Mark Scheme January 2013 (Results) GCE Psychology (6PS03 .

3y ago
39 Views
2 Downloads
239.93 KB
46 Pages
Last View : 15d ago
Last Download : 6m ago
Upload by : Evelyn Loftin
Transcription

Mark SchemeJanuary 2013 (Results)GCE Psychology (6PS03) Paper 01Applications of Psychology

Edexcel and BTEC QualificationsEdexcel and BTEC qualifications come from Pearson, the world’s leading learningcompany. We provide a wide range of qualifications including academic,vocational, occupational and specific programmes for employers. For furtherinformation, please call our GCE line on 0844 576 0025, our GCSE team on 0844576 0027, or visit our qualifications website at www.edexcel.com. Forinformation about our BTEC qualifications, please call 0844 576 0026, or visit ourwebsite at www.btec.co.uk.If you have any subject specific questions about this specification that requirethe help of a subject specialist, you may find our Ask The Expert email servicehelpful.Ask The Expert can be accessed online at the following ernatively, you can speak directly to the subject team at Pearson aboutEdexcel qualifications. Their contact details can be found on this link:www.edexcel.com/teachingservicesPearson: helping people progress, everywhereOur aim is to help everyone progress in their lives through education. We believein every kind of learning, for all kinds of people, wherever they are in the world.We’ve been involved in education for over 150 years, and by working across 70countries, in 100 languages, we have built an international reputation for raisingachievement through innovation in education. Find out more about how we canhelp you and your students at: www.pearson.com/ukJanuary 2013Publications Code UA034804All the material in this publication is copyright Pearson Education Ltd 2012

General Guidance on Marking – GCE PsychologyAll candidates must receive the same treatment. Examiners must mark the first candidate in exactlythe same way as they mark the lastExaminers should look for qualities to reward rather than faults to penalise. This does NOT meangiving credit for incorrect or inadequate answers, but it does mean allowing candidates to be rewardedfor answers showing correct application of principles and knowledge.Examiners should therefore read carefully and consider every response: even unconventional answersmay be worthy of credit. Mark schemes should be applied positively. Candidates must be rewardedfor what they have shown they can do rather than penalised for omissions.Examiners should mark according to the mark scheme not according to their perception of where thegrade boundaries may lie. There is no ceiling on achievement. All marks on the mark scheme shouldbe used appropriately.All the marks on the mark scheme are designed to be awarded. Examiners should always award fullmarks if deserved, i.e. if the answer matches the mark scheme. Examiners should also be preparedto award zero marks if the candidate’s response is not worthy of credit according to the markscheme.Where some judgement is required, mark schemes will provide the principles by which marks will beawarded and exemplification may be limited.Candidates must make their meaning clear to the examiner to gain the mark. Make sure that theanswer makes sense. Do not give credit for correct words/phrases which are put together in ameaningless manner. Answers must be in the correct context.Crossed out work should be marked UNLESS the candidate has replaced it with an alternativeresponse.When examiners are in doubt regarding the application of the mark scheme to a candidate’s response,the Team Leader must be consulted.Using the mark schemeThe mark scheme gives: an idea of the types of response expected how individual marks are to be awarded the total mark for each question examples of responses that should NOT receive credit (where applicable).12345/ means that the responses are alternatives and either answer should receive full credit.( ) means that a phrase/word is not essential for the award of the mark, but helps theexaminer to get the sense of the expected answer.[ ] words inside square brackets are instructions or guidance for examiners.Phrases/words in bold indicate that the meaning of the phrase or the actual word is essentialto the answer.TE (Transferred Error) means that a wrong answer given in an earlier part of a question isused correctly in answer to a later part of the same question.Quality of Written CommunicationQuestions which involve the writing of continuous prose will expect candidates to: show clarity of expression construct and present coherent arguments demonstrate an effective use of grammar, punctuation and spelling.Full marks can only be awarded if the candidate has demonstrated the above abilities.Questions where QWC is likely to be particularly important are indicated “QWC” in the mark scheme

