question had a range of answers from students that covered marks from The mark scheme allowed students to argue for different ways of designing the experiment (independent measures or matched pairs) and of generating a sample (volunteer or random selection from the two groups) provided these were workable and justified. Some common errors included:suggesting an inappropriate design (repeated measures) which did not take account of the information relating to left and right handerssuggesting a sampling method but not explaining how it would yield an appropriate sample of left and right handersassuming that a maths test also needed to be completed (ie incorrect IV)failing to provide any procedural informationproducing a debrief which was not suitable to be read out to participantsproviding standardised instructions and claiming they were a debrief.Some schools and colleges had clearly prepared their students well and many showed an impressive understanding of experimental design. Others struggled with the question and/or, failed to read the instructions and therefore gained very few marks. Once again, advice to teachers is: to do practical work. It was clear that some students were very familiar with designing experiments and they had a strong advantage here.
10Exam FOCUS Design (1 mark) Independent groups or matched pairs Sampling(2 marks)Award 1 mark for explaining an appropriate sampling method and 1 further mark for justifying why this method would be appropriate.Stratified sampling would be used as there can be two stratas, left and right-handed. Once the students are put into these groups, random sampling can be used to reduce any bias. This can be done by placing the name of every student who is left-handed on a piece of paper and then being folded and put in a sealed box. Then there should be 40 students chosen out of the box. The same procedure should be repeated for right-handed students. There will then be two groups of 40 students, left and right handed.
11Exam FOCUS Procedure and assessment of musical ability (4 marks) Award 1 mark for procedure, 1 mark for assessing musical ability and two further marks for elaboration of either or both of these.The procedure would involve each participant (P) going into a room alone, with only a piano and sheet showing how to play a certain song. Each P will have 10 minutes to learn as much as possible. They will then play the song to a qualified music teacher who can rate their performance in terms of musical grades. By having got a piano and now a piece of music it limits the number of Ps who have high musical ability on one instrument although there will be anomalies for those who already have high musical ability on the piano. Also by having a qualified music teacher use official grades, this gets rid of the validity issues the teacher previously had.
12Exam FOCUS Debrief (3 marks) Award up to 3 marks for writing a debrief. This could include the aim of the study, thanking participants for taking part, asking if they have any questions, relevant ethical considerations.If this is not suitable to be read out to participants, maximum 1 mark.Ps will be debriefed after performing. The debrief would be: Thank you for participating in our study. We can ensure that your identity will be kept completely anonymous along with the records of your musical ability. If you have any further questions or concerns, do not hesitate to ask . debrief. rk scheme).
13The research methods specification RMabDesigning psychological investigationsSelection and application of appropriate research methods.Implications of sampling strategies, for example, bias and generalising.Issues of reliability, including types of reliability, assessment of reliability, improving reliability.Assessing and improving validity, including internal and external.Ethical considerations in design and conduct of psychological research.
14Exam FOCUS Writing hypotheses Blanco et al. conducted a study to test the effectiveness of using SSRIs to treat gamblers. Research had shown that low levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin may be a cause of addictive behaviour. SSRIs raise the levels of serotonin.32 gamblers were recruited for this study. Over a period of six months one group were given SSRIs (200 mg/day) and the other group took a placebo. At the end of the trial period the researchers assessed gambling behaviour in terms of reduction in money and time spent gambling per week.Write a directional hypothesis for this study. (3 marks)
15Exam FOCUS Writing too much or too little A psychologist developed a scale to measure personality. It was important for this scale to be reliable. To test this he gave the scale to 30 participants.What is meant by reliability? (1 mark)Explain how the reliability of the scores in this study could be checked. (4 marks)
16Exam FOCUS Writing too much or too little Observation of one child – number of verbally aggressive actsExplain why the psychologist is concerned about inter-rater reliability? (4 mark)Many candidates produced lengthy answers, wasting time explaining inter-rater reliability or reliability.If the psychologist does find low reliability, what could she do to improve inter-rater reliability before proceeding with the observational research? (4 marks)Most candidates could offer at least one solution to this issue but many stopped after making their initial point e.g. 'give them more training’.Time slots0-1011-2021-3031-4041-5051-60Observer A25643Observer B1Very common errors were ‘get more observers’ or ‘average the results’ or 'only use one observer'.
