VCE Psychology Question Thread!

[studyingg]

Why isn't the answer alpha for question 41? The person is still 'awake', I thought theta waves would be associated with someone who is asleep,  also the symptoms the person is exhibiting seem to be indicative of an alcohol induced state and alcohol usually leads to the display of alpha waves?

[sdfg]

Why isn't the answer alpha for question 41? The person is still 'awake', I thought theta waves would be associated with someone who is asleep,  also the symptoms the person is exhibiting seem to be indicative of an alcohol induced state and alcohol usually leads to the display of alpha waves?

Because alpha waves are associated with higher states of consciousness than what the patient is currently at (think alpha = awake but mentally and physically relaxed). Theta waves on the other hand involves reduced consciousness and being awake but not entirely there (think deep meditation, doing something creative like painting) - this better fits with the patient's symptoms. Also, theta waves = low frequency and slowed processing, which could explain the uncoordinated movement and slowed speech.

*Also, just a side point but alcohol is a depressant so it reduces CNS activity and by extension brain activity and also high frequency brain waves like beta and alpha.

Does 'discussing implications' of research mean suggesting possible further hypothesis that can be developed based on the findings of research... or does it mean how the results of the experiment can be implied to a real world context? Also, if it is the latter... does a result have to be valid/reliable in order for an implication to be drawn?

For example in the case of a study investigating the effect of positive reinforcement of learning found that students who were positively reinforced learnt better than students who received no consequence. But due to the fact that findings of the study being confounded by uncontrolled variables, and the use of an unrepresentative sample, neither a conclusion or generalisation could have been inferred. Is it still possible to suggest how the findings relate to a real -world context and say, possible implications from this study could be the use of positive reinforcement by teachers (such as a token economy) in the classroom in order to improve students academic performance.

I did a similar thing in my aos 3 investigation into recall vs recognition, as in I could not draw a conclusion or generalisation, but I did evaluate my results in terms of a real-world context because we were required to. But I was wondering is this correct in terms of the conventions of scientific writing?

AFAIK, 'implications' in the context of scientific research refer to the consequences of your findings to things such as current theories, polices based off research, certain practices and even future research. For instance, if a discovery was made about the reconstruction of memory, an implication of the research could be changes to how witnesses are dealt with in legal proceedings. And another example, you've just discovered something and the implication would be, based off your finds, what would you research next to get a better understanding of the topic.

Can't imagine VCAA would ask a question that required something like that though cause it requires knowledge out of the scope of VCE. 

I just want to clarify something about the long term effects of total sleep deprivation. This is a question from the VCAA exam 1 2008 psych exam (and I'm particularly interested in part c). The answer for this question was 'none', but I was wondering, if someone goes for like a week without getting any sleep, would there still be no long term effects? The reason I ask is because if you look the case study of Peter Tripp, he did suffer irreversible consequences as a result of long-term sleep deprivation, whereas Randy Gardener did not experience any long term negative consequences.

There's no real definite answer to that question because there hasn't been enough research into sleep deprivation of that length to have a conclusion that you could generalise (and probably never will be because sleep deprivation studies that long will never research ethics approval today). There are case studies, but they're just case studies that aren't applicable to a wider population. Also, everyone needs a different amount of sleep so everyone's affected by sleep deprivation differently.

[ardria]

Hi guys,

Does anyone know what Psych exam score is needed for a raw 50 (assuming rank 1-2)? I can't seem to find this info anywhere.

Thank you

[studyingg]

Hi guys,

Does anyone know what Psych exam score is needed for a raw 50 (assuming rank 1-2)? I can't seem to find this info anywhere.

Thank you

I went to a lecture and the lecturer said one of his students who got a 50 last year got  116/120.

[rani_b]

Hey guys this is from VCAA exam 2 2002

Why is the answer C? I feel as though its really obvious but I've been staring at this question for a really long time and now my brain can't understand 

Question 25
Joe’s parents also want him to keep his room tidy but are using a different method of encouragement. Whenever
his room is untidy, Joe is not permitted to watch television until he tidies it.
Joe’s parent are using ______________________ to modify his behaviour.
A. positive reinforcement
B. modelling
C. negative reinforcement
D. shaping

[sdfg]

Hey guys this is from VCAA exam 2 2002

Why is the answer C? I feel as though its really obvious but I've been staring at this question for a really long time and now my brain can't understand 

Question 25
Joe’s parents also want him to keep his room tidy but are using a different method of encouragement. Whenever
his room is untidy, Joe is not permitted to watch television until he tidies it.
Joe’s parent are using ______________________ to modify his behaviour.
A. positive reinforcement
B. modelling
C. negative reinforcement
D. shaping

- Negative reinforcement = taking away a negative stimulus to increase the desired behaviour.
- Reinforcement = Joe's parents want to increase the likelihood of Joe cleaning his room (the desired behaviour).
- Negative = threat of taking away Joe's TV privileges (the negative stimulus) is removed when he cleans his room.

[studyingg]

- Negative reinforcement = taking away a positive stimulus to increase the desired behaviour.
- Reinforcement = Joe's parents want to increase the likelihood of Joe cleaning his room (the desired behaviour).
- Negative = to do ^, they're taking away his privilege to watch TV (something that's positive to Joe - positive stimulus).

Isn't negative reinforcement removal, reduction or prevention of an unpleasant circumstance to increase desired behaviour?

so wouldn't the 'negative' part of this be if Joe does clean his room then he will prevent the consequence of his parents taking away his T.V which thus creates a pleasant circumstance for him, strengthening his behavioral response? 

[sdfg]

Isn't negative reinforcement removal, reduction or prevention of an unpleasant circumstance to increase desired behaviour?

so wouldn't the 'negative' part of this be if Joe does clean his room then he will prevent the consequence of his parents taking away his T.V which thus creates a pleasant circumstance for him, strengthening his behavioral response?

Oh oops you're right, my bad. Thanks for correcting me - edited answer above.

[rani_b]

Oh oops you're right, my bad. Thanks for correcting me - edited answer above.

Thanks guys!!

[studyingg]

I wanted to ask about this research methods question.
If the aim of the experimenter is to determine the effect of viewing a documentary about schizophrenia on stigma shouldn't the experimental group only be the group who watched the documentary on schizophrenia (and not the other documentaries)

also, how could a conclusion based on the results be drawn? because they seem quite contradictory... although the group that watched the schizophrenia film indicate that they are less stigmatizing based off the fact that they believed that they believed that people with schizophrenia are not entirely responsible for their actions (more so than the other groups). They also believe that people with schizophrenia are less likely to change (more so than the others)

(I've attched the question and solutions)



edit: I can't attatch the solutions but here they are

(d) Identify the experimental and control conditions. 2 marks
Experimental: Three groups/conditionsWatch video about polar bears, watch videoabout obesity, watch video about schizophrenia
Control conditionDo not watch any video

(e) What conclusion can be drawn on the basis of the results obtained?

 1 mark Relative to participants who viewed films about polar bears, obesity or no film at all, viewing a documentary about schizophrenia resulted in attributions that ascribed less blame and responsibility to individuals for their disorder a view of schizophrenia as being more likely to change over time.This suggests that watching a short documentary film depicting people with schizophrenia may be of benefit in reducing stigma-related judgements.Award 1 mark for a valid conclusion.

[Duelmaster22]

Hey guys, does anyone know the answer to this question? Tossing up between recognition and serial recall.
In another hypothetical scenario, say if I got given a list of all the Prime Ministers of Australia, and had to put them in chronological order, what type of retrieval methods would that be?
Cheers

[studyingg]

Hey guys, does anyone know the answer to this question? Tossing up between recognition and serial recall.
In another hypothetical scenario, say if I got given a list of all the Prime Ministers of Australia, and had to put them in chronological order, what type of retrieval methods would that be?
Cheers

The answer according to the NEAP solutions is D, the reason is that he recalled the digits in order with minimal cues for assistance, he didn't really use recognition because he 'imagined' using his keyboard and a key feature of recognition is identifying information from alternatives, so recall would be the better answer.

For your hypothetical scenario... i'm not sure tbh
I think cued recall would be a good answer. (due to the use of cues it can't be serial)

[sdfg]

I wanted to ask about this research methods question.
If the aim of the experimenter is to determine the effect of viewing a documentary about schizophrenia on stigma shouldn't the experimental group only be the group who watched the documentary on schizophrenia (and not the other documentaries)

also, how could a conclusion based on the results be drawn? because they seem quite contradictory... although the group that watched the schizophrenia film indicate that they are less stigmatizing based off the fact that they believed that they believed that people with schizophrenia are not entirely responsible for their actions (more so than the other groups). They also believe that people with schizophrenia are less likely to change (more so than the others)
...

Yup, the aim is to determine the effect of watching a schizophrenia documentary on stigma surrounding the disease, but that doesn't necessarily mean watching a schizophrenia documentary has to be the only experimental condition. The other two conditions are used to ensure that specifically watching a schizophrenia documentary is what causes the result, rather than something else like 'the act of watching a documentary about a disease' or simply just 'the act of watching a documentary'. Don't know if that made sense - more than happy to clarify if you have questions.

