unit 3 mark scheme jan 2011

7/30/2019 Unit 3 Mark Scheme Jan 2011

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/unit-3-mark-scheme-jan-2011 1/50

Mark Scheme (Results)January 2011

GCE

GCE Psychology (6PS03) Paper 01

Edexcel Limited. Registered in England and Wales No. 4496 507 Registered Office: One90 High Holborn, London WC1V 7BH



6PS03/ 01 1101

Edexcel is one of t he leading exami ning and awardi ng bodies in t he UK and thr oughout t he worl d. Weprovide a wide range of quali f ications including academic, vocational, occupational and specif icprogramm es for em ployers.

Through a net wor k of UK and overseas off ices, Edexcel’ s cent res receive t he support t hey need t ohelp t hem del iver t heir educat ion and t ra in ing programmes to learners.

For fur t her i nf orm at ion, ple ase call our GCE li ne on 0844 576 0025, our GCSE t eam on 0844 576 0027,or visit our website at www.edexce l .com.

I f you have any subject specif ic questions about the content of this MarkScheme t hat r equire t he help of a subj ect special ist , you may f ind our Ask TheExpert emai l serv ice helpful .

Ask The Expert can be accessed onl i ne at t he f ol low ing l ink:

h t t p : / / www .edexce l . com/ Abou tus/ con tac t -us/

January 2011

Publications Code UA026613

Al l t he mater i a l in t h is publ icat ion is copyr ight © Edexce l Lt d 2011



6PS03/ 01 1101

General Marking Guidance

• All candidates must receive t he same treat ment . Examiners must mark the f irstcandidate in exact ly t he same w ay as t hey mark t he last .

• Mark schemes should be appl ied posit ively. Candidates must be rew arded f or w hatt hey have shown t hey can do rat her t han penalised f or om issions.

• Examiners should mark according to the mark scheme not according to theirperception of where the grade boundaries may l ie.

• There is no ceil ing on achievement. All m arks on t he mark scheme should be usedappropr iate ly.

• All the marks on the mark scheme are designed to be awarded. Examiners shouldalways award ful l marks if deserved, i .e. i f the answer matches the mark scheme.Examiners should also be prepared t o award zero marks if t he candidate’ sresponse is not w ort hy of credit according to t he mark scheme.

• Where some judgement is required, mark schemes wil l provide the principles bywhich marks wi l l be awarded and exempl i f i cat ion may be l imi t ed.

• When examiners are in doubt regarding the application of the mark scheme to acandidate’ s response, t he t eam leader must be consult ed.

• Crossed out work should be marked UNLESS the candidate has replaced it with analt ernat ive r esponse.

• Mark schemes wil l indicate within the table where, and which strands of QWC, arebeing assessed. The str ands are as fol low s:

i) ensure that t ext i s legibl e and t hat spell ing, punct uat ion and grammar are accurate so that meaning is clear

ii ) select and use a form and st yle of writ ing appropriate to purpose and to complex subj ect mat t er

ii i ) organise informat ion clearly and coherent ly, using specialist vocabulary when appropriat e.



6PS03/ 01 1101

General Guidance on Marking

Al l candidates must receive the same t reatment .

Examiners should look f or quali t ies t o rew ard rat her t han fault s t o penalise. This does NOT mean givingcredi t for incorrect or inadequat e answers, but i t does mean al lowing candidates t o be rew arded foranswer s showing correct applicat ion of p rincipl es and knowledge.

Examiners should t heref ore r ead careful ly and consider every response: unconventional answers may bewor thy o f c red i t .

Candidates must make t heir m eaning clear t o the exami ner t o gain the m ark. Make sure t hat t he answermakes sense. Do not give credit for correct wor ds/ phrases whi ch are put t oget her in a meaninglessmanner. Answers must be in t he correct context .

Crossed out work should be marked UNLESS the candidate has replaced it with an alternative response.

When exami ners are in doubt regarding the applicat ion of t he mark scheme t o a candidat e’ s response,t he Team Leader must be consult ed.

Using the mark scheme

The mar k schem e gives:

• an idea of t he t ypes of r esponse expect ed

• how individual marks are to be awarded

• t he tot a l mark for each quest ion• examples of r esponses t hat should NOT receive credi t (w here appli cable).

1 / means t hat t he responses are alt ernat ives and eit her answer should receive ful l credit .2 ( ) means t hat a phrase/ word is not essent ia l for t he award of t he mark, but helps t he examiner

t o get t he sense of t he expected answer .3 [ ] wor ds inside square bracket s are inst ruct ions or guidance for examiners.4 Phrases/ w ords in bold indicate t hat t he meaning of t he phrase or t he act ual word is essential t o

the answer.5 TE (Transfer red Error ) means t hat a wr ong answer given in an earl ier part of a quest ion is used

correct ly in answer t o a later part of t he same quest ion.

Qualit y of Wri t ten Communicat ionQuest ions whi ch involve the w rit ing of continuous prose wi l l expect candidates t o:

• show clarit y of expression

• construct and present coherent arguments• demonstrate an effective use of grammar, punctuation and spell ing.

Full m arks can only be awar ded if t he candidate has demonst rat ed t he above abil i t ies.Quest ions wher e QWC is l ikel y to be part i cularly im port ant are indicat ed “ QWC” in t he mark schemeBUT this does not preclude ot hers.



Unit 3: Applicat ions of Psychology

Section A – Criminological Psychology

GuidanceA1 and A2 Marking points are indicative, not comprehensive and other points

should be credited. In each case consider OWTTE (or words to thate f fec t ) .Each bullet point is a marking point , unl ess other wi se st ated, andeach point m ade by the candidate m ust be ident i f iable andcomprehensible.

One mark i s t o be awarded f or each marking point covered. Forelaborat ion of a marki ng point also award one mark UNLESSotherw ise stated.

Question

Number

Question

A1 (a) Jessica conducted a laboratory experiment to investigate theeff ecti veness of eyew it ness t est im ony. She was part icularl yconcerned about et hical and m et hodological i ssues t hat can arisewithin eyewitness testimony research.

Explain one et hical issue t hat m ust be considered w hen conducting alaborat ory exper iment int o eyewit ness test imony.

Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.Ignore met hodological i ssues unrelat ed t o et hical considerat ions.

Read the answer t hrough to check relat es t o ewt - t he answer mustrelate to eyewitness testimony in at least one way (egwit ness/ t est imony)to gain credi t (0 marks) .

Relevant examples t hat expla in the et h ical issue (not j ust st at ing thest udy…) gai n max 1 mark overal l .

I f m ore t han one ethi cal issue (t ake care wi t h overlap as inf ormedconsent and decept ion, prot ect ion and r ight t o wi t hdraw i f d ist ressed -can overlap) mark al l and credit best.

No ID mark.

Protect ion of part ic ipants

• Jessica should not cause undue distress in a lab experiment in anewt study as t hey may suf f er emot ional ly / ment al harm/ eq;

• Showing a film of a car crash can cause distress and violateprotect ion of part i c ipant s guidel ine/ eq;

• I t can be somet im es unet hical t o expose a part icipant t o a realevent i f using a crim e/ incident scenario so a laborat ory st udy ismore eth ica l / eq ;

• To deal w i t h protect ion of part ic ipants, Jessica must t e l l t hem

what wi l l happen in the ewt st udy and be given a r ight t owit hdraw/ debr ief / counsel l ing to ensure t heir psychological

(AO3 = 2)

6PS03/ 01 1101



wel lbe ing/ eq;

• Loftus and Palmer’s study may have been distressing for somepart icipant s who m ay have previously w it nessed a car crash/ eq;

• Lab experi ment s t end t o be l ess distressing as part icipant s canant ic ipate the inc ident occurr ing/ eq;

Consent / decept ion ( ignore use ‘decept ion to avoid demandcharacter ist ics’ unless at t empt t o resolve or j ust i fy decept ion)

• Part icipant s should have given inf ormed consent t o agree t o t akepart i n t he eyewit ness st udy wi t h knowledge of the aims and t henature o f t he event / eq ;

• They should be infor med about any st ress/ discomf ort / issues t hey aret o wi t ness so when they decide whether or not t o part ic ipate t heyagree to w hat is going t o happen to t hem/ eq;

• Loft us d id not gain f u l ly inf ormed consent otherw ise i t may haveaffected the responses of her part icipants and the validity of herf indings/ eq;

• I f decept ion is used on t he wi t nesses it should be j ust i f ied andJessica should debrief her part icipants after about the nature of the

decept ion to ensure psychological well being/ eq;• Jessica must consider whether she should use deception or not on

t he w it nesses if she feel s her r esult s may be com prom ised byknowl edge of t he st udy aim, but she should keep thi s decept ion t o ami nimum and ensure it does not cause psychological harm / eq;

Right t o wi t hdraw

• Part ic ipants should be given the r ight t o wi t hdraw f rom t he st udy atany point i f t hey fe l t t hey did not wish t o cont inue wi t h thewit nessed event or t est imony/ eq;

• I f the experiment makes the part icipant witnesses feel embarrassed

about t heir part ic ipat ion t hey should be al lowed to w i t hdraw theirresul t s af t er the st udy/ eq;

• Part ic ipant wi t nesses have a r ight t o wi t hdraw t heir data af t er t heexper iment has run/ eq;

Look for other reasonable marking points.

6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

A1 (b) Other t han et hical i ssues, describe two strengths of laboratoryexperim ent s as t hey are used t o invest igate eyewi t ness t est im ony.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.Ignore evaluation of et hical issues or w eaknesses of lab exper iment s.

I f more t han two st rengt hs mark a l l and credi t t he best .

Answer must refer to eyewitness testimony in at least one way for eachstrength or max 1 marks for each strength.

Examples gain credit i f t hey add to and not repeat answer .

No double marking for psychological term.No ID

Take care as overlap w it h some com ment s e.g. cause and eff ect andcontrol can be one issue or t reat ed separat ely – in such cases ple asework wi t h t he student ’ s in ten t ion – do not credit direct repeti ti on.

Strengths include:Contro l , cause and ef fect , s tandardisat ion, repl icabi l i t y / re l iabi l i t y ,int ernal val id i ty , appl icat ion.

