Psychology 9990/12 February/March 2024: question paper and mark scheme

Mark scheme

1(a) From the study by Baron-Cohen et al. (eyes test): 1 Take the first answer only. Identify the sampling technique used to recruit participants for Group 1 (adults Do not credit ‘newspaper with AS or HFA). advertisement’. 1 mark for the correct answer Do not credit ‘selective’. Volunteer/self-selecting 1(b) Outline one hypothesis in relation to the sex of the participants. 2 Group 2 = normal/community/library users 2 marks for full prediction/hypothesis Group 3 = normal/student 1 mark for brief/partial prediction/hypothesis Need indication of group to be Females in Groups 2/3 will score higher than males on the Eyes Test (2 marks). awarded full credit. Females in Groups 2/3 will score higher on the Eyes Test (1 mark). Females will score higher (0 marks: no mention of the test). Females > males on ET = 1 Males > females on AQ = 1 Males in Group 3 will score higher than females on the AQ (2 marks). Males in Group 3 will score higher on the AQ (1 mark). Neurotypical is fine for 2. Males will score higher (0 marks: no mention of the test). Do not accept ‘better’ or ‘worse’. Do not credit any result. 1(c) Outline the instructions that were given to participants on how to use the glossary. 2 List is definitive. 1 mark per correct point made. Do not credit ‘told to use it’ as this is too close to the question They could read through/refer to the glossary. They could indicate any word meanings they were unsure about. They could read those particular meanings (ones unsure of)/help understand words. They were told they could use the glossary throughout the test.

Mark scheme

2(a) From the study by Fagen et al. (elephant learning): 2 Credit can be given to an example from the study or an Outline what is meant by the term ‘positive reinforcement’. invented one. 2 marks full definition 1 mark partial/brief definition 1 mark available for an example e.g. This is the addition of something nice/reward after a behaviour to increase the probability of repeating a behaviour (2 marks). It is giving a reward to someone/the elephants were given (chopped) bananas (1 mark: positive part of the definition). It is trying to help someone repeat a behaviour (1 mark: reinforcement part of the definition). 2(b) Outline one result in relation to the number of sessions it took for the elephants to 3 No tolerance on data. pass the full trunk wash test. You must use data in your answer. Use tick-d annotation when 2 marks for the result with a meaningful comparison awarding the data mark. 1 mark for result with no meaningful comparison 1 mark for correct data The answer must refer to the number of sessions rather than e.g., 3 marks (meaningful comparison plus data): whether they passed it or not Elephant 2 took fewer sessions to pass the trunk compared to Elephant 4. It took (however, can credit elephant 5 elephant 2, 25 sessions. not passing). The juvenile elephants passed within 25–35 sessions/all within 35 sessions whereas as the older elephant never passed. If comparison is based on correct data then award e.g., 2 marks (meaningful comparison but no data or data but no group comparison): maximum marks. Elephant 2 took fewer sessions to pass the trunk compared to Elephant 4. The juvenile elephants passed within 25–35 sessions. e.g., 1 mark (no meaningful comparison and no data): Elephant 2 required the least number of sessions (to pass).

Mark scheme

3(a) From the study by Piliavin et al (subway Samaritans): 2 List is definitive. Identify two features of one of the victims. Do not accept ‘were ill/drunk’. Do accept ‘acted as if ill/drunk’. 1 mark per correct feature Accept ‘casual clothing’. Male Aged 26–35 Either drunk or ill/with cane = 0 White/black 3 white males = 0 Wore Eisenhower jacket/old slacks/no tie Drunk condition – smelled of liquor (1 mark) and held a bottle (in a bag) (1 mark) OR ill condition – carried a cane. 3(b) Explain why this study is from the social approach in psychology. 2 The 2 assumptions are: 2 marks = clearly linked to social approach (either through example or assumption) Behaviour, cognitions, and 1 mark = partially linked to social approach/assumption of the social approach only emotions are influenced by social contexts, social e.g. environments, and groups. One of the assumptions of the social approach is that behaviour is influenced by other individuals. This was clearly shown here as fewer people helped when a model had Behaviour, cognitions, and already offered help (compared to when no model was present) (2 marks). emotions are influenced by the actual, implied or imagined They were affected by the social context of witnessing a drunk person needing help (1 presence of others. mark). When there was a larger group, it affected their behaviour as they were faster at helping (1 mark).

