hey, I saw that you said we should give counterarguments but the question says only one etiology, wouldn't the examiners break marks if we talk about more than one etiology?
Great question. They might if the alternative explanation for the disorder is quite unrelated to the original you have written about. BUT, if the alternative shows how another factor is linked to the original etiology then it's great critical thinking. For example, if you write that a biological etiology is small hippocampus size and this could be influenced by genetics (Gilbertson et al.'s study), you could then also explain that there are other socio-cultural factors that may affect the development of the hippocampus (e.g. poverty and socioeconomic status, as shown in Luby et al) which could explain why poorer people are more likely to develop PTSD. The counter-argument/critical thinking (in this case an alternative explanation) is directly linked to the original etiology. Hope that helps? All this is explained in the revision textbook, too.
Hey. Are you sure that there MUST be a question from each topic? Does that mean that I can learn only one of them really well and ignore the other two? Thanks!
The IB guide states that there will be one question from each topic, so I'm just going on the rule the IB has made for itself and this is the advice I'm giving my own students (i.e. study one topic in-depth).
hey, what if the question asks specifically for a specific etiology? Like the sociocultural etiology of one disorder, do we still bring up the counterclaims from other etiologies (like biological and cognitive)? And if yes... doesn't that mean we would be going off topic in regards to the question?
The best counterclaims are those linked ot the central claim. e.g. if you're saying that socieconomic status is a sociocultural explanation, you could go deeper to explain why by looking at relevant biological factors correlated with soc-ec stats (e.g. brain development).
literally travis saving me from eventual death by IB because my teacher doesn't know what to teach lol
Could you do a video running through the human relationships content??
hey, I saw that you said we should give counterarguments but the question says only one etiology, wouldn't the examiners break marks if we talk about more than one etiology?
Great question. They might if the alternative explanation for the disorder is quite unrelated to the original you have written about. BUT, if the alternative shows how another factor is linked to the original etiology then it's great critical thinking. For example, if you write that a biological etiology is small hippocampus size and this could be influenced by genetics (Gilbertson et al.'s study), you could then also explain that there are other socio-cultural factors that may affect the development of the hippocampus (e.g. poverty and socioeconomic status, as shown in Luby et al) which could explain why poorer people are more likely to develop PTSD. The counter-argument/critical thinking (in this case an alternative explanation) is directly linked to the original etiology. Hope that helps? All this is explained in the revision textbook, too.
@@ThemanticEducation Thank you very much!
How to answer a question that contrasts 2 approaches of etiology? what is there to add in addition?
Hey. Are you sure that there MUST be a question from each topic? Does that mean that I can learn only one of them really well and ignore the other two? Thanks!
The IB guide states that there will be one question from each topic, so I'm just going on the rule the IB has made for itself and this is the advice I'm giving my own students (i.e. study one topic in-depth).
@@ThemanticEducation ok! thank you very much for your videos, they are extremely helpful!
I’m gonna study two just to be safe
@@KenzieElise-dj7cm how’d it go ? I’m considering doing the same
hey, what if the question asks specifically for a specific etiology? Like the sociocultural etiology of one disorder, do we still bring up the counterclaims from other etiologies (like biological and cognitive)?
And if yes... doesn't that mean we would be going off topic in regards to the question?
The best counterclaims are those linked ot the central claim. e.g. if you're saying that socieconomic status is a sociocultural explanation, you could go deeper to explain why by looking at relevant biological factors correlated with soc-ec stats (e.g. brain development).
luv u