UNIVERSITY OF SURREY
PSYCHD IN CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY
SELECTION 2010 - WRITTEN TEST
QUESTION PAPER
CANDIDATE INSTRUCTIONS
There are TWO parts to this test
Candidates should answer BOTH parts of the test but can answer them in whichever order
they prefer
Candidates have 45 MINUTES to complete the test and are advised to manage their time so
that they can complete both parts of the test
Both parts of the test carry equal marks
All answers MUST be written in the answer booklet provided
Loose sheets of paper are provided for notes. They will be collected at the end of the test but
will NOT be marked
Candidates are permitted to make notes on this test paper. It will be collected at the end of
the test but will NOT be marked
WHEN THE INVIGILATOR INSTRUCTS YOU TO DO SO, TURN THE PAGE
PART 1: SCIENTIST-PRACTIONER THINKING
This part of the test assesses your ability to reason and think critically about research, to draw
on theory, and to link theory and research with clinical practice.
Read the Abstract below and then answer the questions for Part 1 in your answer booklet.
There are 15 marks available on this part of the test.
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an important medical diagnostic tool. MRI scanning
requires the patient to lie for a considerable period of time in a scanning machine. If the
patient’s head is the focus of the scan, the patient also has to wear a coil that encloses the
head in order to keep it still. Published reports indicate that around 15% of patients describe
severe claustrophobic reactions while in the scanning machine. Such reactions are distressing
and can result in inaccurate scan results, premature termination of the procedure or refusal to
have any further scans. This study aimed to investigate cognitive and behavioural factors
related to the experience of anxiety in MRI scanners.
One hundred and thirty outpatients aged between 18 and 82 years old attending an MRI unit
completed the following questionnaires five minutes after their scan:
- a measure of how often they experienced anxiety in the scanner,
- a measure of how often they experienced the physical symptoms of panic in the
scanner (e.g. increased heart rate),
- a measure of how often they used particular coping strategies during the scan (e.g.
deep breathing, relaxation), and,
- a measure of how often they experienced claustrophobic-related thoughts during the
scan (e.g. ‘I am going to get stuck in here’, ‘The machine is harming me’).
Participants were also asked to complete at home after the scan and return by post four
general measures as follows:
- level of claustrophobic fears regarding restriction and suffocation
- depression,
- anxiety, and
- health anxiety.
Completed questionnaires were returned by 97 of the initial 130 participants, a return rate of
75%.
Overall, the researchers found that level of anxiety experienced in the scanner was related to:
(1) level of claustrophobic fears of restriction and suffocation; (2) frequency of coping
strategies to manage claustrophobic anxiety during the scan; (3) number of symptoms of
panic during the scan; and (4) number of claustrophobia-related thoughts about the scan.
QUESTIONS: PART 1
Question (a): What type of design has been used in this study? [1 mark]
Question (b): Is it possible to understand the causes of anxiety experienced in an MRI
scanner using this type of design? To score marks you must justify your answer [2 marks]
Question (c): As indicated in the Abstract, 33 of the participants did not return the four
questionnaires they were asked to complete at home. This meant that complete data existed
for only 97 participants. The researchers compared the 33 participants who did not return
their questionnaires to the 97 who did return their questionnaires using the measures they all
completed 5 minutes after the scan (i.e. the measures of anxiety, panic, coping strategies and
claustrophobic-related thoughts during the scan). Why do you think they did this
comparison? [1 mark]
Question (d): The researchers divided the participants into three groups depending on how
much anxiety they reported during the scan. The three groups - ‘high anxious’, ‘medium
anxious’ and ‘low anxious’ – were compared on their fears of suffocation. The mean level of
suffocation fear in the high anxious group was 14.18, in the medium anxious group it was
10.36, and in the low anxious group it was 7.95. A oneway analysis of variance comparing
the mean scores gave the following result: F(2,94)=8.11, p<.001.
What is your interpretation of this finding? [2 marks]
Question (e): As stated, overall the researchers found that general fears of restriction and
suffocation, physical symptoms of panic and claustrophobic thoughts during the scan and
coping strategies were related to anxiety levels during the scan.
Please suggest a theoretical explanation for these results [2 marks]
Question (f): How might the findings of this study be relevant to the work of a clinical
psychologist? [2 marks]
Question (g): Drawing from the results of this study, briefly describe an intervention study to
reduce anxiety reactions that you might conduct with people who are about to undergo an
MRI scan. In your answer, explain how/whether the design of the study could allow you to
conclude that your intervention had an effect [5 marks]
END OF PART 1 QUESTIONS
PART 2: DATA INTERPRETATION AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
This part of the test assesses your ability to extract and interpret information and summarise it
in an appropriate written form. You will be marked on presentation as well as content.
Please ensure your writing can be read.
Read the Description of data below and then write your answer in Part 2 of your answer
booklet following the instructions given in the answer booklet.
There are 15 marks available on this part of the test.
Description of data
The table below summarises studies that have compared different interventions for
depression in children aged 11 to 16 years. In each study listed, there has been an
‘intervention group’ and a ‘control group’. In all the studies listed, the ‘intervention group’
have received a course of vigorous exercise (either running or aerobics). There are three
types of ‘control group’, as follows: in studies A, B and C, vigorous exercise has been
compared with no intervention; in studies D, E and F, vigorous exercise has been compared
with cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT); in studies G, H and I, vigorous exercise has been
compared with low intensity exercise (gentle walking or stretching).
Study
Control
group
A
No
intervention
No
intervention
No
intervention
B
C
Final sample
size
(intervention
& control)
20 & 20
Dropout
rate:
intervention
group
1%
Dropout
rate:
control
group
0
15 &15
45%
0
64 & 100
25%
0
Outcome
No significant difference
between groups in depression
No significant difference
between groups in depression
Significantly lower depression
scores in the intervention group
D
CBT
12 & 15
15%
7%
E
CBT
21 &16
22%
16%
F
CBT
31 & 41
37%
8%
G
Low
intensity
exercise
Low
intensity
exercise
Low
intensity
exercise
33 & 50
5%
2%
Significantly lower depression
scores in the intervention group
14 & 14
18%
5%
No significant difference
between groups in depression
21 & 35
55%
21%
No significant difference
between groups in depression
H
I
Significantly lower depression
scores in the control group
Significantly lower depression
scores in the intervention group
No significant difference
between groups in depression
Instructions
In the space below, write a summary of the exercise data. Your summary must contain the
following:
 How the intervention group (vigorous exercise) compares with the different control
groups.
 The acceptability of the intervention and the different control conditions.
 A comment about sample sizes and possible relation to findings.
 Comment on one variable that is not included in the studies that could be interesting
to look at in future studies (and state why this would be of interest).
 An overall statement about the efficacy of vigorous exercise for the treatment of
depression in young people aged 11 to 16 years.