Control

• Lab experiments control for extraneous variables that couldaf fec t par t ic ipant test im ony/ memory / eq;

• Cause and eff ect can be rel iably establi shed bet ween t he IV andt he DV i f ot her var iables are contr o l led/ eq;

• Other variables, such as noise/ dist ract ion, can be cont rol l ed toensure t he wi t ness part i c ipant s are not af f ected/ eq;

• Contr ol means t hat t he procedure is consist ent and repl icablewhich is l ike ly t o lead t o consist ent / re l iable f i ndings aboute w t / e q;

• Loft us’ st udies have been repli cated and have found t he samef indings/ re l iable f indings/ due t o her standardised proceduresuch as video’ s used/ eq;

• The standardisation involved ensures consistency of theprocedure and part icipant s experience is the same so the st udy

can be repl icat ed to t est t he EWT again and again/ eq; ( 2 mark answer)

Cause and ef f ect

• Because t he IV is direct ly m anipulat ed and DV measured, t herecan be a cause and ef fect relat ionship established in EWTst udies/ eq;

• Wit h contr ol of ext raneous variables, such as eyewit nessvariables, t he cause and eff ect r elat ionship is st rengthened/ eq;

• This way t he int ernal val idit y of t he EWT st udy can be shown ast he IV had a direct ef f ect on t he DV/ eq;

Standardisation

(AO3=4)

6PS03/ 01 1101



• A st andardised procedure means t hat t he experience of t hepart icipant s in t he EWT st udy is consist ent and f air/ eq;

• Each wit nesses wi l l experi ence the same event f or t he same t im eand be asked t he same questions/ eq;

• This ensures t hat t he ewt st udy is replicable and results arel ikel y to be consist ent ( t his mark only available i f cont ext ual ised as it is here wit hin st andardisat ion ) / eq ;

Appl icat ion

• EWT laboratory research has useful applicat ions in t he real w orldthat cannot be tested for practical, legal and ethical reasons anyother way/ eq;

• Lab based EWT research has been applied t o t he real wor ld andhelped t he police develop int erview st rat egies such as t hecogn i t ive in t erview/ eq;


6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

A1 (c) Jessica decided t o conduct a f ol low up invest igation using a f iel dexper iment as she fe l t i t would be more appropr iate.

Explain why a f ield experiment may be a more appropriate researchmet hod than a laboratory exper iment t o test eyewitnesseffectiveness.

Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.Ignore i f reverse point s t hat reverse quest ion e.g. w hy lab is moreappropr iat e than f ie ld exper iment .Answer must r efer t o EWT in at least one way t hat m ust be clear so‘ inc ident ’ is okay but ‘ recal l ’ could be other studies…or no credi t g iven(0 marks)

• A field experiment is conducted in a natural environment whereas alab is art i f ic ial so a truer t est of EWT. This means it has greater

ecological val idi t y f or wit nesses/ eq;• Witnesses wi l l act natural ly / spontaneously/ involved/ natural ly

compared t o a lab/ eq;

• Wit nesses may be unaware of t aking part so not change theirbehaviour, naive wi t nesses are l ess l ikely t o show demandcharacteri st ics t o please the researcher/ eq;

• Wit nesses are less l ikel y t o creat e f alse t est im ony because t hey areunaware of having t aken part / eq;

• Wit nesses are less l ikel y t o focus art i f ic ial ly on t he event as theywould in a lab, making i t more real ist ic / eq;

• Controls in the f ie ld can st i l l be used t o a l low f or repl icat ion s imi lar

to a lab / eq;• Personal involvement wi l l b e higher as lab part icipant s realise they

are part of an exper im ent so t hey don’ t get as wr apped up in t hesi t uat ion as t hey would in t he f ie ld.

• A f ie ld exper iment can recreate a si t uat ion t hat a w i t ness wouldobserve in a more r eal ist ic w ay unl ike the art i f i c ia l labenvi ronment / eq;

• The f ie ld exper iment wi l l gat her data that i s more real l i fe aspart icipants are l ikely to be going about their daily l ives l ike real eyewi t nesses/ eq;


(AO3=2)

6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

A2 (a) During your course you wil l have st udied one of t he fol l owinginvestigations:

• Yuille & Cutshall (1986)

• Charlt on et al (2000)

• Gesch et al ( 2003).

Out l ine t he procedure of one of t hese invest igations.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion for procedure (e.g. researchmet hod, apparatus, procedure, sample, contro ls) .

Part ial elements of the marking points gain cumulat ive credit …(e.g. one th i rd or hal f mark depending on dept h/ breadth)

Ignore aim s, result s and conclu sions.

If t he st udy named is not t he one described pl ease ignore the nameand give credi t for pr ocedure only ( i f ident i f iable as one of t henamed studies).No ID mark.

Eg Yuille and Cutshall (1986) NOTE: the study began after theshooting, max one mark for the descript ion of the shooting itself)

• Inter viewed r eal wi t nesses t o a gun shop robbery m ont hs aft erthe inc ident / eq ;

• There were originally 21 wit nesses/ 13 agreed t o take part i n thest udy/ less t han hal f agreed to t ake part , t he others e i t her moved

out o f t he area or d id not wish to take par t / eq ;• Compared the int erv iew t ranscr ipt s wi t h t he or iginal pol ice

in terv iews/ eq;

• Used leading quest ions wi t hin t he int erview such as t he brokenhead lamp/ ye l low quar t er pane l / eq ;

• Researchers then analysed dat a t o see if t he m isleadingquest ions al tered wi t ness account af t er 3 m onths/ eq;

Eg Charlton (2000)

• Two years before TV, t hey col lect ed inform at ion about t he chi ldrenand then returned after TV to reassess on the same measures a yearlate r / eq;

• Nat ural exper iment as TV was intr oduced natural ly / notmanipul ated/ because researchers used the planned int roduct ion ofsatel l i t e TV t o the island/ eq;

• Quest ionnaires given t o t eachers and parent s concerning t hechi ldren’s behaviour t o rate t heir p lay/ behaviour both before andaft er TV was intr oduced/ eq;

• Content analysis of t he tel evision programmes wat ched by children,part icular ly v io lent content was carr ied out / eq;

• Video camer as wer e set up in school cl assrooms before t he dat acol lect ion f r om t hem began, w hich were used t o record behaviourand measured aggressive/ pro-social behaviour/ eq;

• Video camer as wer e put in pl ace in school classrooms before t hedata col lect ion f r om t hem began so t hat t he chi ldren became

(AO1=3)

6PS03/ 01 1101



accustomed to the equipment so that their behaviour was lessaffect ed by t he cameras/ eq;

Eg Gesch et al (2003)

• 231 18-21 year old pr isoners at Aylesbury young off enders inst i t ut ewere used, t heir d iet moni t ored - the pr isoners volunt eered to t akepart in food supplement t r ia ls/ eq;

• Double bl i nd experim ent al condit ions so neit her pri soners nor st affknew which supplement t he part ic ipants would t ake/ eq;

• Randomised al locati on to eit her supplem ent or placebo capsules/ eq;

• Monit ored discipl i nary off ences befor e and aft er supplem ent s/ eq;


QuestionNumber

Question

A2 (b)(i) Research f indi ngs are oft en applied t o real l i f e behaviour, and used t obuild psychological underst anding.

Explain one way in w hich t he conclusions of t he st udy you have outl inedin (a) can be used or applied in cri mi nological psychology.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion of appl icat ion or impl icat ion forpsychology.

I f more t han one way mark a l l and credi t t he best .

Credit should be given for a pract ical applicat ion of t he st udy (e.g.cogni t i ve int erv iew) or an impl i cat ion f or cr im inological psychology

(e .g/ nature nur t ure debate) .

One mark is availabl e f or a conclusion and one f orappl icat ion/ impl icat ion, or bot h marks can be achieved byappl icat ion/ impl i cat ion alone.

TE: Max 1 mark i f t he applicati on does not m atch t he st udy described in 2abut can be identi f i ed as an applicati on in crim inological psychology.Max 1 if A2bi m atches A2a, but A2a is not a l isted study ( e.g. Loft us) andA2bi descr ibes t he appl icat ion/ impl i cat ion (e.g. cogni t iveint erv iew/ weapon focus) of t h is st udy correct ly .

Full credi t can be given if 2a is blank but an appropri ate appli cation ofone of t he st udies named (see l ist ) is described.

Eg Yuil le and Cutshall (1986)

• Eyewi t nesses t hat have viewed a real l i f e event are mor e accuratet han psychologist s woul d expect based on previous lab research/ eq;

• Therefore st ress does not negati vely aff ect mem ory as shown byYuil l e and Cut shall w ho found w it nesses wer e relat ivelyaccurate / eq;

• I t m ay not be r ight for some psychologist s t o dismi ss t he explanati onof f l ashbulb mem ory whi ch may have explained overall accuracy inthe study / eq;

(AO2=2)

6PS03/ 01 1101



• The shooti ng in the st reet was experienced by t he wit nessesf i r st hand together wi t h the emot ions of t he moment w hich f i t s t hef lashbulb memory theory/ eq;

• A narrat ive st y le interv iew y ie lded more inform at ion t han the pol iceinterr ogat ive st y le according to t he f indings/ eq;

• Which support s t he use of t he cognit ive int erview whi ch is open

quest ioning al lowing more detai l t o be found from t he wi t ness/ eq;

• Witnesses were not misled by leading questions –this is not whatexperim ent al research suggest s e.g. t he work of Loft us/ eq;

• Eyewit ness test imony should not be re j ected/ disputed bycrim inological psychology or t he j ust ice syst em as suggest ed by ot herresearch/ eq;

Eg Charlton (2000)

• There is very l i t t le im pact of TV on behaviour and aggression did notincrease in t he st udy/ eq;

• Encourage close knit comm unit ies wher e t he eff ect s can be buff ered

which society can benef i t f rom / eq;

• Aggression m ay not have been copied because of high comm unit ysupport in t he island set t ing/ eq;

• Famil ies and communi t ies should support one another t o avoidisolat ion and can mediate t he ef fect s of v io lent pr ogramming/ eq;

• Maybe no need f or censorship r egulat ions such as 9 o’ clockwatershed/ eq;

• Famil ies and communit ies can regulat e childr en’ s experienceswi t hout socie ty regu lat ion / government in tervent ion / eq;

• Aggression may be l inked t o t he way in w hich w e are raised byfami l ies/ eq;

• Homes can be more p owerf ul t han TV - SLT is st i l l support ed by t hest udy, t hough Bandura’ s research and conclusions about medi ainf luence can be quest ioned/ eq;


• Vitami ns, m inerals and essent ial l y fat t y acids can aff ect ourbehaviour. Offender s given the supplem ent s showed 26.3% few erof fences t han the placebo group/ eq;

• An absence of dail y nut r i t ional requi rem ent s can cause anti socialbehaviour i n of f enders/ eq;

• Freewil l can be questioned as nutr ients can affect thebrain/ cogni t ion funct ioning in a determ inist ic way/ eq;

• Offender behaviour can be explained by an int er-r elat ionshipbetween nature (bra in / hardware) and nur ture (d ie t ) / eq ;

• Prisoners should be given vit amin and m ineral supplem ent s t o helpt o cont rol t heir aggressive behaviour/ eq;

• Issues of contr ol l ing behaviour of a vulnerable group are raised byt his st udy/ eq;


6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

A2 (b)(ii) Evaluat e t he study you have out l ined in (a) in t erms of both r e l iabi l i t yand val id i ty .Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.Ignore points t hat do not r e late t o e i ther re l iabi l i t y or val id i ty (e.g.ethics unless l inked to rel iabi l i ty or val idity)

Max 4 marks for either rel iabi l i ty or val idity – combinations can include4+1, 3+2 for f ul l marks.