Mark scheme

4(a) From the study by Hölzel et al (mindfulness and brain scans): 2 Accept ‘changes in brain structure’. Outline one aim of the study. 2 marks for full aim 1 mark for partial/brief aim e.g. To investigate the effect of mindfulness stress reduction on brain density (2 marks); To investigate the benefits of mindfulness (1 mark); To investigate changes in brain density in people (1 mark) To investigate mindfulness (0 marks as this is in the question) There are other creditworthy responses. 4(b) ‘Acting with awareness’ was measured by the ‘Five Facet Mindfulness 2 List is definitive. Questionnaire’. Outline one other factor of mindfulness measured by this questionnaire. 1 mark for naming the factor. 1 mark for outlining the factor. e.g. Observing/observation (1 mark). This is about attending to internal/external stimuli (1 mark) Describing (1 mark). This is labelling a stimulus with word(s) (1 mark) Non-judging (of inner experiences) (1 mark). Not evaluating one’s emotions (1 mark) Non-reactivity (of inner experiences) (1 mark). Allowing thoughts to just come and go (1 mark)

Mark scheme

5(a) Outline one assumption of the cognitive approach in psychology. 2 2 marks for full assumption. 1 mark for partial/brief assumption. e.g., 2 marks Information is processed through the same route in all humans: input – process – output, in a similar way to how information is processed by a computer. People have individual differences in their cognitive processing such as with attention, language, thinking and memory (1 named). e.g., 1 mark Information is processed through the same route in all humans: input – process – output. People have individual differences in their cognitive processing. There are other creditworthy responses. 5(b) Explain how one finding from the study by Pozzulo et al. (line-ups) supports the 2 If the link is not with an assumption you outlined in part (a). assumption from 5a, can only be awarded the result/conclusion 1 mark for result/conclusion. mark. 1 mark for linking it to an assumption explicitly (not by name only: a relevant concept needs to be mentioned). Cannot simply re-state the assumption for the 2 nd mark. e.g. Children correctly identified 99% of the cartoon faces (1 mark result). This could follow the principles of input (see cartoon), process (memory of cartoon) and output (recall cartoon) (1 mark supported link). Adults correctly identified 66% of human faces (1 mark result). This shows that people do have individual differences in memory recall (1 mark supported link). There are other creditworthy responses. 5(c) Outline the term ‘false positive responses’, using an example from the study by 2 Pozzulo et al. (line-ups) 1 mark for definition 1 mark for example e.g., This is when a person believes they are making an accurate choice, but it is not (1 mark: definition). In the Pozzulo study this would be the children choosing a person in a line -up even though the culprit is not in the line-up (1 mark: example).

Mark scheme

6(a) In the study by Milgram (obedience), participants took a piece of paper from a hat. 4 List is definitive. They were told that this would decide whether they would be the teacher or the learner. Describe the procedure from this point until the ‘learning task’ began. 1 mark per correct point Both pieces of paper/slips said teacher Both the teacher and learner went into an adjacent room The learner was strapped to an ‘electric chair’. The experimenter explained that the straps were to prevent excessive movement. An electrode was attached to the wrist of the learner. Electrode paste was attached to the learner’s wrist. They were told that this would preventing blistering/burns. They were told that the electrode was attached to a shock generator. They were told that the shocks would be painful but cause no permanent damage. The teacher (true participant) received a 45v shock. This was achieved by pressing the third button on the shock generator. 6(b) Explain one strength of this study in relation to reliability. 2 Ignore reference to controls. 1 mark for standardisation and replication (identification of the strength) 1 mark for example from the study e.g. The procedure was standardised so could be replicated (1 mark). For example, all participants received a 45v shock (1 mark link) There are other creditworthy responses.

Mark scheme

7 Your friend, Taara, needs your help. She has volunteered to take part in a study 4 Go with the intentions of the that is replicating Dement and Kleitman (sleep and dreams). She wants to know candidate. For example, if they how she will be woken up and then asked about her dreams. use more technologically advanced ways to wake up Outline this part of the procedure for Taara. Taara or help her record the dreams, this is creditworthy. 1 mark per correct point based on the following: Do not credit pure repetition of Up to 3 marks for how will be woken. the stem. Up to 3 marks for being asked about dreams. Woken via a loud bell = 2 marks. e.g., how woken: You will be woken up by a doorbell. Annotate: It will be loud enough to wake you up. Tick = how she will be woken up. e.g., asked about dreams: Tick-d = how she will be asked You will then be asked if you were having a dream or not. about her dreams. Then you will be asked to tell the experimenter about the content of your dream. You will be asked to talk into a recording device. The experimenter may come in if they want more information about your dream. You may be asked to estimate dream duration.

Mark scheme

8 Saira is talking about the study by Saavedra and Silverman (button phobia). She 4 Go with the intention of the says that the findings were subjective. candidate. Explain why Saira is correct that the findings were subjective, using evidence from Ignore answers about it not this study in your answer. being subjective/being objective. Up to 1 mark available for defining subjective. Accept subjectivity of the Up to 4 marks available per correct point made based on evidence. researchers and subjectivity of the boy/his mother. e.g., Being subjective is about feelings/emotions from the viewpoint of the individual (1 Ignore tautological responses. definition mark) The boy rated his fear of each button himself. Accept any example from the But his level of fear for certain buttons are not comparable with other people with the study that is about his same phobia. experiences/feelings before, He also had an experience that he felt affected him in the classroom. during, or after the study. There was no objective measure of fear (for example heart rate), so it was all based around how the boy felt about his disgust towards buttons. A ‘comparison to others/lacks The mother may have exaggerated the severity of the boy’s symptoms. generalisability’ mark can only He said that he did not like the smell of the buttons. be awarded once. The researchers may have formed a bond with the boy (during the time helping him with his phobia). Do not credit ‘subjective as he The interviews about the buttons required interpretation of qualitative data. was the only participant’. There are other creditworthy responses. Responses that focus on bias or ‘difficult to know if he is telling the truth’ are creditworthy.