With the conclusion, the schizophrenia documentary group is less stigmatising because they see schizophrenia more as a disease rather than a moral failing that it's commonly stigmatised to be. Less responsible for actions --> yes, people with schizophrenia don't have control over their actions, their disease pretty much takes over all of their agency; less likely to change --> yes, people can't just make the disease lessen or worsen at will, and treatment is often long and hard.

Hey guys, does anyone know the answer to this question? Tossing up between recognition and serial recall.
In another hypothetical scenario, say if I got given a list of all the Prime Ministers of Australia, and had to put them in chronological order, what type of retrieval methods would that be?
Cheers

I'd say serial recall. Recognition would be if had to choose from alternatives that could potentially be his correct password (e.g if he wrote all potential password combinations down and recognised his password out of the alternatives).

With your hypothetical, I'd say it depends. If you use the list to help jog your memory, it'd be cued recall because you're using the list as a cue. If you already know the PMs in chronological order and don't use the list as a cue, it'll be serial recall because you'll most likely be recalling things in order (specifically chronological order) as that's the easiest way. If you don't already know the PMs in the chronological order and don't use the list as a cue, you'd use free recall to recall different bits and pieces of information to piece together the chronological list (e.g "John Howard was the 25th PM, so he goes here ... Gough Whitlam, he was the 21st? So let's put him here ...").

[studyingg]

Yup, the aim is to determine the effect of watching a schizophrenia documentary on stigma surrounding the disease, but that doesn't necessarily mean watching a schizophrenia documentary has to be the only experimental condition. The other two conditions are used to ensure that specifically watching a schizophrenia documentary is what causes the result, rather than something else like 'the act of watching a documentary about a disease' or simply just 'the act of watching a documentary'. Don't know that made sense - more than happy to clarify if you have questions.

With the conclusion, the schizophrenia documentary group is less stigmatising because they see schizophrenia more as a disease rather than a moral failing that it's commonly stigmatised to be. Less responsible for actions --> yes, people with schizophrenia don't have control over their actions, their disease pretty much takes over all of their agency; less likely to change --> yes, people can't just make the disease lessen or worsen at will, and treatment is often long and hard.

I'd say serial recall. Recognition would be if had to choose from alternatives that could potentially be his correct password (e.g if he wrote all potential password combinations down and recognised his password out of the alternatives).

With your hypothetical, I'd say it depends. If you already know the PMs in chronological order, it'll be serial recall because you'll most likely be recalling things in order (specifically chronological order) because that's the easiest way. If you don't, you'd use free recall to recall different bits and pieces of information to piece together the chronological list (e.g "John Howard was the 25th PM, so he goes here ... Gough Whitlam, he was the 21st? So let's put him here ...").

Thank you so much for taking the time to respond! (it's quite long question so your help is much appreciated)

The reason I ask about the identification of the experimental condition is because isn't the definition of the experimental group that it is the group exposed to the independent variable (and that the schizophrenia film is the variable the researchers are interested in its effect on the DV ). The reason they include the other groups is in order to ensure that it is the schizophrenia film that caused the change in the DV and not simply watching a 'film', so dosen't that mean that these conditions were put in place in order to control this particular extraneous variable?  Wouldn't that mean that they are control groups, as the only purpose they serve is to act as comparisions for the effect of the IV?  Because the researchers aren't interested in their effect on the DV, they merely want to compare their effect to the variable that they are indeed interested in. Thats why i'm still sorta confused.

And thanks for the clarification about the other part -- makes sense, because one source of stigma is that people believe that a mentally ill individual is in control of their condition/are putting on an act. I guess the solutions got it wrong, because they misinterpreted the data.

[sdfg]

Thank you so much for taking the time to respond! (it's quite long question so your help is much appreciated)

The reason I ask about the identification of the experimental condition is because isn't the definition of the experimental group that it is the group exposed to the independent variable (and that the schizophrenia film is the variable the researchers are interested in its effect on the DV ). The reason they include the other groups is in order to ensure that it is the schizophrenia film that caused the change in the DV and not simply watching a 'film', so dosen't that mean that these conditions were put in place in order to control this particular extraneous variable?  Wouldn't that mean that they are control groups, as the only purpose they serve is to act as comparisions for the effect of the IV?  Because the researchers aren't interested in their effect on the DV, they merely want to compare their effect to the variable that they are indeed interested in. Thats why i'm still sorta confused.

And thanks for the clarification about the other part -- makes sense, because one source of stigma is that people believe that a mentally ill individual is in control of their condition/are putting on an act. I guess the solutions got it wrong, because they misinterpreted the data.

I think you've misinterpreted what the IV is here - it's not whether or not the participants watched the schizophrenia documentary, but rather which type of documentary they've watched (polar bear, obesity or sczhiophrenia). This is what the experimenters are manipulating and in the group where they aren't is the control group (i.e. no documentary group).