Psychology 9990/13 May/June 2025: question paper and mark scheme

Mark scheme

1(a) From the study by Fagen et al. (elephant learning): 1 If more than one response given, take first one only. State the number of elephants used in this study. Accept ‘4 juvenile + 1 adult’ 1 mark for correct number. 5. 1(b) Identify two criteria used to select the elephants in this 2 List is definitive. study. Accept ‘pregnancy’ by itself. 1 mark per correct criterion. Do not accept healthy, Nepalese, or ‘not trained’. (level of) docility. Lack of pregnancy/does not currently have calf. Willingness of mahout to participate. Trained using traditional methods. No previous experience with secondary positive reinforcement. 1(c) Elephants were trained to do a number of behavioural 2 List is definitive. tasks including ‘trunk here’. Outline the ‘trunk here’ task. 1 mark per correct point. (Distal) end of trunk placed (gently) on palm of trainer. The underside (ventral) part of the trunk must also be touching the palm of trainer.

Mark scheme

2(a) In the study by Dement and Kleitman (sleep and 2 List is definitive. dreams), an EEG (electroencephalogram) was used. Do not credit ‘on the eyes’, ‘in the brain’, ‘under eyes’, ‘in a Outline where on each participant’s body the EEG ponytail.’ electrodes were attached. Accept ‘skull’. 1 mark per correct point. Electrodes were placed next to the eyes. Electrodes were placed on the scalp/head. All electrode lead wires were further attached to top of the head. 2(b) Explain one weakness of this study in relation to 2 Credit population validity but not generalisability. validity. The identification mark can be awarded by term or outline of 1 mark for identifying the weakness in relation to the problem with validity (e.g., it wasn’t real). validity/identifying a type of validity. 1 mark for example from the study. e.g., Ecological validity is how well the setting for a study reflects a real-life setting (1 mark: explain) so in the study by Dement and Kleitman the setting was an artificial sleep laboratory/not at home that might have changed sleep/dream patterns (1 mark: example). There are other creditworthy responses, including do not know if they are telling the truth about dream content, could be difficult to fall asleep in the laboratory, the stress of being in a laboratory might affect dream content.

Mark scheme

3(a) From the study by Bandura et al. (aggression): 2 Do not credit responses about imitation in absence of model as this is in the question. One aim was to investigate whether children would reproduce the aggression shown by a model when that ‘Imitate’ needed for the sex differences aim to be awarded 2. model is no longer there. Terms like reproduce, copy, repeat are synonyms for Outline one other aim of this study. imitate. 2 marks full/detailed aim 1 mark partial/brief aim. e.g., 2 marks To investigate whether children imitate the aggressive behaviour of an aggressive model To investigate whether children are more likely to imitate the behaviour of a same-sex model To investigate whether males imitate more aggression than females. e.g., 1 mark To investigate how children learn aggression. To see if aggression was nature or nurture. There are other creditworthy responses, including sex of model. 3(b) Identify two features of the sample in this study. 2 List is definitive. 1 mark per correct point. Accept age as 3–6 years. n=72 Male + female = 0 marks. Aged 37–69 months/mean age of 52 months. Split evenly across sex/36 male and 36 female. From Stanford Uni = 0 marks. Enrolled at Stanford University Nursery School. 3(c) Suggest one application to everyday life using evidence 2 Annotate with a tick for what the application is and a + for from this study. Your suggestion must be ethical. how it will be achieved. 1 mark for what the application is (clearly based on Do not credit explaining everyday behaviours, for example, Bandura). we must be careful what we do around others, or it explains 1 mark for how it will be achieved. why some people get aggressive. e.g. A finding can be used as a ‘what’ if it leads logically into the Children can be taught prosocial behaviour (1 mark: what). ‘how’. A child can observe a model engaging in prosocial behaviour/speech and they are likely to imitate this (1 mark: how). Children can be taught a new skill at school (1 mark: what). A child can observe a teacher showing them how to complete a new skill and then are given the opportunity to replicate it (1 mark: how). Can be used by TV companies/video games creators/toy companies (1 mark: what) by reducing the amount of aggression in programmes/presenting more prosocial behaviour (1 mark: how). Parents can use it to sensor TV/videogame content/time for their children (1 mark: what) by restricting the time played/presenting more prosocial behaviour/not allowing them to play aggressive games (1 mark: how). There are other creditworthy suggestions.