Mark scheme

9(a) Describe the sample used in the study by Andrade (doodling) . 4 List is definitive. 1 mark for each correct point Accept ‘males and females’. It was an opportunity sample. No tolerance on age range. They had just finished a different study (before being asked to participate in this one) n=40. Members of a university participant panel. General population. Aged 18–55 years. Paid for participation. Majority female/35 female 5 male/doodle: 18F 2M/control: 17F 3M. 9(b) Explain one similarity and one difference between the study by Andrade (doodling) 8 Do not credit any answer about and the study by Pozzulo et al. (line-ups). Do not refer to the sample in your the sample. answer. Award L1–L4 for similarity. Use the marking grid below. Award L1–L4 for difference. 4 marks for the similarity, e.g., experimental, lack mundane realism, quantitative data For Level 4 there must be some collection, experimental design used, ethics, cognitive skills being tested. attempt at explaining the 4 marks for the difference, e.g., experimental design used, cognitive skills being tested, similarity or difference. ethics. Two descriptions of the studies e.g., similarity with no logical link = L1 max. e.g. 4 marks Both Andrade and Pozzulo studies were experimental in nature. For example, both Different aims = L1 max. studies had manipulated IVs. In the Andrade study there were two conditions of doodling and non-doodling. In Pozzulo study there was also two conditions of age/type of Similarity of cognitive approach face/degree of familiarity. Therefore, both were trying to establish cause and effect with examples from each study (explanation). without terms = L3 max. e.g. 3 marks If the candidate mixes up the Both Andrade and Pozzulo studies were experimental in nature. For example, both names of the studies and/or studies had manipulated IVs. In the Andrade study there were two conditions of doodling terminology then L2 max and and non-doodling/in Pozzulo study there was also two conditions of age/type of annotate with NBOD. face/degree of familiarity. Auditory vs visual task is a e.g. 2 marks legitimate comparison but likely Both Andrade and Pozzulo studies were experimental in nature. For example, both to be L3 max. studies had manipulated IVs and measured DVs. e.g. 1 mark Both Andrade and Laney were experimental in nature. 9(b) Mark/ Description Level 4 The similarity/difference is well explained using both studies as examples. 3 The similarity/difference is well explained but only one study is used as an example OR both studies are used briefly. 2 The similarity/difference is brief with an attempt at using at least one study as an example OR The similarity/difference is well explained but there is no study evidence. 1 The similarity/difference is brief with no attempt at using the studies as examples. 0 No creditable response.

Mark scheme

10 Evaluate the study by Hassett et al. (monkey toy preferences) in terms of two 10 Ignore arguments about the strengths and two weaknesses. At least one of your evaluation points must be ethics of not being in the wild. about ethics. They were captive bred. Strengths include: reliability, standardisation, validity (internal), observations. The list of ethical guidelines that Weaknesses include: validity (external), sample, ethics. are creditworthy are: Minimising harm Example: in detail Replacement The sample only had 34 rhesus monkeys as part of it. This could make generalisations Species difficult. This is because some of the troop were not used in the study as they were too Numbers young to be reliably identified and these may have played differently/chosen different Pain/Distress toys/from a captivity troop. Therefore, the findings about monkey toy preferences may Housing only apply to those in the sample/not apply to monkeys who live in the wild where toy Reward/deprivation/aversive. choice is not available. Ignore human ethical guidelines. Example: brief but in context The sample only had 34 rhesus monkeys as part of it. This could make generalisations Main evidence includes: difficult as they might not represent the whole troop. Housing Example: no context • Size of enclosure (25x25) The study followed a standardised procedure making it easier to replicate. • Fed monkey chow every day/water present/fruit and Level Description Mark veg available. • Socially housed in troop. 5 • Very good evaluation including the named issue. 9–10 • Thoroughly addresses both strengths and both weaknesses in Minimising harm/distress detail. • Use of video cameras. • Selection of evidence is very thorough and effective. • Familiarity with keepers in enclosure/lived in enclosure 4 • Good evaluation including the named issue. 7–8 for 25+ years. • One monkey tore toy apart • Addresses strengths and weaknesses but may include three or four points. The majority of the points are in depth. (broken) • Selection of evidence is thorough and effective. 10 Mention of knowing the Level Description Mark monkey’s gender is tick-b only. 3 • Mostly appropriate evaluation but may not include the named 5–6 Observer bias – needs a issue. specified behaviour from the • Addresses either two strengths or two weaknesses in detail or checklist to be explained as to one of each in detail or all four briefly. how it could be observed with • Selection of evidence is mostly effective. bias to get tick-d, otherwise tick- b 2 • Weak evaluation and may not include the named issue. 3–4 • Addresses either a strength or a weakness. Evaluation points are brief. • Some points may have no context. • Selection of evidence is sometimes appropriate. 1 • Little or no evaluation. 1–2 • Discussion of strengths and weaknesses is absent or superficial. • Selection of evidence is limited. 0 No creditable response.