WRITING ESSAYS
Writing psychology essays for examination boards requires a structured approach and a clear understanding of the assessment objectives (AOs). Here's a beginner's guide with general advice:
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A THEORY (EXPLANATION) AND A RESEARCH STUDY?
Psychological Theory:
What it is: A big idea that explains why things happen in psychology.
IN PSYCHOLOGICAL JARGON: A theory in psychology is a broad, abstract, and comprehensive framework or set of principles that seeks to explain and organise phenomena within a specific area of psychology.
IN LAYMAN’S TERMS: UHelps us understand and make sense of psychological stuff..
The primary purpose of a psychological theory is to provide a conceptual understanding of why certain psychological processes or behaviors occur. It helps researchers and psychologists make sense of observed phenomena by proposing explanations.
Research Study in Psychology:
What it is: A specific project where psychologists gather data and conduct to test if a theory is right or wrong.
Nature: A research study in psychology is a specific, systematic, and empirical investigation or experiment conducted to gather data and test hypotheses related to a particular psychological phenomenon or theory.
Purpose: To see if a theory actually works in real life:
The primary purpose of a research study is to collect real-world, empirical evidence that either supports or challenges existing psychological theories or hypotheses. It aims to provide concrete data and draw conclusions based on observations and measurements.
In summary, a theory is a broad conceptual framework that explains psychological phenomena, while a research study is a specific, practical endeavour to gather empirical evidence that either supports or refutes the claims made by a theory. Theories guide research studies by providing a foundation for understanding and generating hypotheses that can be tested through empirical research.
THEORY AND RESEARCH STUDY APPLIED TO ASCH
Psychological Theory (Asch's Theory on Conformity):
A psychological theory is a broad, general framework or explanation that aims to describe and predict behaviour or phenomena within a specific area of psychology.
Asch's theory on conformity, for instance, proposes that individuals tend to conform to group norms and opinions, even when they know those opinions are incorrect. It provides a conceptual understanding of why people conform in social situations.
Research Study (Asch's Lines Experiment):
A research study is a specific, systematic investigation conducted to gather empirical evidence and test hypotheses related to a particular psychological phenomenon or theory.
Asch's research study on lines involved a controlled experiment where participants were asked to judge the length of lines. This study aimed to empirically test and validate his theory on conformity by observing how participants conformed to incorrect judgments made by others in a group setting.
In summary, a psychological theory is a broad explanation, while a research study is a specific experiment or investigation designed to test and support that theory with empirical evidence. Asch's theory on conformity served as the conceptual framework, and his lines experiment was the empirical study used to validate this theory.
ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES
In AQA Psychology, the assessment objectives (AOs) are categorised as follows:
AO1 - Knowledge and Understanding (The Reporter):
AO1 is like a reporter who provides detailed descriptions and explanations of psychological theories, concepts, or research studies.
This objective involves demonstrating your knowledge and understanding of psychological ideas by accurately describing theories, concepts, or the aims, procedures, findings, and conclusions of research studies.
Think of AO1 as the "who, what, when, where, and why" of psychology. It's about presenting the facts and information clearly and concisely.
AO2 - Application and Analysis (The Analyst):
AO2 is akin to an analyst who goes beyond mere description and applies psychological theories or research findings to real-world situations or novel scenarios.
This objective involves taking the knowledge acquired in AO1 and using it to analyze, evaluate, and make connections between different psychological ideas or concepts.
While you didn't mention an analogy for AO2, you can think of it as the "how" of psychology. It's about applying your understanding to answer questions or solve problems.
AO3 - Evaluation (The Scientist):
AO3 is analogous to a scientist who critically evaluates and assesses psychological theories, research studies, or findings.
In AO3, you focus on evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of theories or research, considering the validity, reliability, and ethical issues, and drawing reasoned conclusions.
Just like a scientist conducts experiments to test hypotheses, in AO3, you use your knowledge to evaluate the validity and reliability of psychological theories and research.
All AO3 responses should follow the PEEL structure (Point, Evidence, Explanation, Link, Evaluation, and Synthesis) to ensure a comprehensive evaluation.
So, in summary, AO1 is about reporting factual information, AO2 involves applying and analyzing that information, and AO3 requires evaluating and critiquing psychological theories, research, or findings, following the PEEL structure.
In psychology, the acronym APFC stands for Aims, Procedures, Findings, and Conclusions.
When students are asked to describe or outline a research study for A01, they must include these elements (APFC) in their responses.
