Unit 3 Section B Flashcards
How does this section work?
2 parts of this, divided into environmental psychology and criminal psychology
For part = 10 marker, 15 marker, 10 marker
Part A question
Outline a key study and then apply the findings to explain something (the conclusions)
What approach is needed for part a?
Half the time spent on describing the study
Half the time spent applying it to explain something
What to include in the description of the study for part a?
The aim, the sample, sample method, experimental design, procedure, data collection
What to include in the application of the study in part a?
Suggest 2 results and what these say about the findings thus 2 explanations we can take away on the specific topic at hand
How is part a marked?
10 marks in total
5 marks for description, 5 marks for application of findings
Part b questions
Discuss a methodological issue/debate in relation to research into one of the topics in environmental/criminal psychology
What mnemonic is needed for part b questions?
‘A DOT and 3 PEECs’
Part b: what is the DOT?
Definition of the term( methodological issue/debate we are asked about)
What debates could we be asked about in part b?
Nature-nurture, individual-situational, reductionism-holism, free will-determinism, ethics, usefulness, social sensitivity, psychology as a science
Part B: what are the 3 PEECs?
3x point, example, explanation, counter argument
In the 3 PEECs, what should the point be?
A general point
Research into _ can be seen as supporting this side of a debate/ having this methodological issue if…
But does not mention specific study and is VAGUE
In the 3 PEECs, what should the example be?
A link to the key research or additional research that will demonstrate the original point made
Do NOT go into too much detail, just 1 sentence needed
In the 3 PEECs, what should the explanation be?
Explain how the example of research given shows why it supports one side of a debate or demonstrates a methodological issue
In the 3 PEECs what should the counter argument be?
A general counter to why we could argue the research actually supports the other side of the debate OR why it’s good we have this methodological issue