Psychology 9990/11 October/November 2023: question paper and mark scheme

Mark scheme

1(a) In the study by Andrade (doodling), the participants were given a surprise 1 Accept location/city names. recall test for two categories of information that was presented in the telephone message. One of these categories was the names of the party- goers. Name the other category of information that the participants were asked to recall from the telephone message. 1 mark for correct point. Take the first answer only. Places. 1(b) For the names of party-goers, ‘false alarms’ given by the participants were 2 List is definitive. noted. Plausible mis-hearings were counted Outline the two types of false alarms given by the participants when as correct so no credit. recalling the names of the party-goers. Accept ‘lures’ by itself. 1 mark per correct point. Accept ‘wrong names’ as meaning New names/names not in the message. ‘new names’. Names used as lures in the message / non-party goers.

Mark scheme

2(a) From the study by Piliavin et al. (subway Samaritans): 2 List is definitive. Outline what the model was supposed to do in the ‘Critical area – early’ If the time given is incorrect (but less condition. than 70s) and they state ‘could then go help the victim’, award BOD 1 1 mark for each correct point. Model stood in middle of (critical) car. Waited until passing the fourth station / waited for approximately 70 s. Then began to help the victim. 2(b) Describe the victim in the drunk condition. 2 Accept any age from within the range. At least 1 mark must come from below: List is definitive. Smelled of liquor. Carried a liquor bottle wrapped in a brown bag / brown paper. 1 mark per correct point (maximum 1): Wore Eisenhower jacket / old slacks / no tie. Aged 26–35 years. Male. Black or white.

Mark scheme

3 Explain one problem that could arise if children were used as participants 3 Go with the intention of the candidate. in the study by Baron-Cohen et al. (eyes test). If more than one problem presented, 1 mark for identification of the problem. mark all and credit the best. 1 mark for elaboration of the problem (can be linked to study or not) 1 mark for linking it to Baron-Cohen et al. Cannot be awarded 1 mark for simply stating it reduces/affects validity. e.g., There are ethical issues with using children (1 mark: identification). This could be Do not accept any argument about protection from psychological harm (1 mark: elaboration). In this study, children not being generalisable. may have found the procedure stressful as it could have felt like a test or examination (1 mark: link). Children may not understand what is being asked of them (1 mark: identification). Therefore, the children may not understand how the eyes test works (1 mark: elaboration). As a result, the children may have seen it as a game and therefore theory of mind might not have been measured (1 mark: link). There are other creditworthy problems, such as, getting easily bored, randomly choosing, not understanding words/emotions.

Mark scheme

4(a) Saavedra and Silverman studied a boy with a phobia of buttons. One aim 2 If candidate refers to a different was to investigate whether exposure to buttons would help to treat his method to treat the phobia then BOD phobia. 1. (e.g., positive reinforcement). Outline one other aim of this study. Mention of imagery exposure or behavioural exposure = 0 2 marks full aim. 1 mark partial/brief aim e.g. To investigate what caused / reason for having the phobia of buttons in a boy (2 marks). To investigate the role of classical conditioning in the (button) phobia of a boy (2 marks). To investigate the role of fear and disgust in relation to his/a phobia (2 marks). To investigate evaluative learning (1 mark). 4(b) Outline how the boy’s severity rating for buttons changed during 2 The list is definitive. behavioural exposure sessions. Reject reference to it reducing or the 1 mark per correct point. 8 to 5 to 3 rating as this is for imagery exposure and not behavioural The severity rating remained the same for the first two sessions. exposure. The ratings increased from session 2 to session 3. The ratings increased from session 3 to session 4. Can award 1 mark if all they say is ‘it increased’. 4(c) State two results from the post-treatment assessment session. 2 The list is definitive. 1 mark per correct point. Accept ‘his phobia had gone’. The boy reported minimal distress / less distress / decreased anxiety. Ignore comments about being able to He no longer met the (DSM) criteria for a specific phobia. hug his mother. He was now wearing (clear plastic) buttons (on his school uniform). He was doing this every day / on a daily basis.