17Exam FOCUS Applying your knowledge The psychologist needed to obtain informed consent from her participants. Write a brief consent form which would be suitable for this study. You should include some details of what participants could expect to happen in the study and how they would be protected. (5 marks)
18Topic: Research methods The A2 Examination: January 2010 exam Unit 4Topic: Research methodsA psychologist was interested in testing a new treatment for people with eating disorders. She put adverts in several London clinics to recruit participants. Thirty people cam forward and they were all given a structured interview by a trained therapist. The therapist then calculated a numerical score for each participant as a measure of their current functioning, where 50 indicates excellent, healthy functioning and zero indicates failure to function adequately. The psychologist then randomly allocated half the participants to a treatment group and half to a no-treatment group. After eight weeks, each participant was re-assessed using a structured interview conducted by the same trained therapist, and given a new numerical score. The therapist did not know which participants had been in either group.For each participant, the psychologist calculated an improvement score by subtracting the score at the start of the study from the score after eight weeks. The greater the number, the better the improvement.Table 1: Median and range of improvement scores for the treatment and no-treatment groupTreatment group No-treatment groupMedianRange
19Exam FOCUSJan 2010 Part (f)Must mention not getting treatment.For full marks must include both procedural and ethical points.Sound = 5 marksReasonable = 4 – 3 marksBasic = 2 marksRudimentary = 1 markIf you take part in this study you are agreeing to be interviewed by a psychologist about your eating habits and other aspects of your life. Your current health will be assessed twice by the psychologist in two separate interviews. You will be part of a group that either receives treatment or doesn’t receive treatment. All information you provide will be kept confidential.3 marks
20The research methods specification Candidates will be expected to: RMabThe research methods specification Candidates will be expected to:Design investigations.Understand how to analyse and interpret data arising from such investigations.Report on practical investigations.In order to gain sufficient understanding … candidates will need to practise these skills by carrying out, analysing and reporting small-scale investigations.
21Design it yourself Exam FOCUS What other questions? Test a new idea: People notice the change when the person is the same age as them rather than a different age.You have access to a sixth form of 200 students.identify the design that you would useexplain an appropriate sampling method and justify your choicedescribe the procedure that you would use, including details of how you would assess the DVwrite a suitable debrief for these participants.What other questions?
22The research methods specification RMabData analysis and reporting on investigationsAppropriate selection of graphical representations.Probability and significance, including the interpretation of significance and Type 1/Type 2 errors.Factors affecting choice of statistical test, including levels of measurement.The use of inferential analysis, including Spearman’s Rho, Mann-Whitney, Wilcoxon, Chi-Squared.Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data.Conventions of reporting on psychological investigations.
23Probability and significance Null hypothesisThere is nothing going on.Alternative hypothesisThis is the fixed pack.There is something going on.
24Probability and significance 1 cardProbability is 50:50 that the card is redi.e. 0.550 %2 cards0.5 x 0.5 = 0.2525 %3 cards0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.125About 12 %4 cards0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 =About 6 %5 cards0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 =About 3 %6 cards0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 =About 1 %5 % level
25Probability and significance I keep seeing my best friend’s boyfriend around campus talking to this other girlHe says nothing is going onIf nothing is going on, how come he seems to always be with her?REJECT NULL HYPOTHESISACCEPT ALTERNATIVEWhat’s the likelihood of that if there is nothing going on?THERE IS SOMETHING GOING ON
26RM ab Probability and significance Research study Null hypothesis? Group A does test with loud musicGroup B does test in silenceThere is nothing going on.There is no difference between test results from Group A and B.Null hypothesis?There is something going on.Test results from Group A and B are different.Alternative hypothesis?We do the study …
27RM ab Probability and significance What can you infer from these graphs?There is something going onThere is nothing going onNot sure
29RM ab Levels of measurement Nominal names Ordinal ordered Interval equal intervals
30RM ab Inferential statistics Bandura’s Bobo study involved two groups of children, one group saw a violent model and the other group saw a non-violent model. Both groups were later rated for their aggressiveness in a play situation.In a similar study, children were not rated but were simply classed as aggressive or not.