For example, when discussing Asch's study on conformity for A01, students would include the Aims, Procedures, Findings, and Conclusions of the study.
However, when it comes to A03, which involves evaluation, students should focus on the Findings and Conclusions (FC) of the research study.
During evaluation (A03), students should not provide a detailed study description but instead use the Findings and Conclusions to support their arguments and evaluations.
This approach ensures that students provide a clear distinction between A01 and A03, with A01 including a comprehensive description of the study (APFC) and A03 emphasizing evaluation based on the Findings and Conclusions (FC) of the research.
EVALUATION OF RESEARCH METHODS
EXAMPLE 1: "IT LACKS ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY"
Why this is wrong: This is a common shopping list point, often added without explaining how or why a study lacks ecological validity. Simply stating this does not show an understanding of the concept. Ecological validity refers to whether the findings of a study can be applied to real-world settings. To avoid being vague, you need to explain why the study’s conditions don't reflect real life and how this limits the applicability of its findings.
For example: If a memory experiment was conducted in a laboratory setting using artificial tasks, like recalling random word lists, you need to explain why these conditions might not reflect how memory works in everyday life.
EXAMPLE 2: "THE STUDY IS DETERMINISTIC"
Why this is wrong: Simply stating that a study or theory is deterministic doesn’t show an understanding of how determinism impacts the findings. Determinism suggests that behaviour is caused by forces beyond an individual’s control, like genetics or environment. A point like this needs to be tied back to the specific study, explaining how it presents deterministic views and why that matters.
For example: If discussing a study on aggression, you might say the findings suggest that aggression is caused solely by genetic predisposition (biological determinism), which ignores other potential influences like free will or environmental factors.
EXAMPLE 3: "THE SAMPLE SIZE IS TOO SMALL"
Why this is wrong: While this is often true in many studies, just stating that the sample size is too small without explaining its implications is a weak point. You must elaborate on how a small sample size affects the reliability of the findings and why it limits generalisability.
For example: In a study with only 10 participants, you could argue that the sample is not representative of the wider population, meaning the results may not apply to others in different demographic groups.
EXAMPLE 4: "IT LACKS CONSTRUCT VALIDITY"
Why this is wrong: Throwing in this statement without clarification makes it a shopping list point. Construct validityrefers to whether a test or measure accurately captures the concept it intends to measure. You need to explain how the study fails to measure the intended construct and why that weakens the conclusions.
For example: In a study on intelligence, if the researchers only used a basic IQ test, you could argue that this lacks construct validity because intelligence is a broader concept that includes creativity, emotional intelligence, and problem-solving skills.
EXAMPLE 5: "THE RESEARCH IS REDUCTIONIST"
Why this is wrong: Simply stating that something is reductionist doesn’t demonstrate understanding. Reductionismrefers to oversimplifying complex behaviours by reducing them to a single cause, like biology or environment. You need to explain how the study reduces a complex behaviour and why this is problematic.
For example: If discussing biological explanations of mental health, you could explain that reducing mental health issues to chemical imbalances ignores the role of social, cognitive, or environmental factors, leading to an incomplete understanding.
HOW TO AVOID SHOPPING LIST POINTS
For each of these examples, you must avoid just stating a general critique without:
Explaining it fully (what does it mean?),
Applying it to the specific study or theory being discussed,
Evaluating its impact on the findings or conclusions of the research, and
Linking it back to the question to show how it strengthens or weakens the argument.
By developing your points through point-evidence-explain-evaluate (PEEE) or similar frameworks, you will show deeper understanding and avoid the trap of making unconnected, hit-and-miss claims
PEEL PARAGRAHS
Point (P): The behavioural approach in psychology emphasizes the significance of observable behaviours as a means to understand and explain human actions.
Explanation (E): This approach contends that behaviours can be studied objectively, and through the process of conditioning, associations between stimuli and responses can be identified. Behavioural psychologists believe that external factors and environmental influences play a crucial role in shaping an individual's behaviour.
Evidence (E): Classic experiments like Pavlov's dog, where dogs were conditioned to salivate at the sound of a bell, and Skinner's operant conditioning studies, demonstrate the principles of the behavioural approach in action. These experiments provide empirical evidence of how behaviours can be modified through learning and environmental factors.
Link (L): In summary, the behavioural approach offers valuable insights into understanding and modifying behaviours, making it a fundamental perspective within psychology. By focusing on observable actions and their causes, it provides practical applications in various fields, such as education and therapy.