Mark scheme

5(a) In the study by Bandura et al. (aggression), the final part of the procedure 4 List is definitive. was named the ‘test for delayed imitation’. Describe the procedure used to ‘test for delayed imitation’. Ignore any reference to aggression arousal as this is a different part of 1 mark per correct point. the study. There were a variety of toys in the (experimental) room. The child spent 20 minutes in the (experimental) room. Behaviour was observed through a one-way mirror. Behaviour was rated on predetermined response categories. e.g., imitation of physical aggression, imitative verbal aggression, imitative nonaggressive responses (2 named for 1 mark). The session was divided into 5 second intervals. Using an electric interval timer. A total of 240 response units were recorded per participant. The male model completed all observations. Half were then rated by a second observer (for inter-rater reliability). 5(b) Outline one conclusion from this study. 2 Ignore any results presented. 2 marks detailed conclusion. 1 mark partial/brief. 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 who see aggressive models are more likely to imitate aggression that those seeing a non-aggressive model / no model (2 marks) Girls are more likely to imitate verbal aggression (1 mark). People will imitate aggression (1 mark). Boys are more likely to imitate same-sex models (1 mark).

Mark scheme

6(a) From the study by Dement and Kleitman (sleep and dreams): 4 use tick-e when you award the ‘example mark’ Describe the psychology being investigated in this study. 1 mark per ‘psychology’ point made. 1 mark available for an explicit example from the study. Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes sleep patterns, dreaming, REM, nREM, EEGs e.g., Rapid Eye Movement / REM sleep is a phase of sleep where a person is paralysed. Their eyes flicker and they can breathe but all other muscles are paralysed. Non-Rapid Eye Movement / nREM sleep are the other (four) stages of sleep and they differ in brain activity. Dreaming is a subjective experience of imagery whilst we are asleep. Electroencephalograms (EEGs) measure brain wave activity. They are used to measure the amplitude and frequency of brain waves. 6(b) Explain why this study is from the biological approach. 2 An assumption of the biological approach can be awarded 1 mark 1 mark per point made that explains why it is biological. max. e.g., 1 mark max for basic statement, e.g., Dement was using an EEG / measured brain activity (1 mark) to investigate how they were studying the brain or sleep it is connected to stages of sleep / REM and nREM (1 mark). is a natural process etc. Dement was using an EOG / measured eye movements (1 mark) to investigate how it is connected to dream content (1 mark).

Mark scheme

7 Suggest two real-world applications based on the study by Canli et al. 4 Annotate with a tick for what the (brain scans and emotions). Your suggestions must be ethical. application is and a + for how it will be achieved. 1 mark for what the application is (clearly based on Canli et al.) 1 mark for how it will be achieved. The ‘what’ can be anything emotionally intense (positive e.g. imagery). People in advertising may want to use emotionally intense imagery (1 mark: what). The images in this study that were rated emotionally intense were remembered better so products linked to this type of imagery may also be well remembered (1 mark: how) Psychologists may want to use the same procedure with people who have memory difficulties (1 mark: what). If a patient does not remember emotionally intense imagery then they may have a problem with / may have a damaged amygdala (1 mark: how). This can be used with students to help learning (1 mark: what). Highly arousing images can be used to help them remember (1 mark: how).

Mark scheme

8 Two friends, Rose and Yaroslav, are discussing the validity of the study by 6 Only credit identification of type once Milgram (obedience). Rose thinks the study has validity but Yaroslav thinks if repeated for Rose and Yaroslav, for the study does not have validity. example, mundane realism. Explain one reason why Rose is correct and one reason why Yaroslav is For Rose: correct, using evidence from this study. Standardisation = 0. 1 mark per correct point. Any mention of IV/DV = max 1. Quantitative data = max 1. 3 marks for Rose. 1 mark available for identifying a relevant type of validity. Control of extraneous variables + an 3 marks for Yaroslav. 1 mark available for identifying a relevant type of validity. example = max 2. Demand characteristics = max 2. e.g., Rose The study did have a degree of mundane realism (1 mark). All participants For Yaroslav: received 45 v sample shock before the study began (1 mark) meaning that the participants were more likely to believe that the shocks they were giving were real If argument is population validity but (1 mark). they use the term generalisability then max 1. The study did have some internal validity (1 mark). Milgram ensured that there were some controls present in the study like the pre-set responses from the learner (1 mark). This ensured that Milgram could conclude that the responses were causing the stressful reactions seen in the participants (1 mark). e.g., Yaroslav The study lacked ecological validity (1 mark). This is because the set-up of shocking a stranger during a memory test is not a real situation (1 mark) so the responses may only be what people would do in this unreal situation / might not be what people would do in a real-life destructive obedience situation (1 mark).