31Determining significance Table of critical values for Spearman’s rhoObserved value of rho must be equal or greater than the critical value in the table for significance to be shown)Level of significance for a one-tailed test0.050.01Level of significance for a two-tailed test0.100.02N = 150.4430.521160.4290.503170.4140.485The observed (calculated) value of rho is ….The hypothesis was directional.There were 15 participants.5% level of significance.Is it significant?
32RM Stating conclusions The observed (calculated) value of rho is ….The critical value (p ≤ 0.05) isIt is significant.Statement of resultsAs the observed value (0.456)is greater than the critical value (0.443)at p ≤ 0.05,this means we can reject the null hypothesisand conclude that …. [state the hypothesis].
33Type 1 and Type 2 errorsIf you were on a jury which mistake would you avoid?Convicting an innocent man (Type 1 error).Letting a guilty man go free? (Type 2 error)Null hypothesis: This man is not guilty i.e. innocent.TruthGuiltyNot guiltyTest resultGuilty verdictTrue positiveFalse positive(guilt reported)TYPE 1 ERRORNot guilty verdictFalse negative(guilt not detected)TYPE 2 ERRORTrue negative
34(illness not detected) Which way would you lean?Null hypothesis: This person is not ill i.e. is healthy. There is nothing going on.TruthHas cancerNo cancer i.e. healthyDoctor says you have cancerTrue positiveFalse positive(illness reported)TYPE 1 ERRORDoctor says you are healthyFalse negative(illness not detected)TYPE 2 ERRORTrue negative
35Type 1 and 2 errors happen when a hypothesis is mistakenly rejected. Type I error H0 is rejected when it is in fact true.Type 2 error H0 accepted when it is false.TruthH1 is correctThere is something going on.Ho is correctThere is nothing going on.There is no real effect.Test resultReject nullTrue positiveFalse positive(likely when p too lenient i.e. 10%)TYPE I ERRORAccept nullFalse negative(likely when p too stringent i.e. 1%)TYPE II ERRORTrue negativeType 1 error happens when we set the bar too high.Test message
36Exam FOCUSJan 2010 Part (c)A psychologist found a significant difference at the 5% level for a one-tailed test (p ≤ 0.05).What is the likelihood of the psychologist having made a Type 1 error in this study? Explain your answer. (2 marks)No credit for explaining Type 1.1 in 20 chance (5%) or less that the results are due to chance and that we have rejected null hypothesis that is true (false positive)The likelihood of a Type 1 error is about average as the level of significance chosen (5%) is neither too high or too low).
37Qualitative research Source Thematic analysis Summarising Newspapers, TV, interviews etcThematic analysisTop downBottom upBehavioural categories/themes emergeSummarisingQuotesExamplesOne significant indication of schizophrenia was my inability to plan my future. I took courses in University that sounded interesting with no real plan. I was notably incapable of developing another long term romantic relationships and in fact was very anxious in any kind of social situation.At graduate school I kept going to the university clinic about my physical health, afraid that my health was going to fall apart. I thought the town water supply had become contaminated because it tasted metallic to me. I was convinced I was going to die of a heart attack. The most frightening was that I had contracted a form of syphilis that couldn't be detected by regular lab tests.
38RM o Write enough for the marks available. But don’t write too much. Answer the question.Study past questions and mark schemes. Study the report on the exam to see where students went wrong.