Paper 2 feedback
Miss Shefik June 2017
Biological
Question 1+2
 Brendgen or Gottesman and Sheilds (G+T will be used again in Clinical)
 Procedure – step by step method for the investigation
 B) Contextualise the strengths and weaknesses
Question 2
 Contextualise to the study on drugs
 Make sure your strength and weakness are related to the other sampling
techniques. Best to use comparisons.
 ALL Sampling techniques are ethical!!
 Strength – more willing to disclose sensitive information on their drug and
aggressive behaviour – validity
 Weakness – Personality – drug addicts or people who are embarrassed about
their aggressive traits may not volunteer – lack of generalisability/ population
validity
 C) Explain – Point and justify – Weak positive correlation between number of
drugs taken per week and the self reported aggression score. This is shown as
the more drugs participants took per week the higher they rated their
aggression levels out of 100.
Question 3
Question 4
 A01 content – knowledge of the how the brain scan works
 A03 content – strengths and weaknesses
 Overall, most students did well on coming up with strengths and
weaknesses but the A01 was limited. To hit the top band try and compare
the scanning techniques by bring in your knowledge of different methods
to show depth and breadth.
 E.g. Scans can raise ethical concerns: PET, CAT and FMRI
 E.g. PET scans can pick up neural activity whereas FMRI only measures
blood flow to certain areas.
 Conclusions – Do the strengths outweigh the weaknesses?
Learning Theories
Question 5
 Primary reinforcer: things that are in themselves rewarding. Things like food,
water and rest.
 Secondary reinforcer: things we have learned to value such as praise, video
games or the big one MONEY.
 Primary reinforcement is when a reward strengths a behavior by itself.
Secondary reinforcement is when something strengthens a behavior because it
leads to a primary reinforcer.
 B) Schedules of reinforcement – FIXED (known) or VARIABLE (unpredictable) –
RATIO (number of responses) or INTERVAL (based on amount of time)
Must be contextualised
E.g. Jane could use a fixed interval schedule of reinforcement by rewarding
customers who use the café at least once a week with a free biscuit once a
month.
Question 6
 Practical Aim:
The aim of my practical was to identify whether their were differences in prosocial behaviour between men
and women on public transport by conducting a covert observation on a public bus and collecting
quantitative and qualitative data.
 Quantitative results:
Tallies of scores/mean scores
Chi squared result – observed value of 4.2 is greater than the critical value of 3.84 when probability < 0.05
(two-tailed test, df=1).
This suggests that…..contextualise
 Strengths: CONTEXTUALISE!
Reliability – two observers sitting in different sections of the bus so we could compare our results and check
for consistency
Internal validity – as the passengers on the bus were not aware we were recording their behaviour they
were not changing their behaviour to fit socially desirable norms/behaviours and therefore we can assume
we have accurately recorded prosocial behaviour on a public bus.
Question 7a
 Explain – Point justify
Hugo learns through observation of roles models and has witnessed his Dad
speeding when driving – dad is likely to be Hugo’s role model as Hugo has
attended to and retained the behaviour of those who are of a higher status
and the same gender.
Hugo reproduces the speeding behaviour and gets 3 penalty points as he has
the self-efficacy to speed as he passed his test one year ago. He is now
confident to speed.
Hugo is motivated to imitative his father’s behaviour as he has seen his father
rewarded for his behaviour. Hugo has learnt through vicarious reinforcement
that his father gets “cool” reputation from his friends as he is known as the risk
taker and daredevil which is portrayed in a good light. Therefore Hugo imitates
the behaviour to receive the same rewards.
Question 7b
 A weakness of the Social Learning theory is not there are other theories!!!!
Unless this point is made very well – steer clear of this weakness!
Social Learning theory is a extension of Operant Conditioning:
Operant Conditioning – learning through consequences
SLT – learning through observing the consequences of others
SLT – incorporates the social approach (learning from people) and the cognitive
approach (explaining how we cognitively choose to imitate behaviours through a
process of attending and retaining to certain role models, deciding whether we feel
confident to carry out the behaviour, and deciding if we are motivated to imitate by
observing others’ consequences)
Weaknesses:
Reductionist – simplifies behaviour to learning from others and therefore over-emphasises
the nurture argument and does not consider the role of our biology in how we learn.
Certain people may be more predisposed to aggression and therefore whether they
have aggressive role models or not, they still may develop these tendencies.
Question 8

AO1 – Knowledge of Classical Conditioning

A03 – Strengths and weaknesses
Develop A03 points to show sophistication:
Which is better?
Point: A strength of classical conditioning is that it has supporting research…. or
Point: The research conducted to support classical conditioning as a theory is highly credible due to its standardised procedure using
a highly controlled environment.
Point: The research into classical conditioning is extremely useful as the theory has been translated into a form of therapy to help
those with phobias.
Contextualise your A01 knowledge within your strength paragraph:
Evidence: Classical Conditioning explains how a phobia can be learnt through an association with a automatic reflex response of
fear. Little Albert was not originally afraid of a white rat and therefore the rat was a neutral stimulus. However, when Watson and
Rayner paired the white rat on a number of occasions with a stimulus (loud metal bang), it produced a automatic reflex response of
fear (crying). Little Albert learnt to become of afraid of the rat. The rat became a conditioned stimulus that produced the
conditioned response of fear without the association of the loud bang. Little Albert generalised his fear of the white rat to other white
fluffy objects which can further explain how we generalise the fear to other stimuli and hence can develop a full blown phobia that
needs treatment.
Develop your Comment:
This suggests that we can unlearn the phobia by associating the neutral stimulus with a positive stimulus such as relaxation which is
the basis of systematic desensitisation. As classical conditioning is used in therapy to treat those with phobias at a 70% success rate,
we can conclude that the theory is valid and effective.
Question 8
 Operant conditioning and social learning theory are not direct opposing
theories. They are theories that explain how we learn in a different way and
actually can compliment each other!
 Classical conditioning involves associating between an involuntary response
and a stimulus, while operant conditioning is about associating between a
voluntary behavior and a consequence
 In operant conditioning, the learner is also rewarded with incentives, while
classical conditioning involves no such enticements. Also, remember that
classical conditioning is passive on the part of the learner, while operant
conditioning requires the learner to actively participate and perform some type
of action in order to be rewarded or punished.
 Better counter argument –CC = passive learning and does not consider our
cognitive processes – SLT can explain how we choose to perform certain
behaviours …….and hence is better positioned to explain our individual
differences.
Question 9

A01 – Knowledge of applications and knowledge of the studies

A03 – Strengths and weaknesses

Embedding good A01 was difficult – show knowledge of the studies!!!!
Good paragraphs –
Raine – strength – useful for sentencing – if brain abnormalities are found then the rehabilitation can focus on
strengthening the muscle associated with the brain area – e.g. strengthening impulse control if lower activity
in pre-frontal cortex.
Weakness – Cannot determine causality – did the murder and aggressive acts the individuals engage in
change the activity of their brain or did the activity of the their brain cause them to murder? Correlational
research.
Bandura – useful for media regulations and guidance – 1963 – violent cartoons or 1965 – vicarious learning –
punishment in film for bad behaviour?
Weakness – validity – artificial doll – how much does the study represent how children will act to other human
beings?