TE: Max 3 marks if t he st udy evaluated i s not t he same as t he onedescribed in 2a or 2a is not a st udy fr om t he l ist , but can be identif iedas an appropriat e crim inological st udy evaluation.I f 2a is b lank, but an appropr iate cr im inological st udy f rom t he named

list is evaluated, ful l marks can be credited.

There may be overlap between an issue of rel iabi l i ty and validity,p lease mark wi t h st udent ’ s intent ion in mind.

Eg Yuil le and Cutshall (1986)

• V: This f i eld study is a real case w it h real w it nesses whi ch is t rue t ol i f e unl ike laboratory st udies/ eq;

• V: Great er ecological val idi t y because it invest igates real l i fetest im ony/ eq;

• V: Rigorous scoring was used to ensure controlled comparisonbetw een pol ice and researcher int erv iews/ eq;

• R: Only 13 wit nesses could be invest igated w hich l im it s rel i abi l i t y oft he f indi ngs because of possible p art icipant variables/ bias in t hesample/ eq;

• R: The incident was unique and very t raumat ic, so t he f indi ngs maynot apply t o a l l inc idents of EWT/ eq;

• R: As t he researchers wer e replicat ing the police int erview s t o agreat extent and they found very simi l ar detai ls / resul t s t he st udycould be said to be re l iable/ eq;

(AO2=5)

6PS03/ 01 1101



Eg Charlton (2000)

• V: Natural experim ent s have great er r ealism because t he IV is notdirect l y manipulated – in t h is case t he introduct ion of TV/ eq;

• V: Real l i f e in the f ield so children’ s playing should be natural/ eq;

• R: The f indi ngs may not be generalisable t o ot her places wher e a

special c lose kni t cul ture d id not occur/ eq;• R: Other studi es (Wil l iams, 1981) have shown t he opposit e ef fect s of

media v io lence than Char l ton/ eq;

• V: The childr en were not exposed t o al l mainland programm es,notably v iolent chi ldren’ s v iewing/ eq;

• R: Ext raneous variables such as home l i f e w e not contr ol led so t hestudy wou ld be d i f f i cu l t to rep l icate / eq;

• R: Researchers videoed t he behaviour of t he childr en so it could beob jec t ive ly coded/ eq;

• R: Int er-rat er rel i abi l i t y was est ablished as t wo r esearchersindependent ly coded and scored t he foot age/ eq;


• V: The randomised supplem ent/ placebo ensured no bias in al locat ionof nut r ien ts/ eq;

• R: The double-bl ind procedure el iminated any knowledge of who wasreceiv ing the drug af f ect ing resul t s/ eq;

• V: There are ot her fact ors t hat af f ect ant i -social behaviour ot hert han diet , part icular ly in an of f ender environment/ eq;

• R: The sample w ere already off enders, so the f indings may not applyt o the general populat ion/ eq;

• V: The of fenders were t est ed in a non-art i f i c ia l environment as t h is

is wher e they w ere as part of nat ural ly occurri ng circum st ances - notresearcher manipulated/ eq;


6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

*A3 Sam overheard some people com ment ing that she was l ikel y t obecome a troublemaker because her older brother is often int r oub le w i t h t he pol ice .

Using your knowl edge of social l earning t heory, explain how Sam m ay be

l ikely t o become a cr iminal and evaluate t h is explanat ion.Indicative content MarkRefer t o the levels at t he end of t he indicat ive content .

Ignore a descript ion of Sam’s potential for criminali ty using self-fu l f i l l ing prophecy. However , read t hrough the scr ipt t o look forcredi table mat er ia l part icular ly in t he evaluat ion.

Appropr iate answers may inc lude the f o l lowing indicat ive content , butt he l ist i s not exhaust ive so look for ot her reasonable point s.

Descri pt ion (AO1)

• Sam’ s behaviour can be explained by wat ching and imi t ati ngaggressive behaviour fr om her older b rot her

• Sam m ay have identif ied w it h her br other as an aggressive rolemodel

• Sam w ould be more m ot ivated t o model her brot hers’ behaviouri f t he t rouble making was re inforced

• SLT explains crim inali t y t hrough the process of at t ent ion,retent ion, reproduct ion and mot ivat ion

• Sam w ould have paid at t ent ion t o her brot her as she would be inc lose proximit y to h im much of t he t im e eg at home, school

Evaluat ion (AO2)• Bandura ( 1961) suppor t s SLT as an expl anat ion of ant isocial

behaviour as he f ound childr en/ boys copied aggressive rol emodels

• Bandura’ s st udy only measured short t erm eff ect s, so t his st udymay not be applicable t o the l earning of aggression due t o longterm exposure

• I t is dif f icult t o est ablish a l ink bet ween observing ant isocialbehaviour and being ant isocial because of t he possible t im e lapsebetw een observat ion (retent ion) and imit at ion

• Anti social behaviour such as aggression coul d be a result oftestosterone in males

• Sam w atchi ng her anti social/ aggressive brot her can be cathart icand serve t o reduce it t he l ikel i hood of her ow n aggression rat herthan cause it

• In fact Bandura’ s st udy would f ind i t a l i t t le d i f f icu l t t o expla inSam’s behaviour as they study found girls less likely to copy andeven less l ikel y t o copy a person of t he opposit e sex

• As Sam over heard pe opl e saying she is likel y t o becom e acr iminal , i t may be more l ikely t hat l abel l ing/ SFP is a moreplausib le explanat ion for her t urning to cr ime


6PS03/ 01 1101



Level Mark Descri pt or

A01: (Descript ion) Knowledge and underst anding of how SLT theory canexplains Sam’ s possible crim inali t y.A02: (Evaluati on) Evaluate t he SLT as an explanation of crim inali t y.

0 No rewardable mater i a l

Level 1 1- 3

marks

Candidates wil l produce brief answers, m aking sim ple st atem ent s showing

some rel evance t o t he quest ion.• Basic descript ion of SLT which m ay not ref er t o Sam.• Li t t le or no at t empt t o address t he evaluat ive demands of t he

question.

The ski l ls needed to produce ef fect ive wr i t ing wi l l not normal ly be pr esent.The wri t ing may have some coherence and wil l be generallycomprehensible, but lack both cl arit y and organisati on. High incidence ofsyntact ical and / or spell i ng error s.

Level 2 4- 6marks

Description OR evaluation only OR lim it ed att empt at each OR one is inless detai l than the other

• Good descript ion of t he SLT which m ay or may not have a briefreference to Sam’ s potent ia l cr imi nal i ty .

• Some at t empt at evaluat ion e.g. may refer t o one st udy in detai l(Bandura) or one other evaluation point .

Candidat es wi l l produce st atement s wi t h some development in t he form ofmostly accurate and re levant f actual mater i a l . There are l ikely to bepassages whi ch lack cl arit y and pr oper organisat ion. Frequent synt acticaland / or spell ing error s are l ikely t o be present .

Level 3 7- 9marks

Candidate has att empt ed and answer ed both i njunct ions in the questionwell.

• Good descript ion of SLT wit h ref erence t o Sam’ s pot ent ial

cr iminal i t y (but not expl ic i t in a l l descr ipt ion).• Good evaluat ion e.g. ref ers t o more t han one research st udy and/ or

other evaluation points.

The candidate w i l l demonst rate most of t he ski l ls needed t o produceeff ect ive ext ended wr i t ing but t here wi l l be l apses in organisat ion. Somesyntact ical and / or spell ing error s are l ikely t o be present .

Level 4 10-12marks

Candidate has att empt ed and answer ed both i njunct ions in the questionvery well.

• Very good descript ion of SLT wi t h explicit ref erence t o Sam’ spotent ia l cr iminal i ty throughout the majority of descr ipt ion.

• Very good evaluat ion e. g. ref ers t o research st udies, and thest rengths and w eaknesses of t he t heory (m ore balanced t han level3) .

The ski l ls needed to produce convincing extended writ ing are in place. Veryfew syntact ical and / or spell i ng errors may be found. Very goodorganisation and planning. Given t ime constraints and l imited number ofmarks, ful l marks must be given when the answer is reasonably detai ledeven i f not a l l t he informat ion is present.

6PS03/ 01 1101



Sect ion B – Chi ld Psychology

GuidanceB1 and B2 Marking points are indicative, not comprehensive and other points

should be credited. In each case consider OWTTE (or words to thate f fec t ) .Each bullet point is a marking point , unl ess ot herw ise st ated, andeach point m ade by the candidate m ust be ident i f iable andcomprehensible.


QuestionNumber

Question

B1 (a) John Bowl by conducted research on children w ho had lost t heir parent s

during World War 2. He developed a theory of maternal deprivation.

Explain Bowl by’ s mat ernal depri vati on hypothesis.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.

No credi t i f no reference to ‘ bond breaking/ depr ivat ion/ loss ofat t achment / no at t achment leading t o problems’ at least once.

Ignore ref erence to social releasers, evolut ionary basis, i nt ernal w orkingmodel i f unrelat ed to mat ernal depr ivat ion in t he answer.

Examp les can gain cr edit Max 1 overal l in so far as t hey re lat e to/ add tot heir explanat ion.

• Bowlby f e l t t hat chi ldren m ust have t he const ant presence of t hemot her/ caregiver throughout the cr i t ica l per iod ( f i r st t wo years) / eq;

• Any breaking of t h is bond may af f ect personal i ty / inte l l ectual / socialgrowt h/ depr ivat ion could resul t in af f ect ionless psychopathy/ eq;

• The ef f ect of depr ivat ion is permanent and i r reversib le/ eq;

• Deprivat ion can result in a poor inter nal worki ng model as a fut uret emplate for later re lat ionships/ eq;

• In the 44 juveni le t h ieves st udy he found that mat ernal depr ivat ion

in ear ly years led t o del inquency/ eq;


(AO1 = 3)

6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

B1 (b) Using psychological r esearch, evaluat e Bowl by’ s mat ernal depr ivati onhypothesis.

Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.

Psychological r esearch need not be named but should be cl earlyident i f ied in t he answer.

I f no reference t o research/ gener ic points max 1 marks .

Max 1 mark f or cr i t ique/ evaluat ion of r esearch c i t ed (eg cr i t ic isingBowl by’ s 44 thieves st udy f or bias due to his desire t o support his ownbel ief= max 1 after using t his research init ial ly) PER study.