Mark scheme

9(a) Describe the sample used in the study by Pepperberg (parrot learning). 4 List is definitive. 1 mark per correct point. Do not credit opportunity sample. Sample of 1. African grey (parrot). Already been in studies on communication / cognitive abilities. Already produce vocal labels for colour/shape/material. Knew some of the objects already. Already shown limited comprehension of abstract concepts. Already has the ability to communicate needs (e.g., ‘wanna go gym’). 9(b) Explain whether each ethical guideline below, relating to animals, was 8 Do not credit tautological answers: broken in the study by Pepperberg (parrot learning): • housing e.g., housing is about housing • pain and distress animals etc. • reward • species and strain Go with the intentions of the candidate. For each guideline, use the following banded mark scheme: Mark each guideline independently Level Descriptor Marks and annotate with SEEN, L1 or L2. 2 The answer explicitly describes the ethical guideline and the 2 Credit provided with food and water example is contextualised from the named study as example. Ignore comments about not being in the wild 1 The answer explicitly describes the ethical guideline without 1 correct contextualisation / no contextualisation Credit example about being punished OR The ethical guideline is identified from the use of a brief for incorrect response. example contextualised from the named study OR The ethical guideline is incorrectly described but the For species and strain accept contextualised example from the named study is correct arguments about Alex not being endangered. Also, do credit tested 0 The description of the ethical guideline is incorrect and/or the 0 many times / over many days so this contextualised example is incorrect could have strained him. OR no answer given e.g., housing Housing should consider the social behaviour of species (e.g., caging). Alex was housed alone which might be stressful as parrots are social (broken). e.g., pain and distress Researchers should always attempt to minimise pain and distress that might arise in a study. Alex was not subjected to any painful procedures if he got an answer wrong (it was a verbal punishment) (not broken). When Alex did get an answer wrong he was scolded verbally which could have caused distress (broken). 9(b) e.g., reward Rewards should be tailored to the animal and based on preferred food choices / object choice. Alex was rewarded with the objects if he got a question correct / he could self- reward by asking for food and it would be given (not broken). e.g., species and strain Researchers should choose an appropriate species for their study / least likely to suffer. Alex had been used for over 10 years in different studies about cognitive abilities so was an ideal participant (not broken) / he was a solitary parrot and they are social so he may have suffered (broken).

Mark scheme

10 Evaluate the study by Laney et al. (false memory) in terms of two strengths 10 Use tick-d for detailed (so the and two weaknesses. At least one of your evaluation points must be about candidate clearly explains why it is a ethics. strength or a weakness). Suitable strengths include internal validity, reliability, quantitative data. Use tick-b for brief (tends to not Suitable weaknesses include ethics, external validity, generalisability. explain why). Rules (points in context) Additional guidance If all tick-b then Level 2 max Level 4 (8–10 marks) 10 marks is reserved for: The If mixture of tick-b and tick-d then candidate has given four evaluation likely Level 3 • Evaluation is comprehensive. If three tick-d and one tick-b then • Answer demonstrates evidence of points (two strengths and two weakness) that are in depth, in the Level 4 8 marks max careful planning, organisation and All have to be tick-d and in context to selection of material. context of the study, and include the named evaluation point. gain Level 4 • Analysis (valid conclusions that effectively summarise issues and Max 8 if: The candidate has given If no points are in context then Level arguments) is evident throughout. three evaluation points (at least one 1 max, unless well explained then • Answer demonstrates an excellent strength and one weakness) and Level 2 understanding of the material. they are in the context of the Laney et al. study and it includes the named evaluation point, in depth. Level 3 (6–7 marks) Max 6: if the answer does not • Evaluation is good. include the named evaluation point. • Answer demonstrates some planning and is well organised. Max 6: if The candidate has given one strength and one weakness and • Analysis is often evident but may they are in the context of the Laney not be consistently applied. et al. study and in-depth. • Answer demonstrates a good understanding of the material. 10 Level 2 (4–5 marks) Max 5: The candidate has given either • Evaluation is mostly appropriate two strengths or two weaknesses but limited. (contextualised). • Answer demonstrates limited organisation or lacks clarity. Max 4: if The candidate has given one strength or weakness that is in the • Analysis is limited. context of the Laney et al. study which • Answer lacks consistent levels of is in-depth detail and demonstrates a limited understanding of the material. Level 1 (1–3 marks) Max 3: The candidate has given two • Evaluation is basic. evaluation points that are • Answer demonstrates little generic/brief. organisation. Max 2: The candidate has given one • There is little or no evidence of evaluation point that is generic/brief. analysis. • Answer does not demonstrate understanding of the material. Level 0 (0 marks) If the answer is a description of the No response worthy of credit. study