Psychology 9990/12 February/March 2025: question paper and mark scheme

Mark scheme

1(a) In the study by Perry et al. (personal space), there were four types of ‘approaching 1 If more than one response figure’. One of these figures was a friend. given, take first one only. Identify one other ‘approaching figure’. Do accept boss or teacher (named authority figures by 1 mark for correct answer. Perry). Stranger/authority/ball. Reject parents. 1(b) Outline what is meant by the term ‘empathy’. 2 Do accept ‘seeing it from another person’s 2 marks for full outline. perspective/in their shoes’ for 1 mark for brief outline. the 2nd mark. e.g., 1 mark = ability The ability to understand the emotional state of someone else (1 mark) by imagining what 1 mark = ‘how’ mechanism it would be like to be in that situation (1 mark). 1(c) Outline one conclusion from this study. 2 Ignore results. 2 marks for a full/detailed conclusion Comparison between different 1 mark for a partial/brief conclusion conditions = 0 marks. e.g., 2 marks The role of oxytocin must be Oxytocin affects the amount of personal space a person feels they need in relation to how part of the response to be empathic they are. awarded 2 marks. Oxytocin and empathy interact differently depending on the individual, for example, a person with low empathy level requires increased personal space in response to oxytocin. The administration of oxytocin enhances social cues in different ways and is dependent on the empathy levels of a person. If a person has high levels of empathy and oxytocin then they will be more likely to want closer interpersonal distances [and reverse argument for low]. e.g., 1 mark Oxytocin affects the amount of personal space a person needs. The idea of social salience was supported. The administration of oxytocin enhances social cues in different ways. People with high empathy require less personal space/people with low empathy require more personal space. There are other creditworthy conclusions, including ones based around the familiarity of a person affecting levels of personal space.

Mark scheme

2(a) In the study by Hölzel et al. (mindfulness and brain scans), some participants took 2 List is definitive. part in formal mindfulness training. This included yoga, meditation, and body scan. Outline what happened during the ‘body scan’ part of the training in this study. 1 mark per correct point. Sequentially guided through (entire) body Be aware of sensations in all regions of the body. Observe this with non-judgemental awareness. End point is awareness of the body ‘as a whole’. 2(b) Explain one weakness of this study. 2 Do not credit laboratory experiment but do credit MRI- 1 mark for identifying the weakness. related weaknesses. 1 mark for explaining the weakness via example from the study. Do not accept ‘validity’ or e.g., ‘standardisation’ by itself as The use of self-reports may lead to social desirability (1 mark: identification). The Ps may the ID mark. complete the FFMQ in a way to make it look like they were partaking in MBSR more than they were (1 mark: example) Do not accept lack of standardisation affecting Not all participants were protected from psychological harm (1 mark: identification). Some replicability (it did not) but do Ps withdrew from the brain scan as they did not like it (1 mark: example) accept it related to reliability. There are other creditworthy weaknesses, including sample generalisability; social Do accept representative as interactions during the course affecting grey matter (and not MBSR), lack of generalisability. standardisation affecting reliability, other ethical issues (e.g., control group not getting help), lack of correlation between FFMQ and GMC etc.

Mark scheme

3(a) From the study by Dement and Kleitman (sleep and dreams): 2 Do not credit the aim about eye movement patterns and One aim was to investigate whether eye movement patterns were related to the content of dreams. content of dreams. Outline one other aim of this study. 2 marks for full/detailed aim 1 mark for brief/partial aim e.g. To investigate if dream recall differs between REM and nREM stages of sleep (2 marks). To investigate dream recall and stages of sleep (1 mark). To investigate if there was a (positive) correlation between estimates of dream duration and length of REM sleep (2 marks). To investigate estimates of dream duration (1 mark). 3(b) One feature of the sample was that there were nine participants. 2 List is definitive. Identify two other features of this sample. Do not accept ‘4 withdrew’. 1 mark per correct feature. Accept opportunity sampling. Adults. Do not credit equal amounts Mostly male/7 males. of males and females, or from 2 females. Chicago. 5 studied intensively. 4 used minimally to confirm results. 3(c) Suggest one application to everyday life using evidence from this study. Your 2 Annotate with a tick for what suggestion must be ethical. the application is and a + for how it will be achieved. 1 mark for what the application is (clearly based on Dement and Kleitman). 1 mark for how it will be achieved. e.g., It can help people with sleep related disorders (1 mark: what). Patients can be attached to an EEG monitor to see if brain waves whilst sleeping are typical or not (1 mark: how). It can be used in therapy involving dream analysis (1 mark: what). Patients can be woken up in REM sleep (via a device that detects REM sleep) and asked to recall the content of their dream immediately (1 mark: how). There are other creditworthy suggestions.