• I t has been found that t he mot her- infant r e lat ionship was import antfor physical and social growt h in deprived monkeys/ eq;

• Bowl by (1944) 44 j uvenile t hieves st udy showed t hat depr ivati on inear ly l i fe could resul t in af f ect ionless character / eq;

• Spit z (1946) found that i nst i t ut ionalised/ hospit al ised childr ensuff ered extr eme depression if t hey remained in an orphanage/ eq;

• Goldfarb (1955) found that ear l ier fost er ing led to m ore emot ional lyst able, secure and int el l i gent adolescents/ eq;

• However, Schaff er and Emer son (1964) found t hat ot herre lat ionships, not j ust t he mother- inf ant re lat ionship, are im portantto t he ch i l d/ eq;

• Rut t er (1972) found t hat i t was t he cause of t he separati on and nott he separat ion i t sel f t hat caused problems/ eq;

• Research has suggest ed t hat chi ldren benefit fr om daycare, f orexample i t can impr ove thei r social ski l ls whi ch goes against t hehypothesis/ eq;

• Anim al research used t o support Bowl by’ s t heory may not b e validfor human babies because there are quali tat ive differences betweenhumans and anim als/ eq;

• Bowl by’ s research has been m isunderst ood and used t o blam eparent s for chi ldhood neglect / eq;

• Hospital parents visit ing t imes were drastical ly improved to avoidmat ernal depr ivat i on fo l low ing Bowlby’ s research/ eq;

• Spit z and Wolf (1946) f ound that chi ldren recovered wel l i f t heseparat ion f rom t heir m others last ed less t han 3 months/ eq;

• Research has shown t hat losing t he mot her t o deat h/ divorce aft ert he cr i t ica l per iod can lead to emot ional problems in later l i f e / eq;

Generic points might include:

• Bowl by emphasised t he role of a single caregiver, however, chi ldr enmay develop attachments with many caregivers, e.g. grand-parents.wi t hout signs of depr ivat ion/ eq;

• Children raised differently in other cultures do not suffer theseeff ects so i t is d i f f icu l t t o apply the hypothesis global ly / eq;


(AO2=3)

6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

B1 (c) Daycare has been regarded by some psychologists as a form of maternaldepr ivat ion.

Explain two ways in which a daycare cent re m anager could usepsychological understanding t o reduce any negat ive eff ects on thechi ldren who go there.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.

Look for two clear ways in the answer even if not under the labels ‘1’and ‘ 2 ’ . I f more than t wo ways, mark a l l and credi t best . Take care asover lap wi t h some comments e.g. qual i t y / rat ios/ t urnover can be one‘way ’ or t reat ed separatel y – in such cases please w ork w it h t hest udent ’ s int ent ion – do not credit direct repeti ti on.

Suggest ions should be r eali st ic.

1 mark for a br ief explanat i on of ‘ way’ and a fur t her mark forappropr iat e e laborat ion

2 marks for each explanat ion

Negat ive ef f ects of daycare inc lude at t achment problems, later adul tissues/ behavioural problems, poor relati onships, low er int el l i genceThe answer should deal w it h reducing these eff ect s direct ly (say whynegat ive ef f ects are reduced), part icular ly when t he answer is referr ingt o st imulat ion/ inte l l igence, however, t he ef f ects of maternaldeprivation can be applied.

Increase st aff rat io

• Higher st af f numbers for good rat ios wi t h chi ldren help form bett ersubst i t ute care/ eq;

• As at t achment s can be formed w it h a key member of s taf f w i t hwhom w hich they can have a more intense re lat ionship/ eq;

Reduce st aff t urnover

• Rot ati on of st aff should be mini mi sed t o avoid separati on fromchi ldren regular ly / eq;

• Chi ldren can form a bond/ at t achment wi t h someone i f t here is

consist ency/ eq;

Reduce t i me in daycare

• Reduce t ime spent in daycare so that at t achment / bond wi t h maincaregiver i s less disrupt ed/ eq;

• Belsky and Rovine (1988) rec omm end l ess t han 20 hours f or youngch ild ren/ eq;

• Less t im e spent in daycare al lows child and caregiver t o maint ainthe i r re lat ionsh ip / eq;

(AO2=4)

6PS03/ 01 1101



Encourage earl ier chi ldcare

• Sylva – EPPE st udy f ound i ncreased t im e in d aycare can bene f it somechi ldren f r om cert a in depr ived backgrounds/ c i rcumst ances/ eq;

• Chi ldren wi t h poor cogni t ive abi l i t y were f ound to gain most in t helong-term from daycare and the ear l ier t hey st ar ted t he bet t er / eq;

St art daycare later f or t he chi ld ’ s age

• Al lows for ear ly at t achment s t o be f ormed before separat ionoccurs/ eq;

• Belsky argues t hat com mencement of daycare is more posit i ve fort he chi ld i f st ar ted later (af t er 2 years) / eq;

Use qualif ied staff

• St af f who are t ra ined to provide subst i t ute care and providest imulat ing environments for chi ldren/ eq;

• The Swedish daycare in Andersson’s study highlights the importanceof qual i t y as t hey found posi t ive ef fect s on chi ldren/ eq;

Provide st imulat ion etc. (must point t o how negat ive ef f ects are

improved)• Early insti tut ion studies found that unstimulating environments led

t o lower inte l l igence due to lower levels of at t ent ion/ eq;

• Stimulating environments are needed which provide faci l i t ies tost ret ch a child’ s cognit ive abil i t y and encourage independence/ eq;

Improves sociabil i t y

• Provide opport uni t ies for posi t ive peer interact ion/ eq;

• Other child ren can also be att achment f igures and older chi ldr en canprovide posi t ive ro le models/ eq;

Make l inks bet ween home and school• Robertson’s showed t hat chi ldren w ho spent t ime away from t heir

mot hers suf f ered i f t here was no at t empt t o mit igat e the process ofseparat ion/ eq;

• Parent s should be encouraged t o bring it ems from hom e t hat canhelp t he chi ld cope, e.g. a favour i te t oy can provide emot ionalsuppor t / eq ;

Provide good qualit y daycare

• Ensure t hat f eatur es of good qualit y daycare are provided, e.g. highsta f f :ch i ld rat io / low sta f f tu rnover , qual i f ied sta f f , e tc . / eq ;

• Melhuish found t hat good qualit y daycare reduced t he negati veef f ects as chi ldren were able t o develop bet t er re lat ionships/ eq;


6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

B2 (a) Longit udinal st udies involve t he collect ion of dat a over a long period oft ime .

Explain one st rength of using a longit udinal research met hod.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.

Ignore weaknesses.

I f more t han one st rengt h mark a l l and credi t t he best .

Ignore generic comment s – must be relat ed in t he answer specif i cal ly t olongit udinal. E.g. ‘ dept h and detai l ’ is not enough but ‘ as goes back t ocol lect data over t ime, gathers detai led informat ion’ f i t s.

Example gets max 1 overal l i f expla ins/ adds t o a st rengt h of t he

research met hod

Answer need not re fer t o ch i ldren/ deve lopment .

Growth over t ime/ deve lopment

• Genuine development over t ime shows growt h, not j ust a snapshoto f development a t one par t icu lar t im e/ eq;

• Allows for ef fect s long ter m t o be examined unlike cr oss sect ionalst udies/ eq;

Avoids part icipant variables

• Using same chil d avoids part icipant variables/ eq;

• This al l ows for fact ors such as personalit y and background t o beminim ised and prevented f rom af f ect ing the outcome/ eq;

Avoids cohort eff ect

• Cohort eff ect avoided as t he same child ren are st udiedthroughout / eq ;

• Whereas i f t here were di f f erent chi ldren other f actors in theenvironment / sit uati on such as home background, may have changedand af fect ed the resul t s/ eq;

Can provide in-depth data

• As t he st udy t akes place over a long period of t im e validit y can beimproved by the great er detai l considered/ eq;

• Regular checks on development over an ext ended peri od means thatt he data is very in-depth on t he indiv iduals st udied/ eq;

Uses same participants

• Using same chil d al low s cause and eff ect t o be est ablished/ eq;

• This al low s for direct comparisons, unlike cr oss secti onal t hat usesdi f f erent and therefore unl ike chi ldren/ eq;


(AO3=2)

6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

B2 (b) Explain one weakness of using a longit udinal r esearch met hod.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.

Ignore strengths.

If mor e than one weakness mark al l and credit t he best .

Ignore generic comment s – must be relat ed in t he answer specif i cal ly t olongi t udinal . E.g. ‘ t ime consuming’ is not enough but ‘ as col lects dataover t ime, gat hers detai led inf ormat i on, w hich takes a long t ime andt hat can be expensive’ f i t s.

Example gets max 1 overall i f explains/ adds t o a weakness of t heresearch met hod

Answer need not r efer t o chi ldren/ development.

Time consuming and expensive

• Time consumi ng and expensive as conducted over a l ong t im e andlot s of resources used/ man hours/ eq;

• For example, a st udy entai l s in dept h data and thoroughinvestigating such as Child of Our Time which involves going backevery tw e lve months/ eq;

Lack of generalisabil i t y

• Generalisabil i t y issues as fact ors aff ecti ng the group m ay not af fectd i f fe rent g roups a t another t im e/ eq;

• Wit h a specif i c group l ike t hose chosen for Child of Our Time t heremay be di f f erences t hat are not c lear but have af fect ed thef indings/ eq;

High drop out r ate

• High dropout rat e causes loss of part icipant s due t o death/ movingaway/ changes in circumst ances/ eq;

• The result ing small sample can m ean that t he result s are no longerrel iable and do not r epresent t he general populat ion wel lenough/ eq;

Many other variables• The amount of f actors af fect ing development over t im e cannot be

ful ly m easured or contro l led/ eq;

• Cause and eff ect i s dif f i cult t o est ablish as contr ol cannot beest abl ished fu l ly / eq;

• The amount of f actors af fect ing development over t im e cannot beful ly measured or contro l led, so cause and ef fect is d i f f icu l t t oestablish as we cannot be sure one variable caused the measuredresult (2 marks) / eq ;

Invasion of privacy

• Intensive research conducted over a long period of t im e can be very

(AO3=2)

6PS03/ 01 1101



in t rusive/ eq;

• Delving into someone’s private l i fe can have long-term implicationsfor t he perceived credib i l i ty of t he st udy/ eq;


6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

B2 (c) Kel ly w anted t o conduct a natural ist ic observat ion of chi ldren f or her A-Level Psychology course.

Explain one ethical an d one met hodological issue t hat Kelly w ould needt o consider.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.

Needs t o deal wi t h t he planning of t he nat ural ist ic observat ion at t heplanning st age – not evaluation af t erw ards (e.g. cause and eff ect ,contro l) .

Answer must r elat e t o Kelly’ s observat ion of chi ldren – genericdescr ipt ion of a natural ist ic observat ion wi t hout ref erence toobservat ion of chi ldren (not j ust Kel ly) is max 1 mark per issue.

