It's over!

[derivativex]

yea overall i found it pretty easy, pretty happy with overall performance

 i think must of dropped a couple like i didn't say "nausea due to the illness" just said nausea etc.,

If you're talking about the CR and UCR question then nausea enough would be enough.

[dreamz]

for last question debriefing i wrote benefience and withdrawal right.......is that right???

[derivativex]

for last question debriefing i wrote benefience and withdrawal right.......is that right???

Mmm those are more like separate ethical considerations.

If you're talking about the very last question it was asking what information the experimenter would have to tell the participants after the research was over.

so withdrawal rights would not be an answer as they would need to know about that BEFORE the experiment, and I don't think beneficence would fit in either.

Sorry.

[dreamz]

oooohhhhhhh im going to cry:(

[andrewswabey]

im so glad its over, whoever claims psych is a science is kidding themselves. its all just botched theories that are based on what everyone else knows as common sense.

[Dark Templar]

Mmmm, I'll have to disagree there. Psychology is definitely a science. Care to explain some of those botched theories?

That multiple choice question with the old guy nearly threw me. The one where the two most right answers were something like:

A. Attended meetings but forgot a lot of the content
B. Could recognise new information just as well as a young person

I nearly chose A because B sounded weird to be. Then I realised it was talking about the measure of retention recognition, for new info. For all of reading time I had planned to use A.

Did anyone else nearly run out of time?

[kat148]

Is Psychology a science?

[Dark Templar]

You can't just take a few studies that weren't scientific and claim all of it is not science. There are definitely scientifically sound theories and studies.

There are definitely some bad theories and studies that weren't scientifically sound, I'll give you that.

[andrewswabey]

Mmmm, I'll have to disagree there. Psychology is definitely a science. Care to explain some of those botched theories?

That multiple choice question with the old guy nearly threw me. The one where the two most right answers were something like:

A. Attended meetings but forgot a lot of the content
B. Could recognise new information just as well as a young person

I nearly chose A because B sounded weird to be. Then I realised it was talking about the measure of retention retrieval, for new info. For all of reading time I had planned to use A.

Did anyone else nearly run out of time?

Decay theory is botched, yet still remains in the study design. also skinner and thorndike are both duds. they just applied common sense to a so called "experiment" and claim they invented these revolutionary theories. Hey, who would have thought doing something over and over would make you quicker at it??!

[Dark Templar]

The study design recognises that decay theory is botched. Some questions have you explain why.

I don't know much about Thorndike, but Skinner's work was scientific and he contributed a lot to Operant conditioning. By the way, Operant Conditioning is not simply "doing something over and over makes you quicker". If that is what you think then you show a lack of understanding.

[Glockmeister]

Mmmm, I'll have to disagree there. Psychology is definitely a science. Care to explain some of those botched theories?

That multiple choice question with the old guy nearly threw me. The one where the two most right answers were something like:

A. Attended meetings but forgot a lot of the content
B. Could recognise new information just as well as a young person

I nearly chose A because B sounded weird to be. Then I realised it was talking about the measure of retention retrieval, for new info. For all of reading time I had planned to use A.

Did anyone else nearly run out of time?

Decay theory is botched, yet still remains in the study design. also skinner and thorndike are both duds. they just applied common sense to a so called "experiment" and claim they invented these revolutionary theories. Hey, who would have thought doing something over and over would make you quicker at it??!

It's still worth 'testing' these what may seem to be 'common sense' theories, because it may yield results that are contradictory to what we would expect (see Milgram (1963) for example)

[Dark Templar]

Absolutely Glockmeister. Some theories and studies are unscientific. However, some are completely scientifically sound and very practical and repeatable.

There can be bad eggs in every science.

[invalid]

So happy! I am about 99% certain that I only lost 2 marks (stupid, stupid mistake in MC on the last question) or 3 marks at the most.
Good one, VCAA.

Dark Templar I nearly ran out of time. I did the first two sections I chose to start with in about 20 minutes, then realised how quick I was going and slowed down. Obviously slowed down a bit much.

[ambitiousstar]

Yeah it was easy. some of the MC were a little bit tricky, the way they worded it... The thing that pissed me off was the fact the supervisor phone rang half way through the exam and also he said i couldn't have an extra exam booklet at the end. hes like, were not allowed. pfft.

Now i need to go revise for lit which is in 3 hours, and i dont even know how to write a lit essay. lol

Me too haha.  Lit is making my balls shrivel.  I need some boundaries but Lit just lets you do whatever you want.  *sigh*

hmmm the exam was pretty standard i thought.. there were no questions that really stood out from previous years exams.
what would an A+ be do we think..?
79-80 out of 90?

It'll be higher than 79-80/90.  That's what it was for Unit 3 I think and this was considerably easier.  I would say 82/90 probably.

yea last year's exam 2 was 91% for A+ so that's around an 82...I think this year's exam was easier so maybe around an 83-84? Good luck all!

[Dark Templar]

Wasn't last year's exam supposed to be easier? I heard that in the examiner's report (haven't read it) that they were saying it was too easy and they were going to make it harder this year?

I reckon this one was at least harder than the mid year.

Edit: Note that I didn't actually read/do last year's exam as part of my study regime. My way of studying was very loose, listening to lectures and reading about things rather than hitting the prac exams. Seems to work for me.