bring creativity in your papers.
differentiate one's paper from others.
bring whole book in a single question
represent maximum on minimum space
represent your data in the form of tables
recent researches.
if you go for sociology with psychology ; quote theories of sociology in psychology and psychology in sociology, as both the subjectcs are complementary for each other
keys
outlines
One must include latest researches, it is not difficult to find , you people just need to go for the abstract of research and quote it in a
etiology, personality, development.
read one book 10 times instead of reading 10 books once. one book complete whole syllabus , but the book should be selected with care and understanding which must be good all the above discussed characteristics
Please don't go for Sherbano or Rakshanda's book even I don't like feldmen.
there are two things perceived reality and ground reality, in perception might be these books cover your whole syllabus and can be a good source to score high, yet ground reality is somehow different. you people got brains understand things. I ve copied paste my old post for those who couldn't get to it. There are two things again 1. to follow the subject 2. to love the subject.. Love this subject it will be yours

hey listen carefully, dnt go for rumors, people who use to say that Psychology is disastrous, i can do nothing for them except smiling upon their innocent feelings. there year paper was not difficult . It would be more appropriate to say Psychology's papers creative rather difficult and disastrous . And so far i think , first time in the history of CSS such a creative paper has been asked. There is a huge difference between creative and difficult papers. Psychology's papers were up to the standard of CSS.
I want to ask from my fellows if such papers are not made what would be the standard? How can one differentiate between a standard preparation and a poor preparation? Don't you people want to differentiate yourself from those people who used to study 20-20 question series, Sherbano, Rakshanda, exam Cram ? If such type of questions are not asked guys who read such rubbish would be equal to those who used to read standard material?
what about those who made selective studies? Do you people want selective readers and to the point readers would enjoy equivalent status?
you know what happened this year in Psychology, all those who make are habitual of making selective studies are ruined to nothing , also who study below standard text were unable to give themselves a solid stand against the blows of Psychology.
There was 100% choice against questions which are moulded, but what can one expect from those who make selective studies, and leave portions like social Psychology?

For instance, if difficult question is asked from Nervous system , Social Psychology is always there as an substitute , and this year simple question is asked about "attitude" from Social Psychology. What else one needs?
Same happened in Paper 2.

Patron is not changed , FPSC had asked nothing out of syllabus, everything was very much under the paradigms of syllabus , prescribed by them. What happened this year, FPSC asked unexpected questions , but why don't you people understand those questions are the part of your syllabus .

My advice for you is that don't go for rumours, rumours are without logic, i scored twice more than 160 in Psychology , without any background, i even never studied biology in my whole life . contact me on mail for further queries.
Regards