Two marks for eth ical and tw o marks for met hodology

EthicalParental consent

• She woul d need t o gain parent al consent befor e observing t hechildr en as childr en are not able t o give consent t hemselves / eq;

• The parents may not be happy for t he chi ld to be st udied j ust for t hepurpose of r esearch so t hey must be asked/ eq;

• Childr en must give consent t o the st udy them selves in some w ay/ eq;

• She would need t o get i nfor med consent f rom school authori t ies i f i tt akes place in a school set t ing, e.g. pl ayground/ eq;

Right t o wi t hdraw

• Parents would need to be given a r ight t o wi t hdraw t heir chi ldren’sresul t s f rom Kel ly ’ s st udy at any point / eq;

• They must be to ld t hat t hey can leave the st udy and not suf f er anyconsequences/ eq;

Observati onal research - set t ing

• Kelly’ s observat ion must occur in a place wher e behaviour isnormall y observed and not in any sit uati ons or locat ions wher e itmay be inappropr iate/ eq;

• I f not in a publ ic p lace al l part ic ipants must have given consent/ t he

st udy must be planned/ arranged/ and there must be someone incharge/ eq;

Debriefing

• Part ic ipants/ parent s must have t he st udy expla ined to t hem at anappropr ia te t ime so tha t they fee l comfor tab le about i t / eq ;

• Covert research does not m ean ther e is no need to debr ief t hepart ic ipants/ parents as t hey may st i l l have been af f ected by t hest udy and the debr ief can mit igat e these ef fect s/ eq;

MethodologicalOperationalisation

(AO3=4)

6PS03/ 01 1101



• Kelly wil l need to ensure operationalisation of variables to be able tocode/ t a l ly chi ldren’ s behaviour object ively/ eq;

• So t hat dat a can be compared w hen drawi ng conclusions/ eq;

Inter - ra ter / re l iab i l i t y

• She may use dif fer ent observers to est ablish int er-rat erre l iab i l i t y / eq ;

• Using cameras al low s her t o play back chil dren and cross referencet al l ies again and again/ eq;

Observer ef f ect( s)• Her presence may affect the children’s behaviour and therefore

aff ect t he result s so should consider t he use of video camer as/ eq;

• Even if t he observati on is covert , e. g. using part i cipant observati on,her presence may aler t t he chi ldren t hat somet hing ishappen ing/ d i f fe rent / eq ;

Controls

• She may not be able t o contr ol ot her fact ors such as t heir healt h

that could affect chi ldren’s behaviour so she wil l need to record anyincident s of t h is/ eq;

• I f these inc idents weren’ t r ecorded i t w ould be di f f icul t t o drawvalid conclusions/ eq;

Nat ural set t ing

• Chi ldren need to be observed in a p lace t hat w i l l exhib i t nat ural lyoccurr ing behaviour/ eq;

• Nat ural behaviour may only be observed in a place wher e t he childfeels comf ortable, e.g. a school p l ayground/ eq;


6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

*B3 Describe Curt iss’ (1977) st udy of Genie: a case st udy of ext rem epr ivat ion, and evaluate i t in t erms of et h ics, inc luding the ro le of t hepsychologists after she was found.Indicative content MarkRefer t o the levels at t he end of t he indicat ive content .

Appropr iate answers may inc lude the f o l lowing indicat ive content , butt he l ist i s not exhaust ive so look f or ot her reasonable point s. Generalevaluat ion t hat does not r efer t o the et h ics of t he case or conduct oft he researchers should be i gnored f or t he purposes of t he levels.

Descri pt ion (AO1)

• Genie was f ound when she w as 13 years old af t er suff ering ext rem epr ivat ion f or most of her chi ldhood

• She was neglected, beaten and t ied t o a pot t y chair

• Genie could not t alk properl y and had a physical st oop

• She began to form attachments to staff members and learn words• Researchers conducted a batt ery of t est s fr om observat ions,

interviews and neurological tests

• Genie was rehabi l i tat ed at t he hospi t a l and when l iv ing wi t h t heresearchers

• Her grammar never achieved beyond that of a toddler

• She regressed when m oved int o dif fer ent foster care

• The st udy shows us t hat t here is a sensit ive per iod f or l anguagedevelopment

Evaluation (AO2) – ROP = role of psychologists

• ROP: The moral code and ethics of this case study are questionableas researchers wer e said t o put research before Genie’ s w elf are

• ROP: The researchers subjected her to over assessment that mayhave been an abuse of the researchers role

• ROP: Taking Genie int o t heir hom es was sympat het ic of t heresearchers and enabled close emot ional bonds to f orm

• ROP: The researchers put Genie’ s wel fare bef ore t heir researchinterest s, e.g. prohib i t ing fur t her research

• ROP: Genie w as t aken into care by t he wel fare stat e once fundinghad ceased

• ROP: The publications of research into this case certainly progressedmany of t he researchers careers

• Genie w as a pseudonym so her confident ial i t y was maint ained at t het i me

• Over assessme nt may have caused Genie di st ress• Genie was relocat ed repeatedl y which had a negati ve eff ect on her

emot ional wel lbeing

• Being subject to therapy and regression may have been distressing


6PS03/ 01 1101




A01: (Descript ion) Knowledge and underst anding of t he st udy.A02: (Evaluati on) St rengths and/ or w eaknesses of t he st udy in t erm s ofet hics and the r ole of t he researchers.


Level 1 1- 3marks

Candidates wil l produce brief answers, m aking sim ple st atem ent s showingsome rel evance t o t he quest ion.

• Basic description of Genie background or subsequentt rea tm ent / behaviour .

• Li t t le or no at t empt at t he evaluat ion demands of t he quest ion (nofocus on ethics).

The ski l ls needed to produce ef fect ive wr i t ing wi l l not norm al ly be present.The wri t ing may have some coherence and wil l be generallycomprehensible, but lack both cl arit y and organisati on. High incidence ofsyntact ical and / or spell i ng error s.

Level 2 4- 6marks Descript ion OR evaluation only OR l im it ed att empt at each OR one is in lessdetai l t han t he ot her

• Good descript ion of t he case st udy which m ay j ust focus on eit herbefore or af t er she was found or is imbalanced and/ or has l i t t ledetai l about the case study itself.

• Some at t empt at evaluat ion e.g. ref ers t o at l east one eth ical pointbut may not m ent ion t he role of t he psychologist s or vice versa.


Level 3 7- 9marks


• Good descript ion of Curt iss’ s case st udy of Genie t hat must i ncludebefore AND aft er she was found.

• Good evaluation e. g. ref ers t o a range of et hical point s and mustinclude t he role of t he psychologist s.

The candidate w i l l demonst rate most of t he ski l ls needed t o produceeff ect ive ext ended wr i t ing but t here wi l l be l apses in organisat ion. Somesyntact ical and / or spell ing error s are l ikely t o be present .

Level 4 10-12

marks

Candidate has att empt ed and answer ed both i njunct ions in the question

very well.• Very good descript ion of Curt iss’ s case st udy of Genie i ncluding

before AND aft er she was found in detai l and wel l i n formed.

• Very good evaluation i ncluding a range of et hical issues and t he roleof t he psychologist s aft er she was found. Must be accurat e and wellexplained.

The ski l l s needed to pr oduce convincing extended w rit ing are in place. Veryfew syntact ical and / or spell i ng error s may be found. Very goodorganisati on and planning. Given t im e const raint s and l imi t ed number ofmarks, f ul l m arks must be given when t he answer is reasonably detai l edeven i f not a l l t he informat ion is present.

6PS03/ 01 1101



GuidanceC1 t o C2 Marking points are indicative, not comprehensive and other points

should be credited. In each case consider OWTTE (or words to thate f fec t ) .

Each bullet point is a marking point , unl ess other wi se st ated, andeach point m ade by the candidate m ust be ident i f iable andcomprehensible.


QuestionNumber

Question

C1 (a) What is meant by ‘health psychology’?

Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.

Credi t can be given for and research/ t heory that adds t o a def in i t ion oft he main points below or speci f ic area/ concepts wi t h in heal t hpsychology e.g. subst ance misuse t hat add t o a defini t ion (Max 1) .

However, if there is no definition first, no credit for examples or specif ic areas/ concept s (0 mark)

• Is about understanding what causes bad and good health, using

psychology t o promot e good heal t h/ eq;• E.g. it looks at biological causes for substance misuse and how

drug t rea tments might w ork / eq (on ly c red i t i f de f in i t ion in theanswer as wel l);

• Underst anding healt h fr om cognit i ve, social and biologicalperspect ives/ eq;

• Health psychology is t he st udy of how our ment al and physicalhealt h can be assessed/ eq;


(AO1=2)

6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

C1 (b)(i) Describe one research met hod using human part icipant s t hat i s used t oinvest igate t he eff ect s of dr ugs.Answer MarkOne mark for ID (ID may include generic descript ion of the methodunrelated t o ‘ drugs’ ) of one way humans can be used and tw o fur t hermarks (one mark per point ) f or e laborat ion.

Ignore t herapeut ic dr ugs and maint enance programmes described asexper iments.

Many research met hods can be described (e. g. survey / int erview s / quest ion nai res/ scanni ng) but t he y must be rel at ed t o t he inv est igat ionof t he ef f ects of drugs otherw ise Max 1 marks overal l ( i f no ment ion ofdrugs in w hole answer ).

Ignore reference to animal st udies AND f ield experiments AND

evaluat ion (eg eth ics/ re l iabi l i t y) .

Examples of human studies (procedure) can be credit ed if used t oexemplify the research method described (Max 1) . I f m ore than oneresearch met hod described m ark al l and credit best .

ID Interv iew/ survey;

• Interv iews can be used t o generate quant i t at ive and qual i t at iveinformation about the effects of drug use and effectiveness ofprevent ion/ rehab i l i ta t ion programmes/ eq;

• Interviews can gather essential information about the individualsexperience of drug use, social condit ions and rehab/ relapsecondi t ions/ eq;

• Blat t ler et a l (2002) used interv iew s t o f ind out amount of drugt aken and other pat t erns, looking at heroin and cocaine use/ eq;

• St ruct ured and unst ruct ured int erview s + open/ closed endedquest ions + face t o face bet ween r esearcher andin terv iewee/ eq;

ID Quest ionnaire/ survey;

• Quest ionnaires can be used t o gat her a lot of inf ormat ion aboutt he prevalence, exper ience and causes of dr ug use/ eq;

• Questionnaires can gather quali tat ive and quantitat ive

inf ormat ion based on the t ype of quest ion asked (closed oropen) / eq;

• Ennet t et al (1994) used self -administer ed quest ionnaires formot hers t o look at level of educat ion wi t h the aim of l i nk ing t ot heir chi ldren’s smoking/ eq;

ID Scanning/ PET/ CAT/ MRI

• PET scans can be used on human participants to understand theeff ects of drug use on brain st ructure and funct ioning/ eq;

• Blood f low t o a part icular area of t he brain can bedetect ed/ imaged to show the act ive parts of t he braindur ing/ fo l low ing drug use/ eq;

• PET scans wer e done t o l i nk use of drugs t o cognit i ve funct ioning

(AO3=3)

6PS03/ 01 1101



such as mem ory/ eq;

ID Laboratory st udies

• Part icipant s can be inj ect ed wit h innocuous drugs/ eq;• They are to ld t hat t he drug wi l l have a part icular ef fect , but are

to ld d i f f e rent th ings/ eq;

• The impact of t he comm ent can det ermine how cogni t i on

affect s t heir report ed exper ience of t he drug ef f ect / eq;• Some l aboratory st udies may give recr eati onal drugs t o exist ing

drug addicts and study t heir ef fect s on behaviour/ eq;

• Laborat ory experim ent s al low s researchers t o observe t heeff ects of drugs on t he part ic ipants in a contro l ledenvi ronment / eq;

• The IV is mani pul at ed, such as drug given, and DV me asures suchas ef f ects of dr ug/ eq;

• Lab experi ment s can use ot her t ools/ met hods such as scanningand int erv iewing t o gain quant i t at ive/ qual i tat ivedata / behaviour / fee l ings/ eq;


QuestionNumber

Question

C1 (b)(i i) Explain one strength of using human part icipants to study the effects ofdrugs.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.