This PEEL point highlights the key aspects of the behavioural approach, including its focus on observable behaviours, the role of conditioning, and the empirical evidence supporting its principles.
IDENTIFY THE PEEL POINTS BELOW:
The problems with using methods such as ablations and post-mortems is that participants such as Paul Leborgne aka “Tan” may have individual differences in brain organisation, for example “Tan” may have a larger speech area than other people, especially if the person was bilingual for example. It may, therefore, not be possible to generalise the findings from Tan to other people. Moreover, post-mortems do not show real-time activity in the brain as the person is dead. Similarly, ablations are not a precise research tool, cuts may have different consequences on different brain organisations. However, since this time much more advanced methods of investigating the brain have been introduced, for example electrical stimulation, this method is more precise as it can pinpoint smaller detail such as the topographical maps in the motor and sensory cortices. However, as animals are its main targets, it’s also difficult to generalise as animals have different motor systems, e.g., tails. Lastly, the introduction of scans is the most robust evidence of localisation because …. Scans can use human participants, 1000s of participants can be recruited, it’s not invasive, scans look at real-time brain activity (not dead brains)
This means that researchers can confidently assume most people have functions organised or localised in the same places.
Here are two evaluative points for Asch's study on conformity using FC (Findings and Conclusions):
Support from McCarthy and Nicholsons' Research (FC): Asch's findings on conformity have received support from subsequent research conducted by McCarthy and Nicholson. Their study replicated Asch's experiment in a more naturalistic setting, where participants had to make judgments in a real-world context. The researchers found that individuals were still susceptible to conformity, even in situations outside the lab. This support enhances the validity of Asch's findings, suggesting that they apply to real-life scenarios and are not limited to the controlled conditions of a laboratory. Therefore, Asch's conclusions about the influence of group pressure on conformity are further substantiated by the consistent findings of McCarthy and Nicholson.
Limited Generalisability (Conclusions): One limitation of Asch's study lies in the generalizability of its conclusions. Asch primarily used male college students as participants in his experiments, which raises concerns about the extent to which the findings can be applied to a broader population. The study's sample may not represent the entire population, particularly regarding age, gender, and cultural diversity. Consequently, it is uncertain whether Asch's conclusions about conformity would hold for individuals from different demographic backgrounds or age groups. This limitation suggests that the scope of Asch's conclusions might be narrower than initially proposed and should be considered with caution when applied to diverse populations.
APFC to Asch's study on conformity:
Aims (A): Solomon Asch conducted this study to investigate the extent to which people would conform to the opinions of a group, even when they knew the group's answer was incorrect. He aimed to understand the factors that influence conformity.
Procedures (P): In Asch's experiment, participants were shown a line and then asked to choose the matching line from a set of comparison lines. They did this in a group of confederates, who were instructed to give incorrect answers on some trials. The real participant was seated in a position where they had to respond after the confederates.
Findings (F): Asch found that participants conformed to the incorrect answers given by the group on a significant number of trials. About 75% of participants conformed at least once, even when they knew the group was wrong. This demonstrated the powerful influence of group pressure on individual behaviour.
Conclusions (C): From his study, Asch concluded that social pressure and the desire to fit in with a group could lead individuals to conform and give incorrect answers. He highlighted the importance of social factors in shaping human behaviour.
So, in applying APFC to Asch's study, we have outlined the Aims, Procedures, Findings, and Conclusions of his research on conformity. This approach provides a comprehensive understanding of the study's key components
let's label the Findings and Conclusions and structure the evaluation using the PEEL (Point, Evidence, Explanation, Link) framework with signposting:
ASCH EVALUATION
Point (P): Asch's study on conformity provides valuable insights into human behaviour.
Evidence (E): The study's findings revealed that many participants conformed to incorrect group judgments on simple perceptual tasks, even when they knew the group was wrong. This demonstrated the powerful impact of group pressure on individual decision-making.
Explanation (E): These findings suggest that individuals are often willing to compromise their judgment to fit in with a majority, highlighting the strength of normative social influence and the need for social approval. This phenomenon is crucial in understanding how social norms and group dynamics influence behaviour.
Link (L): Now, let's evaluate these findings and conclusions regarding their significance and limitations.
Point (P): One significant aspect of Asch's study is its experimental rigour and controlled conditions.
Evidence (E): Asch carefully manipulated variables such as group size and unanimity, ensuring that the influence of group pressure could be systematically studied.
Explanation (E): This controlled approach allowed for the establishment of causal relationships between group pressure and conformity, increasing the internal validity of the findings.
