Psychology 9990/13 May/June 2020: question paper and mark scheme

Mark scheme

1(a) From the study by Canli et al. (brain scans and emotions): 1 Identify the sampling technique used in this study. 1 mark for correct answer Volunteer/self-selecting 1(b) Outline the scale that was used by participants to indicate their 2 emotional arousal to each picture. 1 mark per correct point. (The scale was) 0 = not emotionally intense at all; To 3 = extremely emotionally intense; There were four choices (per image); It was a scale of buttons that they had to press. 1(c) Describe what happened to a participant during the ‘recognition test’ in 3 this study. 1 mark per correct point. Participants were asked if they had seen the picture before; If they said ‘yes’ they had two choices; Whether they had remembered with certainty; Whether they had a feeling of familiarity (rather than certainty); Participants responded with a no if the picture had not been seen before; They were shown a mixture of pictures they had and had not seen before; The foils were balanced for valence and arousal characteristics;

Mark scheme

2(a) From the study by Pepperberg that used a parrot as the participant: 2 Outline one psychological concept that was investigated in this study. 1 mark for identifying 1 mark for outlining e.g. Social Learning (1 mark). This is when a person/animal observes and imitates a chosen behaviour (1 mark). The concepts of same and different (1 mark). This is about understanding whether two objects share a feature such as matter or not (1 mark) Animal cognition (1 mark). This is about whether non-humans have the ability to think and reason (1 mark). 2(b) Outline one result for first-trial-only performance from this study. You 2 must use data in your answer. 2 marks = full result with data + naming the test 1 mark = partial result or result does not name the test but is identifiable e.g. Familiar objects On familiar objects he scored 70% (2 marks) He scored above chance on familiar objects (1 mark)

Mark scheme

3(a) From the study by Baron-Cohen et al. (eyes test): 2 Outline one result from this study. Refer only to results from the eyes test in your answer. 2 marks = full result (compares the two conditions correctly) 1 mark = partial result (e.g. one condition) e.g. The AS/HFA participants/Group 1 scored lower on the eyes test compared to the students/Group 3 (2 marks) The AS/HFA participants /Group 1 scored lowest on the eyes test (1 mark) The distributions of scores followed a (rough) normal distribution with the modal score being 24/36 (2 marks) 3(b) Outline one methodological strength of this study. 2 1 mark = an appropriate methodological strength 1 mark = applied to Baron-Cohen e.g. The Revised Eyes Test follows a standardised procedure (1 mark). All participants had the same 36 pairs of eyes to judge so direct comparisons could made across groups (1 mark) The Revised Eyes Test is a standardised measure (of Theory of Mind) (1 mark) 3(c) Outline one ethical weakness of this study. 2 1 mark = an appropriate/possible ethical issue 1 mark = applied to Baron-Cohen e.g. Participants (especially AS/HFA) may have felt psychological distress (1 mark). They may not have understood the emotions in any of the eyes which could have stressed them (1 mark)

Mark scheme

4(a) In the study by Saavedra and Silverman (button phobia), the boy with 4 the phobia went through a ‘behavioural exposures’ procedure as part of his treatment. Describe the ‘behavioural exposures’ procedure as used in this study. 1 mark per correct point. It was based on contingency management (procedures); The mother would provide positive reinforcement; Contingent on the child successfully completing the gradual exposure to buttons; Treatment sessions lasted about 30 minutes with the boy; And then another 20 minutes with the boy and mother; A hierarchy of distress was constructed (for buttons); A series of buttons were rated from 0–8; This was using a Feeling Thermometer. 4(b) Outline the posttreatment follow-up assessment session. 2 1 mark per correct point. They re-administered two measures; One was the ADIS-C-P/measured his anxiety towards buttons; He was also assessed against DSM (IV) criteria; To see if he still had a diagnosed phobia (of buttons)

Mark scheme

5 Maria wants to replicate the Epinephrine Ignorant (Epi Ign) condition 5 from the study by Schachter and Singer (two factors in emotion) and needs your help. You must produce clear instructions for Maria, from when the participant arrives until they are given the injection. Suggest instructions that Maria could use to replicate this part of the study. 1 mark per correct instruction. Max 3 for instructions given that are not specific to the Epi Ign condition. General: You must tell the P that the study is about vision; You must tell them that it is about how vitamins affect vision; You must tell them that a vitamin compound/Suproxin is being assessed; You must then gain their permission to be injected (with Suproxin); You must tell them that the injection is mild/harmless; Epi Ign specific: You must not tell them about any side effects; You must then leave the room; You must remind the physician to re-iterate no side effects/harmless/mild;