No need t o ment ion drugs in t he answer

If more than one strength described, mark al l and credit best, bearing inmi nd t hat some issues overlap so go wit h t he int enti on of t he st udent .

Can provide quali tat ive data about feelings

• Human part ic ipants can provide qual i tat ive data t hat cannot bemeasured in animal studies in the same way/ eq;

• Such as how dr ugs make t he person feel/ subj ecti ve experiences/ eq;

Long t erm s eff ects can be st udied

• Longitudinal research can be conducted into the long term effects of

drug use or rehabi l i tat ion/ eq;• so that more robust conclusion can be drawn over t ime/ eq;

Can generalise to hum ans, unlike animal studi es

• In depth r esearch int o fact ors associated wi t h drug use can beinvest igat ed so t hat vulnerabi l i t y can be predicted in humans/ eq;

• Human studies do not have generalisability issues associated withanimal r esearch - animals may not respond in t he same w ay todrugs/ eq;

• animals may not respond in t he same w ay t o drugs because ofcogni t i ve/ physio logical / behavioural d i f f erences bet ween us/ eq;

• They test dr ugs on humans t hat ot her hum ans wi l l use so t he f i ndingswi l l show exact ly w hat ef fect s t he drugs wi l l have on humans

(AO3=2)

6PS03/ 01 1101



because w e share t he same cent ral ner vous syst em/ eq;

Val id i ty

• Human research conducted in real l i fe is more valid than art i f ic ialsit uati ons used to study animals/ eq;

• Which means f i ndings can be applied t o real l i f e sit uati ons such as t ohelp drug users/ eq;


6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

C1 (c) Explain why researchers may choose to use animals instead of humans toresearch t he eff ects of dr ugs.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.

Max 1 marks overall i f no reference is made to drug research wit hinhealth psychology.

Ignore ‘cheaper’ and ‘easier’ unless quali f ied.

• Animals are mor e pract ical t o use in dr ug research t hanhumans as t heir behaviour can be m onit ored closely in confinedsi t uat ions over l ong per iods of t ime/ eq;

• The knowledge gained f rom research int o drugs t hat can beconducted using animals can benefi t humans, m aking itimpor tant in im proving the qual i t y o f human l i fe / eq ;

• The nervous system (neural transmission) is the same inanimals as it is in humans, so the results of drug research onneural t ransmi ssion should be generalisable t o humans/ eq;

• We can closely st udy t he eff ect s of dr ugs on neural pat hwayst hat w ould be im possible t o st udy on humans as t he animal needst o be sacr i f iced/ eq;

• Animals breed quickl y, so the possible her it abil i t y ofcondit ions caused by drug use can be st udied convenientl y/ eq;

• Animal dr ug research can be used w here et hics precludehuman research/ eq;

• Animals can be t est ed in m ore adverse condit ions t han

human part ic ipants in which harm could be done/ eq;• Animals have short er l i fespans so t he long ter m ef fect s of

drugs can be st udied more ef f i c ient ly / eq;

• The relat ionship bet ween geneti cs and addict i on can bemanipulated in animals but we cannot study or manipulate genesin humans/ eq;

• Animals can be cheaper to use than humans because theyneed less of t he drug t o cause an eff ect/ eq;

• Animals are m ore readil y available t han humans as animalscan be ordered on demand/ humans subj ect are re luct ant t o takepart in drug t r ia ls/ eq;

• Animals are not aware of t he exper im ental a im, t hey are notl ikely to change their behaviour to f i t t he exper imental a im/ eq;

• Animals are breed for l arge samples for experim entat ion, sofindings are l ikely to be more rel iable than smaller humansamples/ eq;

• Animals are small er and easier t o handle/ contr ol so can bemaintained and t est ed re lat i vely easi ly compared t o humans/ eq;


(AO3=3)

6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

C2 (a) Jamie f e l t under pressure t o take drugs and now f inds i t d i f f icu l t t o givethem up.

Ident i fy one explanati on from t he Learning Approach that could be usedto understand Jamie’s experience.

Answer MarkOne mark f or correct ID of a learning explanati on. Can be a descript ionnot necessar i ly name/ t heory, but must be f rom t he learningapproach(e.g. ‘ he does what t he others do’ is not necessari ly m odell ingbut conformi ty ) .

Ignore j ust ‘ condit ioning’ – needs specif ying.Ignore social explanations.Mark t he f ir st answer

• Social Learning Theory/ observat ional/ vicarious

learn ing/ model l ing/ eq;• Operant condi t ioning/ posi t ive re inforcement/ negat ive

re in forcement / eq;

• Classical condit ioning/ Pavlovian condit ioning/ eq;

• Jamie is given praise for t aking drugs/ eq;

Consider OWTTE.

(AO1=1)

6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

C2 (b) Using the explanation you identif ied in (a), explain why Jamie startedt aking drugs and/ or f inds i t d i f f icu l t t o give them up.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.

The answer should ref er t o Jami e’ s predicament in at l east one way orMax 1 otherwise generic.

TEI f 2a is blank but 2b correct ly explains why Jamie st art ed t akingdrugs/ or found t hem di f f icul t t o g ive up using an appropr iat e andidentif iable learning explanation ful l marks can be given.Max 2 if 2a is incorrect but 2b correct ly explains why Jamie start edt aking drugs/ or found t hem di f f icul t t o g ive up using an appropr iat e andident i f iable learning explanat ion.Max 2 if 2a is correct but 2b uses a diff erent explanati on that is

nonethel ess a learning explanati on (e. g. stat es classical and explainsoperant) .Max 1 i f 2a is incorrect but 2b uses t he explanati on given in 2a t oexpla in Jamie’ s predicament.

Eg. Classical condit ioni ng

• Jamie may gain pleasurable f eelings fr om t aking drugs/ eq;

• He/ she learns t o associate t he posit ive feel ings wi t h t he drug sot akes i t again to achieve the same f eel ing/ eq;

• Jamie m ay also learn t o associate his fr iends and the dr ug equipmentwi t h pleasure and this may t r igger the response/ eq;

• Even aft er abst inence, st im uli m ay tr igger Jamie’ s drug taking so herelapses/ eq;

• UCS = fr i ends + UCR = relaxati on/ fun/ eq;

• CS/ NS = dru g + UCS = fri ends + UCR = rel axat ion/ fu n/ eq;

• CS = drug + CR = relaxation/ fun/ eq;

Eg. Operant condit ioning

• Jamie m ay have been reinfor ced by a posit ive experience of dr ugt aking, so t h is wi l l be repeat ed/ eq;

• Jamie’ s conti nued use can be explained by negati ve reinf orcementas avoiding the dr ug causes wi t hdrawal sympt oms leading todependency/ eq;

• Drugs are taken to r emove the w i t hdrawal sympt oms/ eq;• Jamie repeat s t he drug taking because t he rew ard and pleasure is

repeated as a posi t ive re inforcer/ eq;

Eg. Social learning theory

• Jamie could have wat ched a role m odel, such as a fr i end, f amil ymember or media model , t ake drugs/ eq;

• The ro le model may be someone they admire or re lat e t o, m akingmodel l ing their behaviour more l ikely/ eq;

• Jamie m ay be more mot ivated t o t ake drugs i f t he ro le model is seent o enj oy t hemselves/ eq;

• Jamie w ould then receive direct posi t ive re inforcement f r om t hedrug i tsel f / he gained approval f rom his f r iends as a reward/ eq;

(AO2=3)

6PS03/ 01 1101



• Jamie w ould have reta ined/ encoded the m emory of h is f r iendst aking drugs and copied/ imit ated/ eq;


6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

C2 (c) Evaluate the Learning Approach as an explanation of substance misuse.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.

Max 1 mark for each al ternat i ve explanat ion of drug misuse t hat arewel l expla ined (no credi t f or j ust naming al t ernat ive explanat ions) up to2 marks in t ota l f or a l ternat ive explanat ions.

Take care wi t h SLT as DOES expl ain indi vidual dif fe rences/ w hy somedon’t copy, and answer should be explicit when making an evaluationpoint t hat d i rect ly ref ers t o SLT as i t would not apply to ot her learningtheories.

• There is a vast amount of experimental evidence for the general roleof observat ional learning so we can be fair ly sure t hat a sim ilarprocess can explain drug taking/ eq;

• Cult ural ly , d i f f erent drugs are used/ misused in d i f ferent cul tures,support ing social learning t heory as an explanation of drugtak ing/ eq;

• At a neurological level, drugs t hat are com monly used are t hosewhi ch produce euphoric or relaxing eff ect s so are st ronglyreinf orcing the dr ug taking behaviour – operant condit ioning isconsist ent wi t h b io logical exper ience/ eq;

• I t is dif f icult t o evidence social learning theory in t his area as t hereare many ot her f actors that could encourage drug mi suse, such aspeer pressure t o take drugs t o look cool/ eq;

• The tendency for dr ug misuse to r un in fami l ies could be due to

genet ics rather t han social learni ng as addict ions may beinher i ted / eq;

• Some dr ug when f irst t aken cause unpleasant eff ect s, eg smoking,which cannot be expla ined by operant condi t ioning/ eq;

• Sher f ound t hat smoking t ended t o run i n f amil ies as a consequenceof imi ta t ion / SLT/ eq;

• Hughes believes t hat t here is a geneti c component t o addict i on, aaddict ion gene/ personalit y that explains why smoking runs infami l ies/ eq;

• Leventhal found t hat t he f i r st exper ience of smoking of t en occurs inpeer groups and support s t he idea of posit ive reinf orcement fr omsocial approval/ eq;

• SLT explains why peopl e f irst t ake a drug which t he biologicalapproach fa i ls t o expla in/ eq;

• Learning t heory/ Classical condit ioning can explain individuald i f f erence in drug taken through discr iminat i on/ eq;


(AO2=4)

Question Question

6PS03/ 01 1101



Number*C3 Green High School decided t o run an anti -drugs campaign. St udent s put

up post ers, l istened t o a visit ing speaker and set up a helpl ine. They alsoinvi ted a form er st udent w ho was a recover ing addict t o ta lk t o them.

Describe one anti -drugs campaign you have st udied. Evaluate t heeff ect iveness of anti- drugs campaigns including t he one at Green HighSchool.Indicative content MarkRefer t o the levels at t he end of t he indicat ive content .