Mark scheme

4 In the study by Pozzulo et al. (line-ups), the participants were adults and children. 3 Tolerance for data is 2% Describe one result from the children in the target-absent line-ups. You must use Use tick-d for data mark (must data in your answer. be for children) 2 marks for the result with a meaningful comparison. Do accept ‘better’ as within- 1 mark for result with no meaningful comparison. group comparison. 1 mark for correct data. If compared to adults, max 1. e.g., 3 marks The children were more accurate/had a higher correct rejection rate for cartoon faces Do not credit responses (74%) compared to human faces. about % of participants as we The children were more accurate/had a higher correct rejection rate for Dora (80%) do not know this. compared to Diego/female-target (human)/male-target (human). Must be about rejection e.g., 2 marks rates and not correct The children were more accurate/had a higher correct rejection rate for cartoon faces identification (latter is for compared to human faces. target-present trials). The children were more accurate/had a higher correct rejection rate for Dora compared to Diego/female-target (human)/male-target (human). Reject comparisons to target- present. e.g., 1 mark The children were more accurate/had a higher correct rejection rate for cartoon faces. The children were more accurate/had a highest correct rejection rate for Dora.

Mark scheme

5(a) Outline one assumption of the cognitive approach. 2 2 marks: full/detailed assumption 1 mark: partial/brief assumption e.g., 2 marks Information processing is the same for all humans, like a computer: input then process then output information. People have individual differences in the way they cognitively process information based on attention/memory/language (need 2 of the processes named). e.g., 1 mark Information processing is the same for all humans, like a computer. People have individual differences in the way they cognitively process information. 5(b) Explain how the study by Baron-Cohen et al. (eyes test) supports the assumption 2 If the link is not with an you outlined in part (a). assumption from 5a, can only be awarded the 1 mark for result/conclusion/concept. result/conclusion mark. 1 mark for linking it to an assumption explicitly (not by name only) Cannot simply repeat the e.g. assumption in 5(a) to get The AS/HFA group scored significantly lower on the Eyes Test (compared to the other second mark. three groups) (1 mark). This shows that differences between the groups can be explained by individuals’ For input-process-output, the cognitions/thinking processes, in this case, Theory of Mind (1 mark). This clearly shows concepts can be integral that people in the AS/HFA group, when it came to emotions, inputted information but found examples for maximum marks it difficult to process it (alternative 1 mark). (see indicative content). All participants were shown a pair of eyes (input), they then had to process that in order to assess the emotion shown (process) and then choose the correct emotion from the four options (output) (2 marks as examples are integral).