Link (L): However, it's essential to consider the external validity of these findings and their applicability to real-world situations beyond the laboratory.
Point (P): Conclusions drawn from Asch's study have been influential in the field of social psychology.
Evidence (E): Asch's conclusions suggest that individuals are highly susceptible to social influence, even when it conflicts with their judgments.
Explanation (E): This insight has been foundational in understanding phenomena like groupthink, herd behaviour, and the role of conformity in decision-making.
Link (L): Nevertheless, it's vital to acknowledge the study's limitations, such as its sample composition and potential cultural biases.
Point (P): Asch's study has been both praised and criticized for its ecological validity.
Evidence (E): Critics argue that the artificial nature of the tasks and the laboratory setting may not accurately reflect real-life situations where conformity occurs.
Explanation (E): This limitation raises questions about the ecological validity of Asch's findings and whether they can be applied to everyday scenarios.
Link (L): In conclusion, while Asch's study provides valuable insights into the power of conformity, researchers and psychologists should consider its limitations and the need for research in more naturalistic settings to fully understand the complexities of human behaviour in social contexts.
GENERAL ADVICE ON MARKS AND COMMAND WORDS
In AQA psychology essays, the maximum score is 16 marks.
A 16-mark essay combining A01 and A03 comprises six marks for A01 and ten marks for A03.
If A02 (application) is included in a 16-mark essay, the breakdown is six marks for A01, four marks for A02, and six marks for A03.
A01 is limited to a maximum of 6 marks and often involves command words like "outline" and "describe."
A03 focuses on evaluation and commonly uses command words like "evaluate."
When the essay question includes "outline and evaluate" or “ discuss” this means it is an essay with A01 and A03.
In essays where A01 and A03 are combined The outline part) typically allocates 1/3 of the marks to A01 and 2/3 to A03 (evaluation).
For instance, in a 10-mark question, this translates to approximately 3-4 marks for A01 and 6-7 marks for A03.
Examiners closely review essays to ensure students maintain a balanced approach with around 1/3 for A01 and 2/3 for A03 in “outline and evaluate or “discuss” essays.
In essays where A01, A02 and A03 are combined, the breakdown is A01 = 3/8, A02 = 1/4, A03 = 3/8
ESSAY TIMINGS
If you aim to spend 1 minute per mark when writing a 16-mark essay for AQA psychology, you can allocate your time as follows:
A01 (6 marks): Spend approximately 6 minutes on this section. In A01, you typically outline or describe relevant theories, concepts, or research studies related to the question.
A02 (10 marks): Dedicate around 10 minutes to this section. A02 involves applying your knowledge by discussing, analyzing, and providing examples or evidence to support your arguments. You may also need to consider counterarguments or alternative viewpoints.
By following this time allocation, you should be able to complete your 16-mark essay within 16 minutes. Remember that these time recommendations are approximate and can vary based on your writing speed and familiarity with the topic. It's essential to practice under timed conditions to improve your efficiency and ensure that you can effectively convey your knowledge and analysis within the given time frame.
HOW MUCH DO YOU WRITE FOR A 16-MARK ESSAY?
The number of pages a 16-mark essay in AQA psychology would translate to depends on several factors, including your handwriting size, line spacing, and the size of the paper you're using. Generally, if you're writing neatly and using regular lined paper, a 16-mark essay could span approximately 1.5 to 2 pages. However, this is just a rough estimate, and the actual length can vary from person to person.
It's more important to focus on the content and structure of your essay rather than its length. Ensure you address the question, provide a clear argument, support your points with evidence, and use a well-structured essay format, including an introduction, main body, and conclusion. The quality of your essay matters more than its length.
PUTTING IT ALTOGETHER
To recap:
Understand the Assessment Objectives (AOs):
AO1 (A01): Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of psychological concepts, theories, research studies, and research methods.
AO2 (A02): Apply psychological knowledge and understanding to analyze, evaluate, and generate hypotheses.
AO3 (A03): Evaluate psychological theories, research studies, methodologies, and practical applications.
Read and Analyse the Question:
Carefully read and underline key terms and command words in the question, such as "outline," "evaluate," "discuss," or "apply."
Ensure you know what is being asked of you for each AO.
Plan Your Essay:
Create a clear essay plan or outline before you start writing. Allocate time for each section based on the marks available.
Your essay should have an introduction, main body, and conclusion.
Introduction (AO1):
Begin with a clear introduction that provides context and outlines the key points you will discuss.
State the main arguments or theories you will address.