Descri pt ion (AO1)E.g. ‘Scared’ (2008)

• Using the concept of chi l dren being scared of a parent dying

• Target ed at parent al conscience

• Smoking parents are encouraged to identify with the parent being

portr ayed on t he advert isement (TV)• Exploit s parent al prot ect iveness of chi l dren t o discourage smoking

• Provides inf ormat ion about deat h rat es of smoking related i l lness asfear factor

E.g ‘ Talk t o Frank’

• Uses openness as a st rat egy for chil dren and parent s t o seek advice• Parents are encouraged to look for signs of drug use

• Younger people are exposed t o drug user im ages t hat are negative

• Shows peer group pressure and how this can influence drug use• Uses bot h sides of t he argument t o encourage choice and

consideration

Evaluat ion (AO2)

• Dif f i cult t o measure ef f ecti veness as many f actors may causeincrease in healt h

• Quant i t at ive m easures of heal t h re lat ed behaviour (death rate,consumpt ion, help l ine act i v i ty) can be st at ist ical ly ver i f ied

• Healt h programm es oft en go hand in hand w it h a change in publicopinion, which may account for reduction in unhealthiness rathert han programme i t sel f

• Mechanic et al (2005) claimed smoking fel l by half due t o anti-smoking campaigns

• Hafsted (2009) found that those who responded emotionally to anti-smoking campaigns were more l ikely to quit, so emotionallyprovoking campaigns seem t o wor k

• Healt h campaigns only wor k i f peopl e do not have barri ers t o healt hrelated behaviour and can access help

• They are prevent ati ve rat her t han curat ive so st ops issues befor et hey cause heal t h/ l i f est y le/ fami l y issues

• Can be cost ly but cheap in comparison t o curati ve st rat egies

• Talk t o Frank is based on t he Yale Model of Persuasion w hich hasexperimental support for the effectiveness of presenting both sidesof t he argument


6PS03/ 01 1101




A01: (Descript ion) Knowledge and underst anding of a campaign they havestudied.A02: (Evaluati on) Applicat ion, research, st rengths and weaknessescampaigns.


Level 1 1- 3marks


• Anti-drugs campaign may not be identif iable.

• No reference t o t heory on whi ch campaign is based.

• Li t t le or no at t empt at t he analyt ical / evaluat ion demands of t hequest ion w it h no ref erence t o Green High School.


Level 2 4- 6

marks

Descript ion OR evaluation only OR l im it ed att empt at each OR one is in less

detai l t han t he ot her• Ant i -dr ugs campaign that is ident i f iable/ br ief descr ipt ion.

AND EITHER

• An at t empt t o refer t o theory on which campaign is based and/ orused as evaluat ion

OR

• Some at t empt at evaluat ion e.g. ref ers t o at l east one evaluation ofa healt h campaigns and there must be an a t t empt a t re fer r ing to t heGreen High School cam paign.

Candidat es wi l l produce st atement s wi t h some development in t he form of

mostly accurate and re levant f actual mater i a l . There are l ikely to bepassages whi ch lack cl arit y and pr oper organisat ion. Frequent synt acticaland / or spell ing error s are l ikely t o be present .

Level 3 7- 9marks

Candidate has att empt ed and answer ed t he elements in t he quest ion wellalthough t here may be a lapse.

• Anti-drugs campaign that is clearly identif iable with somedescript ion.

AND EITHER

• A good explanation of campaign using t heory and/ or using theory asevaluation.

OR

• Good evaluation of the effectivenessAnd

• t here must be explici t ref erence t o the Green High School campaigneff ect iveness/ t heory l ink.

The candidate w i l l demonst rate m ost of t he ski l ls needed t o produceeff ect ive ext ended wr i t ing but t here wi l l be l apses in organisat ion. Somesyntact ical and / or spell ing error s are l ikely t o be present .

Level 4 10-12marks

Candidate has att empt ed and answer ed t he element s in t he quest ion verywell.

• Very good descript ion of an anti-d rugs campaign that is clearlyident i f iable and/ or c lear ly descr ibes t he theory on which thecampai gn is based.

6PS03/ 01 1101



• Very good evaluation e.g. refers explicit ly to effectiveness eithert hrough t heory (backing it et c.) or actual success/ fai l ure and must explicit ly ref er t o t he Green High School campaign.

The ski l ls needed to produce convincing extended writ ing are in place. Veryfew syntact ical and / or spell i ng errors may be found. Very goodorganisation and planning. Given t ime constraints and l imited number of

marks, ful l marks must be given when the answer is reasonably detai ledeven i f not a l l t he informat ion is present.

6PS03/ 01 1101



Sect ion D – Spor t Psychology

GuidanceMarking points are indicative, not comprehensive and other pointsshould be credited. In each case consider OWTTE (or words to thate f fec t ) .Each bullet point is a marking point , unl ess other wi se st ated, andeach point m ade by the candidate m ust be ident i f iable andcomprehensible.


QuestionNumber

Question

D1 (a) Juan conducted a correlational study to investigate heart rate andsport ing perfor mance in prof essional athl et es.

Describe t he correlat ional research m et hod as it used in sportpsychology.

Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion. Credi t can be given for a descr ipt ioninvolving collect ion of data and/ or analysis. The answer must ref er t osport psychology in at least one way or m ax 2 marks overall . Max 1 markfor a useful dr awing of a scat t ergram t hat c lear ly demonst ratesunderst anding of a relat ionship, posit ive or negati ve correlat ion. Do notcredi t scat t ergrams that f a i l t o i l lust rate any useful point .No credit for examples.

• To look for a re lat ionship/ l ink betw een t wo var iables/ eq;

• Quant it at i ve measures, such as heart rat e/ quest ionnaire scoring, aret aken and analysed t ogether/ eq;

• Two dat a set s are ranked and relat ed t o see if one variable changesalongside t he other/ eq;

• I f bot h variables r ise together i t is seen as a posit ive correl ati on andif one variable r ises and t he ot her f al ls i t is seen as a negati vecor re lat ion / eq;

• I f no pat t ern can be found bet ween t he var iables, t hen there is nocor re lat ion / re lat ionsh ip / eq;

• Strength of correlations are indicated by a correlation coeff icient

scoring betw een -1 0 +1/ eq;


(AO3=3)

6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

D1 (b) Evaluate t he correlat ion as a research met hod.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion. I f m ore than one issue, m ark a l l andcredi t best .Treat t he answer as a research met hod and analysis tool not j ust ananalyt ic t ool a lone.

• Because the dat a gather ed is quanti t at i ve the correl ati onal analysiscan be repeated t o est ablish rel iable f indings/ eq;

• We cannot be sure t hat t he measured variabl es are causal, cannotshow cause and ef f ect / eq;

• There may be innumerable variables that impacted upon one, othert han the var iable being measured/ eq;

• The correlation rel ies upon rel iable data, and if gathered byquest ionnaire/ physiological measures, t hey can change day t oday/ eq;

• Correlat ions can be subj ect t o st ati st ical analysis to ensure a f irmrelat ionship is est ablished/ eq;

• Quest ionnaires used t o gather corr elat ional dat a can be subj ect t osocial desirabi l i t y / eq;

• Correlat ions are et hical compared t o other r esearch met hods such aslaborat ory, f ield experi ment s as et hical issues rarely arise from t heuse of secondary dat a/ eq;

• The col lect ion of pr imary data f or a corre lat ion has t o consider t heet hical issues when using human part icipant s/ eq;

• A strength of correlation is that the can be done where legally,eth ical ly or pr act ical ly i t may not be possib le t o conduct

exper imental research/ eq;• A st rength i s t hat pr eviously exist ing/ secondary data can be used t o

save t im e and cost of prim ary research/ eq;

• I t i s a precursor t o experim ent al research as it is aninexpensive/ eth ical t ool before cost ly research/ eq;


(AO3=3)

6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

D1 (c) Using the same sport s athl et es, Juan decided t o gat her quali t at i vedata by conducting interviews.

Explain what is meant by qual i tat ive data.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion. Examples can gain credi t . No credi t forcomments concerning quantitat ive data unless using it to exemplifywhat i s meant by qual i tat ive dat a.Example can gain credit i f used as elaborat ion

• Gat hered thr ough open quest ions + narrat ive not number/ eq;

• Narrat i ve rat her than number + indepth bel iefs/ eq;• In-depth beliefs, att i tudes, understanding and knowledge gathered +

open quest ions/ eq;

• Oft en sub jec t to t hemat ic ana lysis/ in terpre ta t ion / eq;

• Example: A sport s person can be asked about t heir f avourit e sport

and why they l ike i t is an open quest ion/ eq;• Open quest ions, such as why do you pl ay sport , al low det ai led

answers t hat are qual i t at ive in nat ure/ eq;

• Qualit at i ve data in t he form of open quest ions al low s fr ee responseand therefore does not f orce an answer/ eq;


(AO3=2)

QuestionNumber

Question

D2 (a) A ta lent scout not iced that t he performance of a youngfoot bal ler was bet t er when t ra in ing t han in a real mat ch.

Explain this difference between training and match performance usingone t heory of arousal / anxiet y/ audience ef fect you have st udied.Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.Possible t heories include: Inverted U hypothesis, evaluationapprehension theory, catastrophe theory, optimal level of arousalt heory, dr ive theory, t here may be ot hers.

Max one mark i f no reference to d i f f erence betw een tra in ing and match

performance.

Eg Inverted U hypothesis

• The footbal lers perform ance drop can be expla ined by t he inverted Uhypot hesis as a consequence of hei ght ened arousal/ eq;

• The footbal ler was perform ing at h is best / opt im al level int r a ining/ eq;

• When in a m atch hi s arousal level was too high and t his had adeleter ious ef f ect on performance/ eq;

• Football can involve f ine motor ski l ls which is better suited to lowarousal / eq;

• The foot ballers ski l l s wer e new, and high anxiety af fect ed ski l l s t hatwere not w e l l p rac t iced/ eq;

(AO2=3)

6PS03/ 01 1101



• The invert ed U explains how per for mance increases wi t h arousal upt o an opt imal level past which i t det er iorates/ eq;

Eg Evaluat ion app rehe nsion

• Low perf orm ance could be due t o evaluation apprehension as t hemat ch is an evaluat ion of perform ance/ eq;

• Graduall y anxiet y has buil t up because he has been crit icised duri ng

mat ches in t he past / eq;• He feared negati ve evaluat ion fr om an audience which was not i n

t ra in ing – so perform ance f e l l / eq;

• During the m atch it t est ed his ski l l s more t han traini ng, and this leadt o increase anxiety t oo/ eq;

Eg Catastrophe theory (credit inverted U descript ion in addit ion tobelow comm ents) .

