Psychology 9990/12 May/June 2023: question paper and mark scheme

Mark scheme

1(a) From the study by Schachter and Singer (two factors in emotion): 1 Identify which one of the following groups self-rated the highest score for palpitations in the Euphoria condition. Epinephrine Ignorant (Epi Ign) Epinephrine Informed (Epi Inf) Epinephrine Misinformed (Epi Mis) Placebo 1 mark for the correct answer. Epinephrine Ignorant (Epi Ign) 1(b) In the Anger condition, an observer recorded the participant’s 2 response to the stooge using several categories. Outline how the category of ‘Watches’ was operationalised in this study. 1 mark per correct point. The participant makes no verbal response / did not agree or disagree with the stooge; To/with the stooge comments; But just directly watches/observes the stooge;

Mark scheme

2(a) From the study by Baron-Cohen et al. (eyes test). 2 Name the two tests used in this study, other than the eyes test. 1 mark per correct test named. Autism Spectrum Quotient / AQ; Intelligence Quotient / IQ / WASIR; 2(b) For one of the tests you named in (a): 1 Identify one strength of this test. 1 mark for correct strength identified. e.g. Quantitative data so easy to compare / comparable/objective; IQ is a standardised/psychometric test so valid/reliable; There are other creditworthy strengths.

Mark scheme

3(a) In the study by Canli et al. (brain scans and emotions), participants 3 viewed scenes. Outline how the participants’ emotional arousal towards the scenes was measured. 1 mark per correct point. (The scale was) 0 = not emotionally intense at all; To 3 = extremely emotionally intense; There were four choices / four-point scale (per image); It was a scale of buttons that they had to press; 3(b) Explain one weakness of how the participants’ emotional arousal 2 towards the scenes was measured. 1 mark for identifying the weakness. 1 mark for linking it to the study. e.g. It was a forced choice (scale) being used (1 mark: identification) so the (four) responses may not exactly represent how the participant actually felt towards the scene (1 mark: link). It is a subjective measurement (1 mark: identification) so participants will have different ideas on emotions / what a ‘3’ means on the scale (1 mark: link). It may lack validity due to small range (1 mark: identification). The sample is difficult to generalise from as they were all female (0 marks: not about the measurement). There are other creditworthy weaknesses.

Mark scheme

4(a) From the study by Bandura et al. (aggression): 4 Describe how the participants were allocated into the experimental groups. 1 mark per correct point. Observed/rated by a teacher/experimenter (on aggression); Each participant had a composite score on aggression / from four scales; Participants were arranged in triplets/threes; Who had similar/same aggression scores / were matched on aggression; Randomly / equal chance of being in one of the experimental groups; 4(b) One conclusion was that imitation of aggression in children is 2 influenced by the sex of the model. Outline one other conclusion from this study. 2 marks full conclusion. 1 mark brief/partial conclusion. e.g. Witnessing an aggressive act is enough to produce aggression in the person who observed it (2 marks); Boys are more likely to imitate aggression compared to girls (2 marks); Children can observe an adult and then imitate behaviour in the absence of that adult (2 marks); People will imitate aggression (1 mark); Girls are more likely to imitate verbal aggression (1 mark);

Mark scheme

5 In Experiment 2 of the study by Laney et al. (false memory), 5 participants completed both the ‘Memory or Belief?’ questionnaire and the Food Preferences Questionnaire. Describe one result from the ‘Memory or Belief?’ questionnaire and one result from the Food Preferences Questionnaire. You must use data for one of these results. For result: 2 marks for result with a meaningful comparison. 1 mark for partial result / no meaningful comparison. For data: 1 mark for correct data in one of the results. e.g. Memory or Belief? Questionnaire There were more participants in the Love group who reported a ‘memory’ compared to the Control group (2 marks). For the Love group this was 28% of participants. (1 mark: data). There were more participants in the Love group who reported a ‘memory’ (1 mark). e.g. Food Preferences Questionnaire Believers reported more desire to eat asparagus at Session 2 / follow up compared to controls (2 marks). The mean rating for the Believers group rose by 1 point (1 mark: data). Believers reported more desire to eat asparagus at Session 2 / follow up (1 mark).

