Psychology Post-Exam Discussion

[Ravit]

chose D for 25! probably wrong but oh well "

[Soul_Khan]

Studied a day before. No practice exams. I still think I managed an A-A+. So it was pretty easy.

[Ravit]

^Pro.

[tuffield2003]

Not going to lie isnt it expected that the ER will be research methods? Granted I didn't do past exams but it a component of the study design which is tested in one way or another, and the ER is the best way to do it.

[ktrah]

Nah, ER can either be research methods or some random question. There are examples of both in the sample exam. Last year's mid year exam wasn't ER.

[Em.]

Hey what was the cut-off for the midyear exam?
What do you guys think the cut-off will be this time?

[vashappenin]

Hey what was the cut-off for the midyear exam?
What do you guys think the cut-off will be this time?

It was 73/90.. can't remember
But I think this one's cut-off will be higher, but still in the 70s.. it depends, because a lot of people would not have prepared for the research methods ER, and so the average may be low yet again.. but then again, who knows?

[Genericname2365]

I think I would have preferred a harder exam tbh, with more questions on some of the things like Garcia and Koelling's experiments. But oh well, at least it's over now. 

[honey-corowa]

Found this exam so disappointing, spent a lot of time trying to learn/remember HPA axis, neural basis of learning, role of amygdala, hypothalamus, Garcia and Koelling study, stages of plasticity (adaptive? developmental? dont even remember now!) and they barely featured, or didnt feature at all! Sigh.

[mightychick]

Yeah I put that girl (forgotten the name) as possibly appraising losing her job as a challenge which I'm not sure they'll except - I couldn't remember harm/loss.

Another thing I'm iffy about is the conclusion to the ERA - I said the hypothesis could not be accepted as experimenter effect may have influenced the results (there was no mention of a blind-procedure), and thus the results could not be generalised, but I'm not really sure whether they intended us to accept it or not. 

I'm predicting higher cut-off than the mid-year. The MC seemed much less time-consuming.

I put her (Maddie I think?) as going through Harm/Loss, but I'm pretty sure what I wrote of Emotion-Coping wasn't right. And yeah, the conclusion bit was weird. I just said that the sample size was too small and there was no p-value so it can't be generalised.

That was ridiculously easy and hence disappointing. The cut-off is going to be really high! :O

That's so true. I wish it was a bit harder! But oh well, what's done is done!
Now to wait until 17th December!

The Sample size has no relation to whether the p-value exists, you can have a p-value regardless of the size... I think. But I spoke to my teacher and you are right about the fact you cannot generalise due to no p-value.

There wasn't a p-value, but I'm pretty sure in the scenario they stated that a 'statistical analysis revealed a significant difference between the two groups'. Does that refer to a p-value or?

If the exam stated that the results were statistically significant then doesn't that mean we can generalize the results ?

This if from stats.org
A result that is statistically significant has more weight in the scientific community than one that is not. There is nonetheless a (small) possibility that the result is just due to chance, which is why scientists keep their eyes open for other studies that might discredit the first. Similarly, even if a conjectured correlation has not been demonstrated to be statistically significant, there may still be a good chance that the association really exists, which is why more tests are often called for. Statistical significance should not, however, be dismissed as lacking certainty — we can be 95 percent certain that a statistically significant result is true. This is why statistical significance is the stamp of approval by the biomedical community.

yeh pretty sure if they wrote "results were statistically significant", does mean that the absense of a P-value would make them not statistically significant....

[ktrah]

yeh pretty sure if they wrote "results were statistically significant", does mean that the absense of a P-value would make them not statistically significant....

The results were defs statistically significant because they state it as a fact. There's just no mention of a P-value. I hope they accept that the results can be generalised though!

Found this exam so disappointing, spent a lot of time trying to learn/remember HPA axis, neural basis of learning, role of amygdala, hypothalamus, Garcia and Koelling study, stages of plasticity (adaptive? developmental? dont even remember now!) and they barely featured, or didnt feature at all! Sigh.

Saaaaame

[Hannah_Banana]

I found the exam ok. The areas I focused on when studying didn't seem to make an appearance (neural basis, Garcia, HPA axis etc) which I actually wanted! It would be easier to get a better mark then!
I think I did well, as does everyone else in the state. Won't be as easy to get a good mark as it was in the mid-year.

[vashappenin]

Do we get penalised for writing too much?
For the depression question, I wrote waaaay too much. It was 4 marks, and I filled up the lines, plus half a page in the extra space section :S

[ktrah]

Do we get penalised for writing too much?
For the depression question, I wrote waaaay too much. It was 4 marks, and I filled up the lines, plus half a page in the extra space section :S

Not unless you write something that's wrong. I did that for gambling too, wasn't sure what exactly they were after so I rambled on a bit.

[Lado]

Do we get penalised for writing too much?
For the depression question, I wrote waaaay too much. It was 4 marks, and I filled up the lines, plus half a page in the extra space section :S

Not unless you write something that's wrong. I did that for gambling too, wasn't sure what exactly they were after so I rambled on a bit.

I was unsure how much information they wanted also! When I was reading over my answers is struck me that the question for depression asked "Explain how" rather than just explain in regards to the antidepressant medication and CBT. So I wrote a bunch of extra stuff about how the medication inhibits the re-uptake of serotonin and adrenalin and allows these to accumulate at the synapse, etc. along with what the medication aims to actually do just in case. But I have no idea how they wanted us to answer.