Mark scheme

4 In Experiment 1 in the study by Perry et al. (personal 3 Tolerance for any reported mean is 2. space), participants were given oxytocin (OT) or a placebo (PL). Use tick-d for the data mark. Describe one result from the high empathy OT condition Authority = boss/teacher but not parent/family. that compares two approaching figures. You must use data in your answer. No credit for comparisons with placebo or low empathy. 2 marks for the result with a meaningful comparison. 1 mark for result with no meaningful comparison. 1 mark for correct data. e.g., 3 marks The mean distance for the ball invading personal space was lower than that for a stranger (40). The mean distance for the stranger invading personal space was higher than that for a friend (8.4). e.g., 2 marks The mean distance for the ball invading personal space was lower than that for a stranger. The mean distance for the stranger invading personal space was higher than that for a friend e.g., 1 mark The mean distance for a friend invading personal space was the lowest. The mean distance for the stranger invading personal space was the highest.

Mark scheme

5(a) Outline one assumption of the social approach. 2 For 2 marks need two of the ‘influenced’ components to be presented by the candidate. 2 mark full/detailed assumption. 1 mark partial/brief assumption. Other acceptable ‘influenced by’ examples include: e.g., 2 marks Interaction with others Behaviour, cognitions, and emotions are influenced by social Social pressure contexts, social environments and social groups (any 2 mechanisms). Behaviour, cognitions and emotions are influenced by actual, implied or imagined presence of others (any 2 of these). e.g., 1 mark Behaviour is affected by other people. Behaviour is influenced by groups. 5(b) Explain how the study by Piliavin et al. (subway 2 If the link is not with an assumption from 5(a), it can only be Samaritans) supports the assumption you outlined in awarded the result/conclusion mark. part (a). 1 mark maximum if linked to the aim of the study, rather than 1 mark for result/conclusion/concept. a finding, e.g., diffusion of responsibility. 1 mark for linking it to an assumption explicitly. e.g. They were affected by the social context of witnessing a drunk person needing help (1 mark). They were less likely to help as it was seen as ‘self-inflicted’ (1 mark). When there was a larger group, it affected their behaviour as they were faster at helping (1 mark).

Mark scheme

6(a) Describe the psychology being investigated in the study 3 by Hassett et al. (monkey toy preferences). use this when you award the ‘example mark’. 1 mark for each correct statement. Examples from the study by Hassett can gain credit (max 1). Do not accept any answer about gender of monkeys. e.g., Accept description of nature-nurture for 1 mark. Sex differences refer to behavioural differences based on biological differences between males and female. These can be based on hormones/chromosomes. The main male hormone is testosterone/the main female hormone is oestrogen. Play is any mental/physical activity performed in leisure time for enjoyment/pleasure. Socialisation is any mechanism that changes/adapts a behaviour to societal/cultural expectations. The study looked at whether male and female monkeys preferred masculine or feminine toys (1 mark: example). There are other creditworthy responses. 6(b) Two friends, Madison and Zach, are discussing the 4 If both Madison and Zach feature in the answer, mark them validity of the study by Hassett et al. (monkey toy independently and credit the highest score. preferences). If the candidate mixes up Madison and Zach (e.g., says Madison says the study has validity, but Zach says it Zach but gives a ‘it is valid’ based answer) then max 2 and does not have validity. annotate with ? Outline why you think either Madison or Zach is correct, using evidence from the study. = identification mark 1 mark per point made, with: Standardisation, reliability, replicability = 0 marks 1 identification mark for a relevant type of validity. Up to 3 marks for examples in relation to why/why not valid. Identification mark from: Ecological validity/external e.g., Madison it could be argued that the study has some ecological Mundane realism Internal validity/IV affects DV/causal relationship validity (1 mark: identification) as the enclosure was their Population validity everyday setting (1 mark). The study did have some controls Control extraneous variables like the types of toys chosen for wheeled/plush (1 mark). This means that this variable was less likely to affect the DV of toy choice/preference (1 mark). This also meant that it more likely that the idea of masculine/feminine toys was affecting the frequency/duration of play (1 mark). e.g., Zach The act of having to choose human toys to play with is not an everyday activity for monkeys (1 mark). This means that the study lacks ecological validity/mundane realism (1 mark: identification). Also, there were no participant variables controlled for like amount of previous experiences with novel objects (1 mark), it could be that a monkey/monkeys were drawn to the more exciting toys and not because of the sex- typing (1 mark) 6(b) There are other creditworthy responses, including monkeys were not exposed to any societal pressures, videotaped so no effect if having an experimenter nearby, toy categorisation may have influenced toy choice, use of counterbalancing, social rank controlled.