• Anxiety increased t hroughout t he mat ch resul t ing in dramat i cdeter io rat i on at a c r i t i ca l po int dur ing the match/ eq;

• The footbal ler w orr ied more about h is perform ance dur ing a matcht han t ra in ing and t h is cogni t i ve evaluat ion led to f ret / eq;


6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

D2 (b) Describe t he f indings (result s and/ or conclusions) of one study youhave learned about in sport psychology, other t han Boyd and Munroe(2003).Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion.Possible st udies include: Cot t rel l et al (1968), Koivula (1995), Craft et al(2003), t here are ot hers – please cont act your TL if in any doubt . No mark for ID.

Cott re l l et a l (1968)

• Non-compet i t ive groups performed bet t er (error rat e) on word pairrecall than competit ive groups irrespective of audience or learningspeed/ eq;

• Competit ive groups with an audience performed worse (more errors)wi t h an aud ience than wi t hout / eq ;

• Unless they were fast learners who made fewer errors without an

audience in the compet i t ive group/ eq;• Fast l earners perform bet t er wi t h an audience than wi t hout/ eq;

• Mere presence did not have an eff ect , t he audience had to be inapposi t ion of judgement t o have an ef fect / eq;

• However, slower l earners perform worse wi t h an audience/ eq;

• Audience enhances a domi nant response/ eq;

Koivula (1995)

• ‘sex typed’ individuals were the largest group for both males andf em ales t est ed (48% and 43% respect ivel y)/ eq;

• Most sport s wer e regarded as gender neutral / eq;

• Cert ain sport s wer e regarded as more appropriat e for each gendert hat seemed consist ent wi t h social view s on sport s genders/ eq;

• Gender based schemat ic inf ormat ion infor med choices about w hatwas gender appropriat e sport s/ eq;

• Sex t yped men r ated m asculine sport s as mor e masculine t han othertypes or women/ eq;

• Koivula bel ieves t hat m ale dominated sports ref lect male dominat edsociety and val idate a m ale domain in sport / eq;

• Non-sex t yped m ales and fem ales t end t o challenge genderst ereotypes bel iefs about sport t ype/ eq;

Craft et al (2003)

• met a-analysis showed no rel ati onship bet ween anxiet y andperformance overal l / eq;

• There was a posit ive relat ionship bet ween self est eem andper formance/ eq:

• Top sport ing athletes showed a posit ive correlation between anxietyand performance which was not evident in lower sport i ngath le tes/ eq;

• Anxiety w i l l not show a corre lat ion i f t he inverted U hypothesis ist rue as a theory of anxiety/ eq;


(AO1=3)

Question Question

6PS03/ 01 1101



NumberD2 (c) Evaluat e t he st udy you descr ibed in (b) i n t erms of both re l iabi l i t y and

val id i ty .Answer MarkOne mark per point / e laborat ion. Combinat ion of credi t e i ther 2+2 or3+1 for maximum marks for re l i abi l i ty and val id i ty .Possible st udies include: Cot t rel l et al (1968), Koivula (1995), Craft et al(2003), t here are other s.TE: Max 2 marks if t he st udy evaluated i s not t he same as t he onedescribed in 2b or 2b is wrong, but can be identi f i ed as anappropriat e sport st udy evaluat ion. I f 2a is blank, but anappropriate sport study is evaluated, ful l marks can be credited. Nocredit for evaluat ion for study out side of sport psychology.Rel iabi l i t y and val id i t y can over lap, p l ease f o l low t he intent ion oft he st udent.

Cott re l l et a l (1968)

• R: Ot her research cont radict s t he mer e presence of t he audience ashaving an ef f ect on performance/ eq;

• V: Sport ing perform ance is far d i f ferent t han word pair recal l orrecognit i on t asks, so the f indings may not represent sport ingper formance at a l l / eq ;

• V: Anxiet y and audience is a practiced situat ion for at hlet es who areaccust omed t o such si t uat ions wi t h in t he f ie ld of a physical sport / eq;

• V: The st udy lacks ecological val idit y as t hey are oft en t est onphysical sk i l l rather t han cogni t ive sk i l l / eq;

• R: Independent groups wer e used t o prevent order eff ect s butpart ic ipant d i f ference may af fect r esul t s in the compet i t ive/ non-compet i t ive and audience groups/ eq;

Koivula (1995)• V: Asking part icipant s about gendered sports could provoke a

gendered schema and result in invalid results/ eq;

• V: Social desirabil i t y m ay have skewed t he part icipant s responsesint o providing eit her sex t yped or non-sexed t yped responses/ eq;

• V: The researcher used t he part icipant s own gender st ereot ypesrat her t han generalised categories, m aking the result s mor e relevantand val id t o the part ic ipant s used/ eq;

• V: Fi l ler i t ems/ dist racter quest ions were used t o prevent demandcharacteri st ics so the part icipant s could not t ry and guess t he tr uea im o f the study / eq;

• R: Generalisabil i t y of t he f i ndings can only be l im it ed t o Swedi sh

spor t ing cu l tu re / young/ whi te / students/ eq;• R: Questionnaires and self ratings are considered unreliable as

bel iefs and at t i t udes may di f f er according t o t i me, mood,exper ience, e tc / eq;

Craft et al (2003)

• R: The r esearchers acknowledged t hat arousal w ould be l i kely t o

yield a zero correlat ion based on the i nvert ed U hypothesis overall ,but f a i led to val idate t h is wi t h any fur t her st at is t ics/ eq;

(AO2=4)

6PS03/ 01 1101



• V: Team sport s and individual sport s wer e not accounted f or in t hismet a-analysis which needs to ref ined as audience and arousal w ouldhave di f f erent ef f ects on each/ eq;

• R: Despit e t he robust quali f ying crit eria of studies used in a met a-analysis in t erms of simi l ar i ty , each st udy would be l i kely t o d i f f er instandardisation, procedure and measurement signif icantly to makecompar ison d i f f i cu l t / eq ;

• R: The quest ionnaire used was a rel iable and t rust wor t hy source/ eq;


6PS03/ 01 1101



QuestionNumber

Question

*D3 Sophi e and Becky ar e sist er s. Sist er s shar e 50% of t hei r gene s. Sophi eis an excellent athlete winning regional competit ions, whereas Beckyis not sporty at al l .

Describe and evaluate two explanati ons for Sophie and Becky’ sindividual dif ferences in sport ing performance.Indicative content MarkRefer t o the levels at t he end of t he indicat ive content .


Suit able examples include: Personalit y theory, Social isati on, Att r ibut ion,Reinforcement.

Descri pt ion (AO1)

Eg. Personalit y t heory

• Athletes are born wi t h an introverted or ext raverted personal i t y

• This is a biological basis for personality

• Ext ravert s have a reduced st im ulat ion of t he RAS so seek excit ement

• Extr avert t herefore have a more outgoing and compet i t ive nature

• Intr overt s have an over st im ulat ed RAS result ing in avoidance ofsensation

• Intr overt s are shy and avoid compet it ion

• Introverts avoid sport and extroverts seek it out to reach optimalcor t ical act iv i t y

• Personalit y t heory also considers the role of t he environment int erms of condi t i oning

• Becky and Sophie should have inherited the same biological basis fort heir personalit y, so should be sim ilar in sport ing abil i t y

Eg Reinforcement

• Sport ing people are given reinforcem ent f or t aking up sport whi lstot hers may not

• Praise such as trophies and awards can be posit ive r einfor cement forgood athlet es

• Intr insic reinf orcement , such as sati sfact ion, can also explain whysome take up sport seriously

• Social int eract ion and fr iends can also provide reinf orcement forsome t o pursue sport s

• Not al l athl et es receive praise – i f t hey lose – t his variable r ati oincr eases persist ence

• Sophie and Becky may have received diff ering reinf orcement fr omparents/ coaches t hat w ould expla in t h is si t uat ion

Evaluat ion (AO2)Eg. Personality theory

6PS03/ 01 1101



• Physiological measures have shown higher cortical arousal inextravert s t han int roverts

• We cannot be sure w het her ext raversion is a cause or r esult ofcort ical arousal

• There are m any other r easons for being sport ing t han personalit y –many opt f or sport because of f ami ly or f r iends

• Sophie and Becky are di ff erent despit e having the same biological

basis, so t his t heory cannot expl ain thei r sport ing diff erences

Eg Reinforcement

• Coaches using posit ive r einfor cement t o encourage sport ingperformance

• Sport s personalit ies comm only cit e a sport ing hero as an explanationfor their success (SLT)

• Despit e reinf orcement , some people are just not very good at sportso do not excel


6PS03/ 01 1101




A01: ( Descript ion) Knowl edge and underst anding of t heories of indi vidualdifferences.A02: (Evaluati on) Applicat ion, st rengths and weaknesses of t heories ofindividual dif ferences in sport ing performance.


Level 1 1- 3marks


• Basic descript ion of one explanat ion of i ndividual dif fer ences.

• Li t t le or no at t empt at t he analyt ical / evaluat ion demands of t hequest ion. No refer ence t o Sophie and Becky.


Level 2 4- 6marks

Descript ion OR evaluation only OR l im it ed att empt at each OR one is in lessdetai l t han t he ot her

• Descript ion of both theories of individual dif ferences, although onet heory may be l im it ed. May be no ref erence t o Sophie and Becky OR

• Descript ion of one t heory whi ch is very good w it h no descript ion oft he second t heory. May be no ref erence t o Sophie and Becky

• Some at t empt at evaluat ion e.g. m et hodological issues, support ingst udies and pract ical points in re lat ion t o actual t heory/ ies.


Level 3 7- 9marks


• Good descr ipt ion inc ludes both t heor ies in balance wi t h at t empt t orelat e answer t o Becky and/ or Sophie.

• Good evaluat ion e.g. ref ers t o refer s t o at least one f rommet hodological , support ing st udies and/ or pract ical points inre lat ion t o actual t heory

The candidate w i l l demonst rate m ost of t he ski l ls needed t o produceeff ect ive ext ended wr i t ing but t here wi l l be l apses in organisat ion. Somesyntact ical and / or spell ing error s are l ikely t o be present .

Level 4 10-12

marks

Candidate has att empt ed and answer ed both i njunct ions in the question

very well.• Very good descript ion includes bot h t heories in balance wit h explicit

ref erence to Becky and/ or Sophie.

• Very good evaluation e.g. refers to refers to more than one f rommet hodological , support ing st udies and/ or pract ical points inre lat ion t o actual t heory

The ski l ls needed to produce convincing extended writ ing are in place. Veryfew syntact ical and / or spell i ng errors may be found. Very goodorganisation and planning. Given t ime constraints and l imited number ofmarks, ful l marks must be given when the answer is reasonably detai ledeven i f not a l l t he informat ion is present.

6PS03/ 01 1101



Furt her copies of t his publicat ion are available f rom

Edexcel Publicat ions, Adamsway, Mansfi eld, Nott s, NG18 4FN

Telephone 01623 467467Fax 01623 450481

Email publicat [email protected]

Order Code UA026613 January 2011

For more inform ation on Edexcel qualif icat i ons, please visit www. edexce l .com/ quals

unit 3 mark scheme jan 2011

Documents