Section C was shit, use of the word "weaknesses" very very annoying, should have been more specific like "extraneous/confounding variables". Terrible wording of the question and gave a very vague idea of mark allocation in my opinion. Ugh.
I agree with everyone saying some of the MC were ambiguous...
Short answers were okay but I didn't like the question where we were only asked to write about primary appraisal for those 2 girls. And strengths and weaknesses of CBT? I agree - out of all the things to talk about with CBT they pick something not in the study design and that is not in the books.
The snake question I thought was strange too. flooding doesn't really involve relaxation, but I guess it's implied as eventually anxiety diminishes and a new association is made. Definitely wasn't any of the other answers though.
overall not a very well written exam, but not overly hard in terms of content. However what did makes it ten times harder was when, as I said about CBT, they put stuff in that no one even has an an opportunity to LEARN. it just pisses me off. There's SO much on the study design can't they bloody stick to it to make it a tiny bit easier for students.