Importance of remembering names & years of studies

[Jyrgen]

Hello

My psych teacher said we do not necessarily need to be able to remember the people who did a study and when it was conducted in the finals. However I am not so sure if she's right. Isn't it important to be able to cite exactly what you're referring to when forming an argument?

Is this correct or not? Surely it wouldn't hurt to remember them?

Best of luck to your finals, people

[blindpet]

This has come up time and time again. When I ask teachers they don't care if you remember the researchers and years, though if the researcher is a big deal (e.g. Bandura or Bartlett). If the study is well-known they will know who it is by. If you are using more obscure research then it's a good idea to remember the researcher so the examiner can look it up (though I don't know how many actually do this).

My lecturers at university don't care if we put the researcher name and year either. If you can remember them great, if not, don't panic .

[Sean Banan Janse]

My teacher says we should know the names of the researches and the years of the studies.. And we're getting two studies per bullet in the syllabus.. But it's good I guess, there hasn't been a kid with a lower final grade than 4 in the last 5 years..

[carpediem]

My psychology teacher said this to my class the other day: "As an examiner, I assume all the researchers and the dates and correct unless it's blaringly obvious." So it's important to know who has done the study and the year of the most famous studies (e.g. Sharot et al) and it's important to get those right, as the examiners/teachers will know otherwise. But for those that aren't explicitly stated on the syllabus/really famous, it's not as important to get it right - but I would still keep the name and the year of the study on there. Otherwise you could be referring to a number of studies.

[blindpet]

Just to follow this up cause this question comes up a lot. I have looked at exam scripts (answers written by students and marked by examiners) and students still can get 6-8/8 marks on SAQ even if they put the wrong researcher for a theory/study. This suggests the examiners are more concerned with your knowledge of studies rather than memorizing names and are encouraged to mark positively (give you marks for what you have done well rather than penalizing you for what you have done wrong/nitpicking over years and names). That is the best evidence I have that the researcher and year are not as important as many teachers will have you think. If you explain/summarize the study well enough the examiner will know the researcher (or have forgotten themselves), knowledge of the study, I believe, trumps remembering the researchers.

Of course, remember them if you can but don't beat yourself up over it if you can't.

[marauder7]

My teacher always says that we have to memorize the year and the researcher.

My suggestion is that you memorize the researchers/years (and put more effort in the most important ones) because this will help to show that you have knowledge on the research.

However it is more important that you know what the research was about and use critical thinking in your answer. Spend more time studying this that studying the names.