BUT this does not preclude others.Unit 3: Applications of PsychologySection A – Criminological PsychologyGuidanceMarking points are indicative, not comprehensive and other pointsshould be credited. In each case consider OWTTE (or words tothat effect).Each bullet point is a marking point, unless otherwise stated, andeach point made by the candidate must be identifiable andcomprehensible.One mark is to be awarded for each marking point covered. Forelaboration of a marking point also award one mark UNLESSotherwise stated.TOPIC A: Questions A1(b), A1(c) and A3 are markedaccording to levels indicated.QuestionNumberA1 (a)QuestionLoftus and Palmer (1974) conducted a laboratory experiment toinvestigate eyewitness testimony.Describe what the participants were asked to do in this study.AnswerMarkNo credit for aim, results and conclusions.(3 AO1)Creditworthy answers should be focused on what the participants didand not what the researchers did or why, e.g.’ the verbs implied adifferent speed’ – no credit as not what the participants did.Experiment one Participants were asked to view seven/health and safety videoclips of different car accidents/eq; Participants were asked how fast was the car going when it either[at least two of] ‘smashed’, ‘hit’, ‘bumped’, ‘collided’ or‘contacted’/eq; Participants were asked to give a description of the accident andanswer a questionnaire/eq; Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire with a criticalquestion about the speed the car was travelling/eq; Participants were either asked to judge the speed of car when it‘hit’, ‘smashed’ or no critical question was asked of them/eq;Experiment two Participants were asked to watch a short video clip of a multiple carcrash/eq; Later, participants were asked to decide whether or not there wasbroken glass seen in the clip/eq;Look for other reasonable marking points.

GuidanceUse the levels below to allocate marks according to how detailed theanswer is and how thorough the information. Giving marks forelaboration where appropriate is particularly important wherequestions such as this are suitable to stretch and challengecandidates, so that the full range of marks are available.QuestionNumberA1 (b)QuestionLaboratory experiments are often criticised for lacking validity.Explain how problems with validity may affect laboratory research incriminological psychology.In your answer you must refer to how the laboratory experiment isused in criminological psychology.AnswerOne mark per point/elaboration.Four marks available for definition(s) of (any type of) validity andappropriate explanation. Max 2 marks for a non-contextualised answerthat is generic and not linked to criminological psychology in any way. validity is measuring what is intended/ecological validity is aboutrealism.low ecological validity means the findings are not real life/as wouldbe found in the context of real criminal behavior/eq;with good controls the researcher can isolate the variables to besure they are measuring what they intend to/eq;low population validity means the results cannot be generalized toall potential witnesses/eq;lab experiments may lack the emotionality of a real criminal eventso are not valid as a representation of real life/eq;a lab event that is staged does not truly reflect spontaneous eventsthat a real witness might experience/eq;giving participants a questionnaire does not reflect the level ofconsequence experienced by a real witness/eq;Lack of realism can lead to participants trying to guess the aims ofthe study and alter their behavior so they do not behavenaturally/eq;Look for other creditable content.Mark(4 AO3)

QuestionNumberA1 (c)QuestionLoftus and Palmer’s (1974) study involved laboratory research and hasbeen criticised.Outline two ways in which Loftus and Palmer’s (1974) study mighthave been improved.AnswerTwo marks for each suggestion for improving the study. So use thelevels twice for each way of improving the study. If more than twosuggestions, mark all and credit the best. There may be valid overlapwith each suggestion but with different reasons or effects, pleasecontact your team leader if unsure.Ignore ‘do a field experiment’ without some qualification or example.0 marksNo creditable material1 mark answerBrief or basic suggestion for improving of Loftus and Palmer’s (1974)study.Indicative contente.g., Get participants to witness real car crash.e.g., Participants could have been interviewed by police.e.g., Conduct the experiment in a realistic environment with a realisticevent like a witness would experience.e.g., By asking participants whether they were affected by the verb.e.g., By using a more varied sample of participants.2 mark answerSuggestion is detailed and/or well explained in terms of improvingLoftus and Palmers (1974) study.Indicative contente.g., Participants could have been placed in a naturalistic environmentto witness a real crash/incident so that their response was morenaturalistic and external factors would have played a realistic effect.e.g., If participants were interviewed by the police they would havegained a real sense of what it would be like to be a witness comparedto an unimportant, inconsequential questionnaire.e.g., participants may have been affected by the verb rather than areal change in memory, so participants could have been recalled at amuch later date to see if the speed they first gave endured.e.g., using a more varied sample of participants would have reflected areal witness situation and account for the variety of individualdifference known to influence witness recall.Look for other creditable content.Mark(4 AO3)