Mark scheme

6(a) Outline what is meant by the term ‘shaping’. Include an example from the study by 3 Only credit examples from the Fagen et al. (elephant learning) in your answer. study by Fagen. 1 mark per correct point, up to 2 marks. Do not credit descriptions of 1 mark for an example from the study by Fagen. positive reinforcement in the absence of any reference to e.g., the ‘shaping’ element of Shaping is when behaviour is reinforced in successive approximation. training. When a behaviour gets closer to the one that is being taught, the organism is rewarded. The rewards are then given when each progressive step is completed (towards the goal Do credit ‘rewards best behaviour). performance/behaviour/ In Fagen, the elephants were rewarded with banana each time they got closer to the attempt’. desired behaviour, for example, trunk here (1 mark: example). Example mark must have There are other creditworthy points. banana and a named/description of behaviour from the study. 6(b) Two friends, Tenzin and Ambar, are discussing the ethics of the study by Fagen et 4 If both Tenzin and Ambar al. (elephant learning). feature in the answer, mark them independently and credit Tenzin says the study is ethical, but Ambar says it is not ethical. the highest score. Outline why you think either Tenzin or Ambar is correct, using evidence from this If the candidate mixes up study. Tenzin and Ambar (e.g. says Tenzin but gives a ‘not ethical 1 mark per point made, with: answer) then max 2 and 1 mark for identification of a relevant guideline linked to animals. annotate with a ? Up to 3 marks for explanation(s) as to why guideline adhered to/broken. e.g., Tenzin The study followed the guideline of numbers (1 mark: guideline). The sample size was only g = guideline mark 5 so it was kept to a minimum (1 mark). e = explanation mark The study followed the guideline of species chosen (1 mark: alternative guideline mark). Go with the intention of the The purpose of the study was to teach a trunk wash for elephants to help in TB candidate. management, so appropriate species was used (1 mark). Relevant guidelines are: The elephants had constant access to food/water outside of training (1 mark). Minimising harm, The elephants could walk away if they did not want to participate (1 mark). replacement, species, No punishment was used in training/only used positive reinforcement in training (1 mark) numbers, housing, rewards/deprivation. e.g., Ambar The study could be seen as possibly not following the guideline of housing (1 mark: Do not accept right to guideline). This is because the elephants were leg-chained to posts during some of the day withdraw for elephants being so might have found it difficult to be sociable (1 mark: explanation). able to walk away for the available guideline mark. The study could be seen as possibly not following the guideline of minimising harm (1 mark: alternative guideline mark) as elephants would only gain the banana reward once a Do not accept informed behaviour had been performed/lured and this might have been stressful for the elep hants consent of elephant or (1 mark: explanation). mahout. There are other creditworthy responses.

Mark scheme

7 From the study by Andrade (doodling): 5 List is definitive. Describe the procedure for a participant who was in the doodling condition. Use tick-b to show that at least one mark is from bold 1 mark per correct point. indicative list when awarding To gain maximum marks, the answer must include at least one of the statements 5 marks. highlighted in bold as Q is about the doodling condition. Do not credit details about They were recruited after completing a different/unrelated study. the materials (e.g., 227 wpm, They were taken into a visually dull room. A4 paper, 4.5cm margin) etc. They were asked to listen to a tape recording of a telephone message/monotonous recording. Do not credit ‘they were (Whilst listening) they were asked to shade in the squares and circles (on a piece of asked to doodle’. paper given to them). They were told it does not matter how neat/how quickly as it is to relieve the Do not credit ‘they were boredom. asked to remember the They were told they did not need to remember any of the message. names’. They had been instructed to write down the names of the party-goers. Engaged in a one-minute conversation with the experimenter. They were then asked to write down the names of the party-goers or the places. They had not been told about the test on places/it was a surprise test. (They were debriefed) and asked if they suspected a memory test.

Mark scheme

8 Your friend, Aditi, has read a newspaper story about a person on a bus who 4 Go with the intentions of the collapsed but did not receive help from other bus passengers. The story did not candidate. Anything that is contain any information about the characteristics of the victim. Aditi says that she from the Piliavin study that is cannot understand why the other passengers did not help the person who had linked to the scenario can collapsed. gain credit, including background, as the focus is Suggest to Aditi why the other passengers did not help, using your knowledge of on knowledge, not purely the study by Piliavin et al. (subway Samaritans). evidence. Explanation is not necessary but if provided it 1 mark per correct point. must be credited. e.g., No identification marks for Sometimes people can diffuse their responsibility and expect others to help. concepts of bystander apathy This is more likely to happen (theoretically) if there were lots of people on the bus. or diffusion of responsibility. The victim may have been drunk so people would have been less inclined to help. One reason might have been the condition victim, e.g., ill/drunk. Evidence used to elaborate If the victim was drunk, the passengers might think the victim did not deserve help/could be any reason is creditworthy. aggressive. One reason might have been the race of the victim, e.g., white/black. Do not credit responses One reason might be the sex of the helpers / sex of people on the bus. about racial prejudice as If the victim was male and the majority on the bus were female passengers, then the Piliavin stated there was very probability of help could be less. little evidence for this. Female passengers might have expected male passengers to help more as ‘it is a man’s job’. There are other creditworthy suggestions.

