Psychology 9990/12 October/November 2021: question paper and mark scheme

Mark scheme

1(a) From the study by Saavedra and Silverman about a boy with a button 1 phobia: State who provided the boy with positive reinforcement during the Behavioural Exposures stage of his therapy. 1 mark for the correct answer His mum/mother. 1(b) Name two stimuli that were rated 4 or lower on the boy’s Disgust/Fear 2 Hierarchy. 1 mark per correct stimuli Large denim jean buttons; Small denim jean buttons; Clip-on denim jean buttons; Coloured large plastic buttons; Clear large plastic buttons. 1(c) Outline one conclusion from this study. 2 2 marks detailed conclusion; 1 mark partial/brief conclusion e.g. Disgust does play a crucial role in the development and maintenance of a (button) phobia (2 marks); Imagery exposure can have a positive long-term effect on reducing distress linked to phobias (2 marks); A phobia can be treated with positive reinforcement and imagery / behaviour exposure (2 marks); People can be successfully treated for phobias (1 mark); The boy could begin to wear the buttons on his uniform (0 marks: result)

Mark scheme

2(a) From the study by Pepperberg (parrot learning): 3 Describe the psychology being investigated in this study. 1 mark per correct statement made. e.g. Social Learning is when someone observes the behaviour of someone else / pay attention to behaviour; They retain this information for use at a later date; The organism/person/animal must feel capable of replicating that behaviour; The need to be motivated via vicarious reinforcement; Operant conditioning is when an animal/person learns by the consequences of its behaviour; If a behaviour is followed by a reward they are more likely to repeat; If a behaviour is followed by punishment then they are less likely to repeat; Looked at the cognitive skill of distinguishing same and different; There are other creditworthy responses. 2(b) Outline one strength of this study in relation to validity. 2 1 mark for identifying a strength; 1 mark for linking it to Pepperberg e.g. Researcher bias was limited (1 mark). For example, the principal trainer on the test trials had not trained Alex at all (1 mark: link); There were a number of controls, for example, the objects used in training/ trials (1 mark: link). Therefore, it was easier to establish cause and effect (1 mark); The procedure was standardised (0 marks: reliability);

Mark scheme

3(a) Before the study by Canli et al. (brain scans and emotions), other 4 psychologists had found a relationship between amygdala activation and memory. Canli et al. reported three alternative reasons for this relationship, other than amygdala activation causing the formation of memories. Outline two of these alternative reasons. 2 marks full/detailed reason given; 1 mark brief reason given e.g. 2 marks Some individuals are just more responsive to emotional experiences than others in terms of personality type; Some individuals when being brain scanned experience enhanced emotional experiences / respond more to emotional stimuli; The amygdala is dynamic in the way it responds to emotional experiences on an individual level e.g. 1 marks Individuals differ when it comes to emotions; People’s personalities affect emotions; Brain scanning makes some people emotional; 3(b) Describe the correlation between participants’ intensity ratings and 2 valence ratings. 1 mark available for identifying the type of correlation; 1 mark per correct description of correlation/direction of scores e.g. Negative correlation (1 mark); As one score went up the other went down (1 mark), so as the intensity rating increased, the valence rating decreased (1 mark)

Mark scheme

4(a) From the study by Yamamoto et al. (chimpanzee helping): 3 Describe the familiarisation phase of this study. 1 mark for every correct statement made There were eight trials per chimpanzee; Each lasted for 5 minutes; Only one trial per day / spread over eight days; Were allowed to freely manipulate any tool; No tool use situation was created for them. 4(b) Outline the two possible outcomes that ended a trial. 2 1 mark per correct outcome ×2 Recipient (chimpanzee) succeeded in getting the juice reward; When 5 minutes had passed without appropriate tool transfer. 4(c) Identify one methodological weakness of this study. 1 1 mark for the identification e.g. Lacks ecological validity (1 mark) Ecological validity / not a natural setting (0 marks) Lacks generalisability (1 mark) Generalisability / sample size (0 marks) Used repeated measures that could have cause practice effect (1 mark) There are other creditworthy responses.

Mark scheme

5(a) From the study by Schachter and Singer (two factors in emotion): 2 Identify two features of the sample used in this study. 1 mark per feature: (predominantly) volunteers; n = 184; Males; Taking introductory psychology class; University of Minnesota; Students/undergraduates; Gained course credit (for participation). 5(b) One of the questions that the participants were asked about their 2 mood was ‘How good or happy would you say you feel at present?’ Explain one reason why this question may not measure mood accurately. 1 mark for a problem 1 mark for linking it to the study e.g. What people say they will do on a questionnaire may not ‘mirror’ their behaviour (1 mark); therefore just because they said they were happy or good does not mean that is what they actually felt (1 mark) It is a subjective measure (1 mark); participants will interpret happy/good in different ways (1 mark); It is a subjective measure (1 mark); Only a transient measure / less valid (1 mark); There are other creditworthy responses.