QuestionNumberA2 (a)QuestionDuring your course you will have learned about one of thefollowing studies: Yuille and Cutshall (1986)(A case study of eyewitness memory of a crime) Charlton et al (2000)(Broadcast television effects in a remote community) Gesch et al (2003)(Influence of supplementary vitamins, minerals and essentialfatty acids on the anti-social behaviour of young adultprisoners)Evaluate one of these studies in terms of reliability.AnswerOne mark per point/elaboration. Max 1 mark for generic evaluatione.g. reliability, that is not made specific to the study.Ignore obvious validity issues (e.g. ecological validity).The name of the study is for convenience in marking, it is not anelement of the evaluation so if the name does not match theevaluation it is of no concern if the evaluation can be identified as froma study in the list. Mark the evaluation only.Yuille and Cutshall(A case study of eyewitness memory of a crime) They only used operationalised features that definitely occurred inthe incident to compare with witness accounts to make the studyreliable/eq; Qualitative accounts were scored into quantitative data, sosubjective interpretation may make findings unreliable/eq; Participants/witnesses may have had time to converse about theincident or read up facts in the media, making their accounts moreaccurate later/eq; It was a one-off incident so cannot be repeated to test thereliability of the findings/eq; Many variables could have affected recall in the field, so lack ofcontrol could make findings unreliable/eq; Contradictory research questions the reliability of the findings thatleading questions have an influence (e.g. Loftus and Palmer)/eq;Charlton et al(Broadcast television effects in a remote community) Many variables affecting viewing habits could not be controlled sofindings may be unreliable/eq; Video recording can be cross checked to ensure accurate andconsistent measurement of behaviour/eq; Inter-rater reliability was established between raters codingchildren’s behaviour in the school/eq; Due to the unique nature of the Island, it is unlikely the sameconditions would be found on the mainland/eq; The findings of this study are not consistent with similar researchinvestigating behaviour before and after TV is introduced (e.g.Williams) making the findings unreliable/eq;Gesch et al(Influence of supplementary vitamins, minerals and essential fattyMark(3 AO2)

acids on the anti-social behaviour of young adult prisoners) There may have been offences that were not seen so notreported/eq; There may have been changes in the prison (policy, groupdynamics) that may have affected the findings/eq; Prisoners may not have taken the vitamin supplements even if theyshould have, leading to unreliable findings/eq; The prison environment was controlled to a greater extent thatmore everyday environments, so greater reliability could beestablished/eq;Look for other reasonable marking points.QuestionNumberA2 (b)QuestionMost psychological research raises ethical issues for the participantsinvolved or for society.Compare two studies you have learned about in criminologicalpsychology in terms of ethical issues.In your answer make it clear which two studies you are comparing.AnswerOne mark per comparison made and subsequent elaboration – bothparts of the comparison need to be explained. Max 1 mark fordescribed studies with no explicit comparison (e.g. one study describedfollowed by the other study described).Studies must be related to criminological psychology for credit. Assuch, studies such as Bandura, Rosenthal and Jacobsen, Jahoda etccan be used. Please consult your team leader if you are unsurewhether a study is appropriate to use.1 mark for an appropriate identification of an ethical issue AS APPLIEDTO THE STUDY SPECIFICALLY that can be used to compare twostudies, and a further mark for the explanation/elaboration of thatpoint which is sufficient difference or similarity up to two marks maxfor each comparison.There are two ways of interpreting this question:1. Comparison of the same ethical issue, e.g. comparing informedconsent.2. Comparison of overall ethics – good and bad/high and low.Treat this as one comparisonE.g., Yuille and Cutshall (1986) and Loftus and Palmer (1974) Both studies deceived participants about the use of the criticalquestion/eq; participants were unaware of the placement of themisleading questions ‘smashed/bumped’ AND/OR ‘yellow/bluequarter panel’/eq; Participants were protected in Yuille and Cutshall’s study as theywere not forced to view an incident/eq; it was naturally occurringunlike Loftus where participants were shown a video incident/eq; Loftus and Palmer’s video recording of a car incident could be saidto be less traumatic than reliving a real incident unlike Yuille andMark(4 AO2)

