Posts archived in Exam updates


Back in September we gave you new free spreads to support you with the changes to the specification, now we’re about to publish Third Editions of the Complete Companions for AQA A matched to the revised 2012 specification. Out this summer, these new editions of the AS and A2 Complete Companions for AQA A Student Books, Exam Companions and Mini Companions, match the revised 2012 specification.

Written by the same author team, Mike Cardwell and Cara Flangan, these essential companions provide a range of resources for every learning style. They can be used independently or together to support everyone teaching and studying the AQA A Psychology 2012 specification.

But, what about our new A2 Exam Companion out this March? It just so happens that the A2 Exam Companion is publishing in perfect time for us to make sure it also matches the 2012 specification as part of the Third Editions series, so you can rest assured that this book will help with preparation for the exams. Take a peek at some preview material here.

For more information about the new editions or to order inspection copies, please email me at claire.beatt@oup.com with your school or college address.

 

 

 

 

 

A team led by Dr David Glahn (Glahn et al., 2012) claims to have identified a gene RNF123 which may play a role in major depression (as distinct from bipolar disorder/depression). This gene has been shown to affect the hippocampus, which in turn is implicated in depression. Smaller hippocampal volumes are often found in people with recurrent bouts of major depression. Smaller hippocampal volumes also appear to be associated with a lower probability of remission of depression with antidepressants.However, the causal nature of this relationship is not entirely clear. Hippocampal volume may be either a cause of depression or a consequence of it. For example, it might be the case that people born with a smaller hippocampus (because of the RNF123 gene) may be more vulnerable to depression (the diathesis-stress model). Alternatively, it could also be the case that the duration of untreated depression might in some way affect hippocampal volumes.

The picture above is apparently what RNF123 looks like!

The UK-based charity Science about Science aims to equip people to make sense about the scientific and medical claims in public discussions. Part of your study of psychology has similar aims – to teach you to make educated assessments of information presented to you.

Sense about Science gets particularly annoyed by the things said by celebrities. So every year they publish some of the claims made by people who know very little. For example the US reality TV personality Nicole ‘Snooki’ Polizzi said: “I don’t really like the beach. I hate sharks, and the water’s all whale sperm. That’s why the ocean’s salty.” No Snooki, the ocean is not salty because of whale sperm. And Simon Cowell also made the bad science list in 2011. Read these and more here.

You might also be interested in some of their other publications, such as this one about peer review.

0 comments

Happy New Year?

According to today’s Guardian

“The use of antidepressants has risen by more than a quarter in England in just three years, amid fears that more people are suffering from depression due to the economic crisis. The number of prescriptions for antidepressants increased by 28% from 34m in 2007-08 to 43.4m in 2010-11, according to the NHS information centre”.

But elsewhere of course there are doubts regarding the usefulness of such treatments, for example according to a “meta-analysis carried out by evolutionary psychologist Paul Andrews, an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour. His findings suggest that people who have not taken medication for depression are at a 25 per cent risk of relapse, compared to 42 per cent or higher for those who have taken and gone off an anti-depressant”.

Furthermore “Paul believes that anti-depressants interfere with the brain’s natural self-regulation of serotonin and other neurotransmitters, and that the brain can overcorrect once medication is suspended, triggering new episodes.”

(See links here and here for full details)

 

 

I thought I’d share a couple of photos from Cara’s Science and Pseudoscience Conference on Friday. For those of you who missed it, we were joined by Psychologist and Author, Professor Richard Wiseman, and Hypnotist, Andrew Newton. One student in particular certainly won’t be forgetting the day in a hurry… under Andrew’s hypnosis he managed to get his finger firmly stuck up his nose and gave us all a good giggle.
I've picked the next experiment just for you

I've picked the next experiment just for you

All of this hypnosis is very tiring...

All of this hypnosis is very tiring...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you to everyone who popped by to say hello to us on the Oxford stand. For anyone kicking themselves afterwards for not taking advantage of our ‘Better than Amazon’ discount on The Complete Companions on the day, don’t worry – just drop me a line at claire.beatt@oup.com for the best offers on these well-loved resources. See you at the Zimbardo conference in March.

Heather Henry alerted me to these fantastic youtube clips – the multi-store model and the working memory model set to Rudolf the Rednose Reindeer and Jingle Bells. Just in time for Christmas.

There is increasing evidence that psychoanalysis may be an effective therapy. A landmark review by Shedler (2010) included a number of randomised control trials* where psychodynamic therapies proved as effective as other forms of therapy. Midgley and Kennedy (2011) conducted another review, this time of studies relating to children and young adults and again found strong evidence of the value of psychodynamic therapies.

In fact Shedler suggests that non-psychodynamic therapies may be effective in part because therapists use techniques that have long been central to psychodynamic theory and practice, such as gaining awareness of previously implicit feelings.

Shedler describes psychodynamic therapies as ‘a range of treatments based on psychoanalytic concepts and methods that involve less frequent meetings and may be considerably briefer than psychoanalysis proper. Session frequency is typically once or twice per week, and the treatment may be either time limited or open ended. The essence of psychodynamic therapy is exploring those aspects of self that are not fully known, especially as they are manifested and potentially influenced in the therapy relationship’. In his article he provides a useful description of the techniques used in the therapy.

*A randomised control trial is the gold standard of medical research where patients are randomly assigned to treatment or no treatment groups.

 
 
WJEC AS Revision Guide

The WJEC AS Revision Companion

The WJEC AS Revision Companion is out at the end of November. The guide is part of The Complete Companions for WJEC course and provides essentional information and preparation for the exam. Plus, it is endorsed by WJEC and matched to the specification to give course-specific support.

 
If you’d like to see more, then please email me (claire.beatt@oup.com) with your school or college details for your inspection copy or to place a firm order. Alternatively, you can download our recommendation sheet to pass onto your students.

A recent study by Ramona Scotland (just published) is described on a recent edition of Healthcheck (listen here). The study did involve animals but points clearly to significant gender differences – females have stronger immune systems which means they become less ill and recover faster. There is a downside because women are also more susceptible to more autoimmune diseases because their immune systems are more sensitive.

Such differences are important because most research is conducted using men and the assumption is made that the findings apply to all people. For example if a drug is tested on men it may not function in the same way with women.

In the last month a report appeared in the Daily Mail entitled ‘Putting baby in nursery could raise its risk of heart disease because it sends levels of stress soaring‘. This conclusion is based on a report by Aric Sigman, a psychologist who has previously been attacked by Ben Goldacre for his bad science (see here). Sigman’s day care claims have come in for a blistering attack by Bishopblog ‘How to become a celebrity scientific expert’. It’s a great example of why we need to understand science – because it means we are less gullible.

In brief Sigman bases his conclusions on accepted research that has shown that children in day care have raised levels of the stress hormone cortisol. But he then assumes that such increased levels later have negative consequences. In fact some research suggests that increased cortisol levels may lead to reduced fearfulness, a positive consequence. And further, the link between cortisol and heart disease is based on studies of people over 65 so it is mistaken to assume that children with raised levels of cortisol are more at risk of heart disease. However, it’s a very appealing newspaper title and has led to lots of comments from parents on the ill effects of day care.

The moral of the story? Don’t believe all your read. Always ask questions.