Mark scheme

6 Outline two assumptions of the social approach. 6 You must use an example from a core study for each assumption. For assumptions: 2 mark for full assumption 1 mark for partial assumption. For example: 1 mark per correct example per assumption. Examples have to come from a core study and be linked to the assumption given. e.g., assumptions Behaviour/cognitions/emotions can be influenced by other individuals (2 marks) (must have two of the three elements mentioned at the beginning). Behaviour/cognitions/emotions can be influenced by groups (2 marks) (must have two of the three elements mentioned at the beginning). Behaviour can be influenced by other people (1 mark). Behaviour can be influenced by social context (1 mark). e.g., examples In the Milgram study the experimenter in the lab coat used prods to get them to continue to give electric shocks (1 mark); In the Piliavin study, some people only helped after a model had intervened (1 mark); In the Yamamoto study, the chimpanzee could give a tool as requested by another chimpanzee (1 mark).

Mark scheme

7 Suggest two real-world applications based on the study by Dement 4 and Kleitman (sleep and dreams). Your suggestions must be ethical. 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). It can be used to promote better quality sleep (1 mark: what). People can use their watch / sleep app to measure/track sleep/REM time to see if sleep is good or needs ‘improving’ (1 mark: how). It can be used by a mattress company to see if their mattresses promote good quality sleep (1 mark: what). There are other creditworthy suggestions.

Mark scheme

8 Two friends, Haji and Dottie, are discussing the ethics of the study by 6 Yamamoto et al. (chimpanzee helping). Haji thinks the study is ethical but Dottie thinks the study is not ethical. Explain one reason why Haji is correct and one reason why Dottie is correct, using evidence from this study. 3 marks for Haji. 1 mark per correct point made. 1 mark available for naming guideline. 3 marks for Dottie. 1 mark per correct point made. 1 mark available for naming guideline. e.g., Haji The smallest number of animals should be used in research (1 mark: naming guideline) in order to meet the aims and goals of the study (1 mark). Yamamoto only used five chimpanzees / five kin pairs of chimpanzees in the study (1 mark). The chimpanzees did not experience any deprivation (1 mark: reason) as they had access to food and water all of the time (1 mark). e.g., Dottie Behaviours cannot be controlled by the use of rewards only (1 mark: naming guideline). In this case it could be argued that one chimpanzee did get a reward at the expense of the other (1 mark) which meant that the chimpanzee who did not receive a reward was stressed (1 mark). The chimpanzees may have felt some distress (1 mark: reason) if they could not figure out which tool was the best choice (1 mark).

Mark scheme

9(a) From the study by Saavedra and Silverman (button phobia): 2 Outline what is meant by a phobia. 1 mark per correct point. e.g. It is a (an irrational) fear; Of an object or situation; We feel anxious in the presence of the (phobic) stimulus; 9(b) Outline what is meant by evaluative learning. 2 1 mark per correct point e.g. It is a form of Classical Conditioning; An individual perceives/evaluates a previously neutral event/object negatively; As a result of complex cognitive/thought processes; Which is more likely to elicit disgust rather than fear of an object/event; 9(c) Explain one similarity and one difference between the study by 8 Saavedra and Silverman (button phobia) and the study by Pepperberg (parrot learning). 4 marks available for the similarity. 4 marks available for the difference. Creditworthy points include: sample/sampling, ethics, quantitative data, species used, type of conditioning. Level Descriptor Mark The similarity/difference is well explained using 4 marks 4 both studies as examples. The similarity/difference is well explained/ 3 marks described but only one study is used as an 3 example OR both studies used briefly. The similarity/difference is brief with an attempt 2 marks at using at least one study as an example OR 2 The similarity/difference is well explained but there is no study evidence. The similarity/difference is brief with no attempt 1 mark 1 at using studies as examples. 0 No creditworthy material. 0 marks e.g. similarity 4 marks Both of the studies used the case study method. Saavedra and Silverman used a boy who had been diagnosed with a button phobia. Pepperberg used a parrot who was being tested on the concepts of same/different. This means that both studies could collect rich/in depth data about the participant. 3 marks Both of the studies used the case study method. Saavedra and Silverman used a boy who had been diagnosed with a button phobia. Pepperberg used a parrot who was being tested on the concepts of same/different. 2 marks Saavedra and Silverman used just one boy with a phobia and Pepperberg used just one parrot. 1 mark They both used the case study method.

Mark scheme

10 Evaluate the study by Andrade (doodling) in terms of two strengths 10 and two weaknesses. At least one of your evaluation points must be about the use of an independent measures design. Suitable strengths include: internal validity, reliability, independent measures, generalisations. Suitable weaknesses include: external validity, ethics, independent measures. 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.