Cutshall’s participants/eq; who had witnessed a real shooting ORasking real participants to relive a real incident involving adeath/shooting, is more traumatic than asking them to report on ahealth and safety video/eq; Both Loftus and Palmer and Yuille and Cutshall gained participantconsent to take part in the research both knowing parts of theprocedure such as viewing a video/reliving an event/eq; HoweverYuille and Cutshall offered greater information and this wasdemonstrated by participants opting out of reliving the event dueto stress/eq; Yuille and Cutshall offered a more robust means of opting in to takepart in the study compared to Loftus and Palmer due to it being areal life traumatic incident/eq; this was shown by only 13 of theparticipants (not the victim) choosing to take part/eq;E.g., Charlton (2000) and Gesch (2003) Charlton did not manipulate the environment of the participantsunlike Gesch/eq; who directly administered pills to prisoners tostudy its effect/eq; Gesch foresaw improvements in prisoners health and wellbeing,however, Charlton foresaw media violence, so there may havebeen an issue of researcher competence/eq; Gesch believedthat the pills might improve behaviour of the prisoners whereasCharlton may have known that the introduction of TV on theIsland could have had a harmful effect/eq; OR Charlton’sexperiment was natural therefore he was not responsible for thedirect administration of the IV/eq; There may have been an issue of consent for both Charlton andGesch as participants were children and prisoners/eq; Beingprisoners, the participants in Gesch’s study may not have beenwilling volunteers because of their circumstances, whereasexplicit permission to study the children in Charlton’s studywas given by parents/eq; There may have been an issue of right to withdraw for both theIslanders and prisoners/eq; The Islanders had explicit right towithdraw from the study, whereas the prisoners may not havefelt that they had the facility to withdraw themselves/eq;Look for other reasonable marking points/studies.QuestionNumberA3QuestionThe influence of the media on anti-social behaviour can be explainedby using social learning theory.Describe and evaluate the possible role of the media in creating antisocial behaviour.In your evaluation you must compare the role of the media as anexplanation of anti-social behaviour with a different explanation ofanti-social behaviour at least once.Indicative contentMark

Mark according to the levels given.Appropriate answers might include the following knowledge, butthis list is not exhaustive.Indicative contentDescription Social learning theory can account for the role of the media as itexplains behaviour being observed and copied. The media portrays role models for viewers to identify with. Role models are popular, powerful and likable so more likely tobe modelled. Role models are reinforced/rewarded for violent behaviour,encouraging modelling. Very few negative consequences of violence are seen, sovicariously reinforces aggression and violence. Media glamorise violence making it more appealing. Video games actively reward game players for violent acts. SLT explains that anti-social behaviour can be acquired throughthe process of attention, retention, reproduction andmotivation.Evaluation Content analyses of the media show a high level of aggressionand violence even in children’s programming which would bestatistics that support the idea of observational learning ofaggression. Rideout calculated 70-80% of programmes containing acts ofviolence which supports SLT of aggression. Both adults and children watch a high volume of violentprogrammes (38 and 25 hours respectively) so it could beexpected to have an influence on behaviour. Williams et al, found that increased exposure to mediaencouraged anti-social behaviour. Charlton et al found that aggression amongst children did notincrease with increased media exposure. However, Charlton’s findings may be due to nature of Islandcommunity/close surveillance so findings may not be reliable. Bandura, Ross and Ross, found that children copy a narrowrange of aggressive behaviours from adult role models. Bandura’s findings extend to watching the role models on TVand cartoon portrayals of the same behaviours. Case studies such as Ryan and Columbine offer limitedevidence for modelling of aggression from the media as suchcases are very rare indeed and offer tentative links. The Bulger case has shown no significant link between mediaviolence and modelling. Anderson and Dill found increased aggression following playingviolent video games such as Wolfenstein compared to Myst. Bartol found aggression levels to increase when playing moreviolent bloody video games. Media violence may be cathartic, reduc

Mark Scheme January 2013 (Results) GCE Psychology (6PS03) Paper 01 Applications of Psychology . Edexcel and BTEC Qualifications Edexcel and BTEC qualifications come from Pearson, the world’s leading learning company. We provide a wide range of qualifications including academic, . All the marks on the mark scheme are designed to be awarded .

Related Documents:

CSEC English A Specimen Papers and Mark Schemes: Paper 01 92 Mark Scheme 107 Paper 02 108 Mark Scheme 131 Paper 032 146 Mark Scheme 154 CSEC English B Specimen Papers and Mark Schemes: Paper 01 159 Mark Scheme 178 Paper 02 180 Mark Scheme 197 Paper 032 232 Mark Scheme 240 CSEC English A Subject Reports: January 2004 June 2004

Matthew 27 Matthew 28 Mark 1 Mark 2 Mark 3 Mark 4 Mark 5 Mark 6 Mark 7 Mark 8 Mark 9 Mark 10 Mark 11 Mark 12 Mark 13 Mark 14 Mark 15 Mark 16 Catch-up Day CORAMDEOBIBLE.CHURCH/TOGETHER PAGE 1 OF 1 MAY 16 . Proverbs 2—3 Psalms 13—15 Psalms 16—17 Psalm 18 Psalms 19—21 Psalms

Examiners should mark according to the mark scheme not according to their perception of where the grade boundaries may lie. All marks on the mark scheme should be used appropriately. All marks on the mark scheme are designed to be awarded. Examiners should always award full marks if deserved, i.e. if the answer matches the mark scheme.

Mark Scheme (Results) January 2013 GCE Accounting (6001/01) . mark scheme to a candidate’s response, the team leader must be consulted. Crossed out work should be marked UNLESS the candidate has . Answer Mark 2(b) (i) Sundry Expenses Account 1 January Balance b/d 600 31 December Income Statement 1 550 .

H567/03 Mark Scheme June 2018 6 USING THE MARK SCHEME Please study this Mark Scheme carefully. The Mark Scheme is an integral part of the process that begins with the setting of the question paper and ends with the awarding of grades. Question papers and Mark Schemes are d

the mark scheme should be used appropriately. All the marks on the mark scheme are designed to be awarded. Examiners should always award full marks if deserved, i.e. if the answer matches the mark scheme. Examiners should also be prepared to award zero marks if the candidate’s response is not worthy of credit according to the mark scheme.

2013 Subject Report -June 307 2014 Subject Report -June 324 2015 Subject Report -January 341 2015 Subject Report -May/June 351 2016 Subject Report -January 366 CSEC Social Studies Extra Information: Cut Scores 381 Mark Scheme Paper 02 January 2013 383 Mark Scheme Paper 032 January 2013 404 Specific Objectives 411

Mark scheme for Paper 1 Tiers 3-5, 4-6, 5-7 and 6-8 National curriculum assessments ALL TIERS Ma KEY STAGE 3 2009. 2009 KS3 Mathematics test mark scheme: Paper 1 Introduction 2 Introduction This booklet contains the mark scheme for paper 1 at all tiers. The paper 2 mark scheme is printed in a separate booklet. Questions have been given names so that each one has a unique identifi er .