Mark scheme

6(a) The study by Baron-Cohen et al. (eyes test) is based on Theory of 4 Mind. Describe what is meant by ‘Theory of Mind’. 1 mark per point about Theory of Mind 1 mark can be awarded for an appropriate example or part of the procedure of a study (e.g. Eyes Test, Sally-Anne Test or that people with AS/HFA lack ToM) that is used as an elaboration. This refers to our ability to attribute mental states to ourselves and others; These can be desires, emotions etc.; It is linked to empathy which is the ability to understand how other people are feeling/thinking; This can be done by imagining what the other person is feeling/thinking / putting ourselves in the shoes of others; It is also about how we use this knowledge to explain the actions of other people; It is also about how we use this knowledge to predict the actions of others; We use this knowledge to understand that people may have different ideas and hold different emotions to us; It can be tested using the Eyes Test where people have to judge the emotions of others’ by looking at eyes only (example mark) 6(b) Suggest one real-world application based on the procedure of this 2 study. 1 mark for what the application is about 1 mark for how it will be implemented/used e.g. The Eyes Test can be used to help diagnose autism as people who score low on the test have difficulty processing emotions of others’ (2 marks: what and how); The Eyes Test can be used to help diagnose autism (1 mark: what);

Mark scheme

7(a) Jamie has learned about the study by Milgram (obedience). He 2 believes that the study is unethical. Outline what is meant by the ethical guideline of ‘informed consent’. 2 marks for a full answer 1 mark for brief/partial answer e.g. This is when a participant is given enough information before a study begins so they can decide whether they would like to participate (or not) (2 marks); This is when a person decides if they want to take part in a study (1 mark); Telling participants information about the study before it starts (1 mark); 7(b) Outline why Jamie is correct that this study is unethical, using 4 evidence in your answer. Up to 1 mark for outlining one ethical guideline directly relevant to Milgram Up to 4 marks for using evidence to show that Milgram was unethical e.g. The participants were deceived about the procedure (1 mark outline); They did not know that they were not giving electric shocks to a learner (1 mark evidence); Many showed signs of anxiety and stress when giving the shocks so were psychologically harmed (1 mark evidence); They were given prods if they wanted to stop so they were not really allowed to withdraw (1 mark evidence); There are other creditworthy responses.

Mark scheme

8(a) Outline the debate about individual and situational explanations in 4 psychology, using an example from the study by Dement and Kleitman (sleep and dreams). 1 mark = defining individual + 1 mark example (from Dement and Kleitman) 1 mark = defining situational + 1 mark example (from Dement and Kleitman) e.g. The individual explanation states that we behave because of our personality (1 mark). For example, the participants had different success at estimating dream duration (1 mark D+K); The situational explanation states that we behaviour because of the environment we find ourselves in (1 mark). For example, being in the laboratory may have caused some of the strange dreams (1 mark D+K); There are other creditworthy responses. 8(b) Explain what psychologists have learned about sleep and dreams 8 using two results from the study by Dement and Kleitman. Do not refer to the debate about the individual and situational explanations in your answer. e.g. People tend to dream more in REM sleep compared to NREM sleep; Direction of eye movement in REM relates to dream content so it is not random; People may well dream in ‘real time’; Level Criteria Marks 4 The result presented has a meaningful comparison 4 and the candidate clearly explains what we have learned about the named concept 3 The result presented has a meaningful comparison 3 and there is a brief attempt at explaining what we have learned about the named concept; The result presented has no meaningful comparison but the candidate clearly explains what we have learned about the named concept 2 The result presented has a meaningful comparison 2 but there is no attempt at explanation; The result presented is not clear or no result but there is an attempt at explaining what we have learned about the named concept 1 The result presented has no meaningful comparison 1 or there is a basic attempt at explaining 0 No creditworthy answer 0 e.g. Level 4: People tend to dream more in REM sleep than they do in NREM sleep. Around 80% of dreams were recalled when woken in REM compared to 7% when woken in NREM; Direction of eye movement in REM relates to dream content so it is not random. Vertical movement was linked to playing basketball whilst horizontal movement was linked to throwing tomatoes; Level 3: People tend to dream more in REM sleep. Around 80% of dreams were recalled when woken in REM compared to 7% when woken in NREM; Direction of eye movement in REM relates to dream content. Vertical movement was linked to playing basketball whilst horizontal movement was linked to throwing tomatoes; 8(b) Level 2: Around 80% of dreams were recalled when woken in REM compared to 7% when woken in NREM; Direction of eye movement in REM relates to dream content so it is not random; Level 1: People tend to dream more in REM sleep; One participant dreamt about throwing tomatoes; (9) Evaluate the study by Bandura et al. (aggression) in terms of two 10 strengths and two weaknesses. At least one of your evaluation points must be about the use of quantitative data. Suitable strengths = reliability (standardisation), quantitative data, validity; children showing less demand characgteristics Suitable weaknesses = ecological validity, ethics, generalisability, quantitative data 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.