Section B: Review of studies

Section B has two questions

  • a 12 marker where toy are provided with some unseen material and asked a 12 mark questions about it
  • a 16 marker which is about two of the classic studies and how they relate to one of the eleven issues and debates.

This page is about the 16 marker, but click here for advice on the unseen 12 marker:

The Unseen 12 marker

For this exercise need you to be completely confident with the major details of all of the CLASSIC STUDIES:

  • Social: Sherif (1954) – Robbers Cave
  • Cognitive: Baddeley (1966b): Experiment 1, 2 or 3
  • Biological: Raine et al (1997)
  • Learning: Watson and Rayner (1920) – Little Albert
  • Clinical: Rosenhan (1973) – On being sane in insane places

Use this table to think about how the classic studies fit with the different issues and debates: synoptic-review-of-studies

Once you have identified the studies which are most likely to come up matched against the respective issues and debates you need to practice comparative essays, that is comparing how two studies relate to different issues and debates.

  • Number the studies from 1-6; roll a dice to select a study, roll again to see which issue and debates you have to discuss with relation to this study
  • there are 9 issues and debates, in order that you don’t leave out the last three (there are only 6 sides on a dice!), if you get 1, 2 or 3 on your second roll, roll again and see whether you get an odd or an even number; if its even do the 1st, 2nd or 3rd issue and/or debate from the first six, if its odd you do the 1st, 2nd or 3rd (as dictated by the first dice) from the last set of 3 (that probably doesn’t make sense to everyone, but someone will get it!!)
  • To practice comparing studies, why not roll two dice to select combinations of any two studies and then roll the dice again to decide whether you have to give a similarity (even numbers) or a difference (odd numbers); you should compare them with regard to any of the issues and debates (roll two dice as you did before) and GRAVESOCs
  • You should create a Venn diagram to record the similarities and differences between the studies with regard to the synoptic issues and debates.

Practice Questions (16 markers)

With a mark allocation of 16 guaranteed for the review of studies question, the options are rather limited with regards the command term. Unless there is a context/scenario the nl command term that can be used is evaluate. Assess and TWE at 16 marks both require of context. A quote or short statement could be provided for you to explore so this is an option meaning assess or TWE could be used. Below you will find a range of studies combined with the various I and Ds but all have been combined with ‘Evaluate’.

  1. Evaluate Sherif (1954) and Baddeley (1966b) with regard to ethical issues
  2. Evaluate the extent to which the studies of Sherif (1954) and Raine (1997) can be considered  to be scientific?
  3. Evaluate the contribution to society of the studies if Baddeley (1966b) and Watson and Rayner (1920)
  4. Evaluate the role of nature and nurture in explaining the findings of Raine (1997) and Watson and Rayner (1920)
  5. Evaluate the extent to which the Watson and Rayner and Loftus and Palmer can be considered reductionist?
  6. Evaluate the changes to psychology over time since the classic studies of Rosenhan and Loftus and Palmer
  7. Evaluate practical issues in the design and implementation of the studies of Rosenhan and Raine
  8. Evaluate the cultural and gender issues relating to the studies of Sherif and Rosenhan
  9. Evaluate the extent to which the findings of Rosenhan and Raine can be considered socially sensitive?
  10. Evaluate the extent to which the studies by Raine (1997) and Watson and Rayner (1920) studies could be used in social control