Mark scheme

9(a) Describe the sample used in the study by Hassett et al. (monkey toy preferences). 4 List is definitive. 1 mark per correct point. No tolerance on numbers. Rhesus monkeys. Do credit information about Troop of 135 individuals. rank if presented. Lived together for more than 25 years. Lived at Yerkes Center. Matriline social structure/same natal group. 14 not used due to hormonal treatment. Age range 3 months to over 13 years. 61 females/21 males/more females than males used as potential participants/82 potential participants. 23 females/11 males/34 monkeys used in data analysis. 39 infants not used (as interactions not coded). 53 monkeys were excluded in total. 9(b) Explain one similarity and one difference between the study by Hassett et al. 8 The other studies from the (monkey toy preferences) and one other study from the biological approach. Do not biological approach are: refer to the sample. Hölzel et al Use the marking grid below. Dement and Kleitman 4 marks for the similarity, e.g., assumptions they are based on, type of data collected, ethics, experimental design, correlations. Do accept Perry if response 4 marks for the difference, e.g., brain measurement, type of data collected about biological aspects of (quantitative/qualitative), type of experiment, experimental design. that study. e.g., similarity Award L1–L4 for the similarity 4 marks Award L1–L4 for the Both the studies by Hassett and Hölzel conformed to ethical bodies relevant to their difference studies. In the study by Hassett this was in accordance with NIH Guidance to include enrichment and appropriate environmental management. In the study by Hölzel this was For Level 4 there must be via guidelines from a hospital and a medical school to include obtaining informed consent. some attempt at explaining Therefore, both studies followed set ethical guidelines relevant to the setting the study took the similarity/difference. place in (explanation). If ethics used as a e.g., difference, then max L2. 3 marks Both the studies by Hassett and Hölzel conformed to ethical bodies relevant to their Different aims = L1. studies. In the study by Hassett this was in accordance with NIH Guidance to include enrichment and appropriate environmental management. Sample generalisability, sampling technique or e.g., different species = L0 2 marks Both followed ethical guidelines relevant to their sample as Hölzel had to obtain informed consent. e.g., 1 mark Both conformed to ethical bodies relevant to their studies. 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 Bandura et al. (aggression) in terms of two strengths and two 10 weaknesses. At least one of your evaluation points must be about generalisations from the sample. Strengths include: reliability (standardisation), quantitative data, validity. Weaknesses include: ecological validity, ethics, generalisability, quantitative data. Example: in detail The study collected quantitative data which makes it easier to make meaningful comparisons between groups/conditions. They measured things like the number of times a physical/verbal aggression was imitated. This meant there could be a direct comparison between aggressive/nonaggressive models or male/female models. Example: brief but in context (named issue) The sample was only from one nursery. This could make it difficult to generalise to a wider population outside of this sample. Example: no context There was a standardised procedure meaning it could be replicated/tested for reliability. 10 Level Description Marks 5 • Very good evaluation including the named issue. 9–10 • Thoroughly addresses both strengths and both weaknesses in detail. • Selection of evidence is very thorough and effective. 4 • Good evaluation including the named issue. 7–8 • Addresses strengths and weaknesses but may include three or four points. The majority of the points are in depth. • Selection of evidence is thorough and effective. 3 • Mostly appropriate evaluation but may not include the named 5–6 issue. • Addresses either two strengths or two weaknesses in detail or one of each in detail or all four briefly. • Selection of evidence is mostly effective. 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. 0