Main Body (AO2/AO3):
Address the main points or theories one by one.
Use the PEEL (Point, Evidence, Explanation, Link) structure for each point:
Point: Make a clear point or argument.
Evidence: Provide evidence such as research findings, studies, or theories.
Explanation: Explain the significance of the evidence and how it supports your point.
Link: Connect your point to the essay question and the next point you will discuss.
Use clear and concise language. Avoid overly complex sentences.
Application (AO2):
When required, apply psychological knowledge to real-life examples or scenarios.
Show how the theories or concepts you discuss can be applied to practical situations.
Evaluation (AO3):
For evaluation questions, consider both the strengths and weaknesses of theories, research studies, or methodologies.
Use critical thinking to weigh the evidence and come to a reasoned conclusion.
Avoid making unsupported claims; use empirical evidence to support your arguments.
Use Proper Citations:
When referencing studies or theories, cite them properly using the author's name, publication year, and other relevant details.
Conclusion (AO1/AO2/AO3):
Summarize the main points you've discussed in the essay.
If the question requires evaluation, provide a balanced final assessment of the topic.
Proofread and Edit:
Review your essay for grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
Ensure that your writing is clear and concise.
Practice and Get Feedback:
Practice writing essays under timed conditions to improve your time management skills.
Seek feedback from teachers, peers, or online resources to identify areas for improvement.
Time Management:
Allocate time wisely. If the essay is worth 16 marks, consider spending about 1 minute per mark.
Stay Calm and Stay Focused:
Manage exam stress by staying calm and focused during the exam. Stick to your plan and avoid rushing.
Remember that practice is key to improving your essay-writing skills. Over time, you'll become more proficient at structuring and writing psychology essays for AQA exams.
FULL ESSAY EXAMPLE: ASCH
Title: Solomon Asch's Conformity Experiment (16 marks) Time 20 minutes max ; GRADE C/B
Description of Asch's Conformity Theory (6 Marks - AO1):
Introduction: Solomon Asch's Conformity Experiment, conducted in the 1950s, remains a classic and influential study in the field of social psychology. This essay will first provide a brief description of Asch's theory of conformity, followed by an evaluation of its strengths and weaknesses, applying the PEEL (Point, Evidence, Explanation, and Link) structure.
Point: Solomon Asch's conformity theory focuses on the idea that individuals often conform to group norms and opinions, even if they disagree with those views.
Evidence: Asch conducted a series of experiments where participants were asked to judge the length of lines. They were placed in a group of confederates who intentionally provided incorrect answers to see if the real participants would conform to the group's incorrect judgments.
Explanation: The results of Asch's experiments revealed that a significant proportion of participants conformed to the group's incorrect judgments, even when they knew the group was wrong. This demonstrates the power of social influence and the tendency of individuals to conform to avoid social discomfort or being seen as deviating from the group.
Link: In summary, Asch's theory of conformity highlights how social pressure can lead individuals to abandon their judgments and conform to group norms, a phenomenon observed in his line-judgment experiments.
Evaluation of Asch's Conformity Theory (10 Marks - AO3):
Point 1 - Strengths of Asch's Conformity Experiment (PEEL): Point: One strength of Asch's research is its experimental rigour, making it highly controlled and replicable.
Evidence: Asch carefully designed his experiments, ensuring that the Confederates' responses were scripted and consistent across trials. This control enhances the reliability of the study.
Explanation: This methodological strength means that other researchers can replicate the study with a high degree of accuracy, strengthening the credibility of Asch's findings.
Link: The methodological rigour of Asch's experiments bolsters the validity and trustworthiness of his conformity theory.
Point 2 - Weaknesses of Asch's Conformity Experiment (PEEL): Point: One significant weakness of Asch's research is the limited ecological validity.
Evidence: Participants in Asch's experiments were presented with a contrived task of line judgment, which does not represent real-world conformity situations accurately.
Explanation: In everyday life, conformity occurs in more complex and emotionally charged situations, such as peer pressure in adolescence or conformity to societal norms. Asch's controlled experiments do not capture these nuances.
Link: The lack of ecological validity in Asch's research raises questions about the generalizability of his findings to real-life situations.
Conclusion: In conclusion, Solomon Asch's conformity theory has substantially contributed to our understanding of social influence. His controlled experiments, while methodologically robust, lack ecological validity, which limits their applicability to real-world conformity scenarios. Despite this limitation, Asch's work remains a cornerstone in the field of psychology, highlighting the powerful impact of social pressure on individual behaviour.