Mark scheme

6(a) From the study by Piliavin et al. (subway Samaritans): 2 Identify two characteristics of the sample used in this study. 1 mark per characteristic. Males and females; 45% black; 55% white; Travellers on a subway (in New York); 6(b) Describe how the sample was obtained for this study. 3 1 mark per correct point They were unsolicited people on a New York Subway; They would be travelling between 11 am and 3 pm; From Harlem to the Bronx; On a weekday; Between April and June; Recruited/obtained via opportunity sampling/from those available at the time; 6(c) Outline one conclusion from this study. 2 2 marks = full conclusion 1 mark = partial conclusion 0 marks = purely results e.g. People help ill victims more often (1 mark); A person who is ‘ill’ is more likely to receive help than a person who is ‘drunk’ (2 marks) 100% of the white drunk victims got help when no model was present (0 marks)

Mark scheme

7(a) From the study by Dement and Kleitman (sleep and dreams): 2 Outline one aim of this study. 2 marks = full aim 1 mark = 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); To investigate if eye movement patterns were related to dream content (2 marks); To investigate eye movement and dreams (1 mark); 7(b) Suggest one real-world application of this study. 2 1 mark for application (clearly based on Dement and Kleitman) 1 mark for who it would benefit/elaboration e.g. This could be useful to help diagnose a (potential) sleep disorder in a patient (1 mark). They could undergo an EEG whilst sleeping to see if REM and nREM sleep is happening ‘correctly’ (1 mark).

Mark scheme

8(a) The study by Bandura et al. (aggression) is from the learning approach. 4 Outline two assumptions of the learning approach, using any example for each. 1 mark = appropriate assumption (×2) 1 mark = any relevant example (×2) e.g. Conditioning can help to explain our behaviour (1 mark); If we reward someone they are likely to want to repeat that behaviour (1 mark) Social learning can help explain our behaviour (1 mark); Bandura found that children will observe and imitate an aggressive role model (1 mark) 8(b) Explain how one result from the study by Bandura et al. supports the 8 nature side of the nature–nurture debate and how one result supports the nurture side of the nature–nurture debate. Level Criteria Marks 4 The result presented has a meaningful comparison and 4 the candidate clearly explains how the result supports the nature/nurture explanation. 3 The result presented has a meaningful comparison and 3 there is a brief attempt at explaining how the result supports the nature/nurture explanation; The result presented has no meaningful comparison but the candidate clearly explains how the result supports the nature/nurture explanation. 2 The result presented has a meaningful comparison but 2 there is no attempt at explanation or explanation is not about the nature/nurture explanation; The result presented is not clear but there is an implicit attempt at explaining how the result supports the nature/nurture explanation. 1 The result presented has no meaningful comparison or 1 there is a basic attempt at explaining. 0 No creditworthy answer. 0

Mark scheme

9 Evaluate the study by Laney et al. (false memory) in terms of two 10 strengths and two weaknesses. At least one of your evaluation points must be about generalisations. Level 4 (8–10 marks) • Evaluation is comprehensive. • Answer demonstrates evidence of careful planning, organisation and selection of material. • Analysis (valid conclusions that effectively summarise issues and arguments) is evident throughout. • Answer demonstrates an excellent understanding of the material. Level 3 (6–7 marks) • Evaluation is good. • Answer demonstrates some planning and is well organised. • Analysis is often evident but may not be consistently applied. • Answer demonstrates a good understanding of the material. Level 2 (4–5 marks) • Evaluation is mostly appropriate but limited. • Answer demonstrates limited organisation or lacks clarity. • Analysis is limited. • Answer lacks consistent levels of detail and demonstrates a limited understanding of the material. Level 1 (1–3 marks) • Evaluation is basic. • Answer demonstrates little organisation. • There is little or no evidence of analysis. • Answer does not demonstrate understanding of the material. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit.