Hi, just sat paper 2 psychology. Want to say a massive thank you for your help with the questions, the paper was quite nice (didn’t like the approaches until the 8 marker). Need a bit of reassurance tho for a 16 marker on discussing endogenous pacemakers and exogenous zeitgebers. For the evaluation, I talked about the chipmunk study and then said how it shows that the removal of endogenous pacemakers largely affects our biological rhythms. I then did a counter/limitation about generalisability from animals to humans (quite long and detailed). I then forgot to do a full eval about Siffre’s research and instead said what he found in a point and then said this was contradicted by research in the arctic circle etc. By not writing the evaluation point for Siffre so only doing the 3 or 2.5 eval (if you count a counter as a half) will this affect my score? So annoyed at myself!
Considering that you did talk about siffre and that you DID evaluate decoursey then you'll be fine. 3 evaluation points is totally fine. On the other hand, I talked about siffre and decoursey as a01. My evaluation was as the following: * siffre study and artificial light=methodological issues *decoursey gemeralisqbility *research into endo + exo is correlation and that cannot imply a causation *something about real life applications to jet lag and light therapies As you can see, two of my evaluation points are not strong so as long as your paragraphs are detailed you'll be fine. Also, that 8 marker was just whyyy? Let me tell you something friend: I revised every other approach than the behaviourist approach and slt. I probably got 4/8 or something for that questiob
You're most welcome 😊 Glad paper 2 went well for you. In terms of the Biopsychology essay you asked about, that all sounds good. Effective use of research (DeCoursey) that was linked to endogenous pacemakers. Counterargument to follow it up - nice contradiction of research with the artic circle! Sounds like a very well structured essay.
Can you please do videos in detail on research methods??? Your videos are so helpful and have helped me in every topic but I just can’t seem to find any videos on research method. Thanks for the help
Glad the videos have been helping you so much 😊 Got something bigger in the works for research methods - will take some time to complete - but don’t worry. It’s on the way 👍
Hi there, Tom. I've been following your videos for quite a while now, and I must say they're really good. You put in a lot of effort! I just have a quick question for you. As you must be aware, Paper 1 and Paper 2 of psychology have just passed, and I know I did really bad on them. I missed out on a lot of sections-I can't lie, it was nerves. When I checked the answers at home, I realised I made a lot of careless mistakes. So now I'm literally working my a** off for Paper 3. I wanted to know, if I did bad on the first two papers but do well on Paper 3, will I still get a grade? Or is it important to pass all three papers, like get a certain mark in order to get a grade? Please pleasee answer I would finally find motivation.
Hey 🙂 Sorry to hear that Paper 1 and 2 haven’t got as well as you’d hoped. Drop me an email at info@bearitinmind.org and I’ll send you more of a response 👍
for Q15 I put the level of measurement as nominal data and justified it by saying that the previous behavioural categories when observing the social behaviour of the children were used to create the social behaviour score and therefore gave my final answer as Chi Squared - did I include enough appropriate justification to achieve the alternative marks as suggested by the markscheme?
And many students would have put the same. The issue is that the scenario states that they converted 'the number of agreed observations into a total social behaviour score for each child - they turned it into ordinal data. Mark scheme states: "the data collected can be treated as ordinal as it is a social behaviour score (the difference between each score is not fixed/can be ranked)."
@@BearitinMIND thank you for replying so quickly! i'm still not quite sure why it could also not be justified to be nominal data, as I thought it could be interpreted as like a frequency score since the markscheme says 'or an alternative statistical test if appropriately justified in bullet point three'
With the mark schemes they have tended to be more lenient and open with student answers, often crediting where students have justified the answers correctly.
I can't not to admit the calmness of the voice and the tempo of the speech, which really makes me found myself in kind of magic hypno)
Thank you kind sir. Appreciate the encouraging words. Hope you enjoy many more of the videos on the channel.
i agree wholeheartedly its chilling me out so much for tomorrow
Thanks so much for getting this out in time for p2- was waiting for this!!!
No problem! Hope it helps you ahead of Paper 2 😊
you have helped me all through my alevls , always finding your videos intresting and helpfull. Thankyou!
Excellent! So wonderful to hear that 😊 Delighted the videos have helped you through your studies. All the best with Paper 2!
Hi, just sat paper 2 psychology. Want to say a massive thank you for your help with the questions, the paper was quite nice (didn’t like the approaches until the 8 marker). Need a bit of reassurance tho for a 16 marker on discussing endogenous pacemakers and exogenous zeitgebers. For the evaluation, I talked about the chipmunk study and then said how it shows that the removal of endogenous pacemakers largely affects our biological rhythms. I then did a counter/limitation about generalisability from animals to humans (quite long and detailed). I then forgot to do a full eval about Siffre’s research and instead said what he found in a point and then said this was contradicted by research in the arctic circle etc. By not writing the evaluation point for Siffre so only doing the 3 or 2.5 eval (if you count a counter as a half) will this affect my score? So annoyed at myself!
Considering that you did talk about siffre and that you DID evaluate decoursey then you'll be fine. 3 evaluation points is totally fine.
On the other hand, I talked about siffre and decoursey as a01.
My evaluation was as the following:
* siffre study and artificial light=methodological issues
*decoursey gemeralisqbility
*research into endo + exo is correlation and that cannot imply a causation
*something about real life applications to jet lag and light therapies
As you can see, two of my evaluation points are not strong so as long as your paragraphs are detailed you'll be fine.
Also, that 8 marker was just whyyy? Let me tell you something friend:
I revised every other approach than the behaviourist approach and slt.
I probably got 4/8 or something for that questiob
@@i.o.creates thank you for replying my friend, the 8 marker was certainly interesting to say the least!
You're most welcome 😊 Glad paper 2 went well for you. In terms of the Biopsychology essay you asked about, that all sounds good. Effective use of research (DeCoursey) that was linked to endogenous pacemakers. Counterargument to follow it up - nice contradiction of research with the artic circle! Sounds like a very well structured essay.
@@BearitinMIND thank you!
tysm for this sir you really tackled lots of my weak areas :)
That's great to hear - so pleased the video has been useful and helpful for your revision. All the best with Paper 2!
Great video, really helpful thanks!
Thanks Lydia 😊 Glad it was helpful!
Thank you so much for your advice. Your channel has been really helpful and your videos are so well put together and edited!
Thanks for commenting! It's wonderful to hear to how the videos have been helping your studies 😊 All the best with Paper 2!
Can you please do videos in detail on research methods??? Your videos are so helpful and have helped me in every topic but I just can’t seem to find any videos on research method. Thanks for the help
Glad the videos have been helping you so much 😊 Got something bigger in the works for research methods - will take some time to complete - but don’t worry. It’s on the way 👍
@BearitinMIND Hi is there any update on this? It would be incredibly helpful!
@@nuhashukry7726 Working on Forensics videos - Research Methods coming in 2025.
@@BearitinMIND Thank you! I can't wait 😀
This is the reason I won’t fail psychology
All the best with the exam today 👍
Hi there, Tom. I've been following your videos for quite a while now, and I must say they're really good. You put in a lot of effort! I just have a quick question for you. As you must be aware, Paper 1 and Paper 2 of psychology have just passed, and I know I did really bad on them. I missed out on a lot of sections-I can't lie, it was nerves. When I checked the answers at home, I realised I made a lot of careless mistakes. So now I'm literally working my a** off for Paper 3. I wanted to know, if I did bad on the first two papers but do well on Paper 3, will I still get a grade? Or is it important to pass all three papers, like get a certain mark in order to get a grade? Please pleasee answer I would finally find motivation.
Hey 🙂 Sorry to hear that Paper 1 and 2 haven’t got as well as you’d hoped. Drop me an email at info@bearitinmind.org and I’ll send you more of a response 👍
@@BearitinMINDThank you, i’ve left you an email👍🏻
send prayers pls
Many thanks sir. Please can you post one of those mini quizzes like you did gor paper1?
for Q15 I put the level of measurement as nominal data and justified it by saying that the previous behavioural categories when observing the social behaviour of the children were used to create the social behaviour score and therefore gave my final answer as Chi Squared - did I include enough appropriate justification to achieve the alternative marks as suggested by the markscheme?
And many students would have put the same. The issue is that the scenario states that they converted 'the number of agreed observations into a total social behaviour score for each child - they turned it into ordinal data.
Mark scheme states: "the data collected can be treated as ordinal as it is a social behaviour score (the difference between each score is not fixed/can be ranked)."
@@BearitinMIND thank you for replying so quickly!
i'm still not quite sure why it could also not be justified to be nominal data, as I thought it could be interpreted as like a frequency score since the markscheme says 'or an alternative statistical test if appropriately justified in bullet point three'
With the mark schemes they have tended to be more lenient and open with student answers, often crediting where students have justified the answers correctly.
@@BearitinMIND i see, thank you