Mark scheme

7 In the study by Milgram (obedience), a shock generator 5 List is definitive. was used. It consisted of 30 lever switches in a horizontal line. If XXX already awarded, then needs to be two different labels to gain the final marking point. Describe the shock generator used in this study, other than these features. Do not credit the 1,2,3,4 answer box. 1 mark per correct point. Each switch was clearly labelled with a voltage. The volts ranged from 15 V to 450 V/minimum 15 V/maximum 450 V. Each button went up by 15 V levels. Verbal designations for groups of four voltage levels. Last two were labelled (simply) XXX. Upon depressing a switch, a red light appeared. An electric buzzing was emitted. A blue light labelled ‘voltage energizer’ would light up. Labelled Slight Shock to Danger Severe Shock (any two of these can be credited for max 1 mark). Was connected to the learner by electrodes/wires that were ‘supposed’ to send a shock.

Mark scheme

8 Your friend, Alfonso, is finding it difficult to concentrate 4 No credit for justifying advice as this is not what the question at school. He tells you that his concentration is worse is about. when he is bored. He has come to you for advice about ways to help him improve his concentration. Do not credit ‘doodling’, ‘doodle’ or ‘secondary task’ by itself. Outline the advice you would give to Alfonso, using your knowledge of the study by Andrade (doodling). Do not accept scribbling. 1 mark per piece of advice clearly based on the study by Do not accept go into a quiet dull room. Andrade. e.g. Tell Alfonso to have a piece of paper in class. Tell Alfonso that he can draw shapes on the paper. Tell Alfonso that he can shade the shapes. Alfonso can shade/draw whenever he wants/about whatever he wants. Tell Alfonso it does not matter how neat/quick he is when shading/drawing. The paper can already have shapes on it he can colour them in. He could do this when the teacher has told him that important information needs to be remembered. There are other creditworthy pieces of advice.

Mark scheme

9(a) Describe the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire 4 List is definitive. (FFMQ) used in the study by Hölzel et al. (mindfulness and brain scans). No credit for describing any of the five facets. 1 mark per correct point. A response of: 1 mark available for naming one of the five facets. 1 = never; 5 = very often is 3 marks (1–5 and the two correct examples) It is a 39-item questionnaire. Measures the five factors of mindfulness: observing/describing/acting with awareness/non-judging of inner experiences/ non-reactivity to inner experience (1 mark maximum). Rated on 5-point scale/scale of 1–5/Likert scale 1=never or rarely true. 5=very often or always true. 9(b) Explain one similarity and one difference between the 8 The other biological approach studies are Hassett and study by Hölzel et al. (mindfulness and brain scans) and Dement. one other study from the biological approach. Do not Do accept Perry but only for oxytocin-related comparisons. refer to questionnaires. Award L1–L4 for the similarity Use the marking grid below. Award L1–L4 for the difference 4 marks for the similarity, e.g., small samples, data collection techniques, experimental design, brain scans. For Level 4 there must be some attempt at explaining the similarity/difference. 4 marks for the difference, e.g., brain measurement techniques, research techniques used, type of data Different aims = L1. collected (quantitative/qualitative). Different species = L1. Same species = L1. e.g. difference Both have applications = L1. 4 marks Both study biology = L0. Hölzel used an MRI scan to be able to see brain density changes after a mindfulness stress reduction course. Any response where it is just describing what each study Dement & Kleitman used a different technique called an did, take as different aim = L1 EEG that could only monitor brain wave activity/patterns. Therefore, Hölzel’s method looked at structure whereas Dement looked at (real-time) function (explanation). 3 marks Different techniques were used to measure the brain. Hölzel used an MRI scan to be able to see brain density changes after a mindfulness stress reduction course/Dement & Kleitman used a different technique called an EEG that could only monitor brain wave activity/patterns. 2 marks Hölzel used an MRI scan to measure brain density whilst Dement & Kleitman used an EEG. 1 marks Both studies used different techniques to measure the brain. 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 Saavedra and Silverman (button 10 phobia) in terms of two strengths and two weaknesses. At least one of your evaluation points must be about subjective data. Strengths include reliability (standardisation), quantitative data, validity, self-reports. Weaknesses include subjective data, ethics, generalisability, quantitative data, self-reports. Example: in detail The sample was one boy with a button phobia so it may be difficult to generalise/he had a ‘unique’ phobia of buttons. Females may react differently to the type of therapy as they tend to be more emotional, plus people with other types of phobia may not find a Feelings Thermometer useful if the phobia is not a concrete object. Example: brief but in context The participant could have lied/given false responses/shown social desirability. He could have rated some of the buttons differently to how he felt as he did not want to look as scared. Example: no context There was a standardised procedure meaning it could be replicated/tested for reliability. 10 Level Description Mark 5 • Very good evaluation including 9–10 the named issue. • Thoroughly addresses both strengths and both weaknesses in detail. • Selection of evidence is very thorough and effective. 4 • Good evaluation including the 7–8 named issue. • 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 5–6 may not include the named 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. 10 Level Description Mark 2 • Weak evaluation and may not 3–4 include the named issue. • 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.