Paper 1

Summary and
sample answers

Compiled by

REHAN REHMAN
1
 P1 – 10 MARK ESSAY QUESTIONS

● Will always be about strengths AND weaknesses regarding one study.

● There will be a named issue – pay attention to what I say in class.

o Ideally start your essay with it. Important tips to be given in class.
o DO NOT FORGET to write about the NAMED ISSUED. That will change in every exam, so
you must read the question and then answer accordingly! If you forger to write about
the named issue, it would be detrimental to your grade.
o Named issue can either be a strength or a weakness. DO NOT include it as both a
strength and weakness. You decide which side you want to support.

● 4 paragraphs:
o 2 strengths
o 2 weaknesses.

● Fix the following paragraphs for each study:

o Strength – QUANTITATIVE DATA
o Weakness – GENERALISATIONS (sample, location, whatever is relevant)

● PEE for each paragraph.

o Point
o Examples (from the study – ideally 2-3)
o Explain

● Be mindful about not describing everything from the study but selectively using examples to
support your point. Refer to my sample answers for each study.

 Relate standardization to reliability.

 Always follow this format when writing about generalizations:

o Write about what the sample consisted of.
o And then as a result who cannot we generalize the results to.
o Explain why we might expect differences in behaviors between the sample and the wider
population by making links to the study (explained in class).

 Always follow this format when writing about ecological validity:

o What happened in the study?
o What happens in real life?
o We are not the same bruhhhhh, therefore lacks ecological validity OR we are the same
bruhhhhh, therefore ecologically valid.

 Always follow this format when writing about ethics:

o Select two to three ethical guidelines. (depending on what you choose and time left).
o Give clear cut examples on how each one was broken or not. Do not just state if the
guideline was followed or not but elaborate using concrete examples.
o For deception, always mention what was told to participants and then what happened in
reality. Do not just state people were deceived about xyz but you should also add how
exactly and why.

2
 Content to know about each study:
1) Background
2) Aim
3) Sample and sampling technique
4) Procedure (2-3 questions in the exam usually)
5) Results/findings
6) Conclusion
7) Ethics (broken and not broken)
8) Debates: nature vs nurture; individual vs situational
9) Application to everyday life/usefulness
10) Psychology being investigated
11) Assumptions of each approach and how it applies to
the study

3
 BIOLOGICAL
APPROACH
Main assumptions of the biological approach:
• Behaviour, cognitions and emotions can be explained in
terms of the working of the brain and the effect of
hormones, genetics and evolution.
• Similarities and differences between people can be
understood in terms of biological factors and their
interaction with other factors.

4
 Hasset et al.
For Against
Application/Usefulness
● Findings show that socialization is not
the only important factor in the
development of gender specific
behaviors.

● Since there is likely a biological

explanation it can be said that such
gender differences are inevitable. This
also supports the disadvantage that
some careers are also associated with a
certain gender and the opposite sex will
find it harder to be able to succeed.

● There is a need for gender neutral

socialization to enable all individuals to
access all possible opportunities.This
would recognize that gender typed
socialization threatens to widen the
divide between males and females early
in childhood.
Ethics
● One toy was destroyed, could be due to
● The study was approved by the Emory a reflection of distress.
Universal Ethical committee on animal
care and use.
● Housing- Animals received regular and
appropriate food (twice daily monkey
feed plus daily fruit and vegetables
once a day), and had constant access to
water. They were also housed in family
groups, in large enclosures, with access
to both a temperature-controlled
indoor area and an outdoor area.
● Since they were observed through
cameras it wouldn't have been very
distressing and their level of interaction
with the toys suggest less likelihood of
psychological distress or physical pain.
● It is also ethical because they didn't
expose children to hormones or change
their environment for research
purposes. They found an alternative
that is simpler but shows similar
behavior.

5
 Reliability
● Highly standardized- operational ● There is inconsistency in the measures
of ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ play
definition of behaviors to improve which are different for the monkeys
reliability, trials lasted for 25 minutes and for the children. The children were
for all animals. assessed in a different study using
● Inter rater reliability- 2 observers different toys. Further, they were only
analyzed the video tape and worked assessed on duration of play not
together to reach a consensus. frequency. The most significant
● Quantitative data- The study used comparison was between frequency for
quantitative data to collect responses the monkeys and duration for the
which makes our analysis objective children, rather than duration for both.
rather than interpretative. Statistical These inconsistencies make the two
comparisons could be made between studies quite incomparable and our
male and female animals on their results rather unreliable.
choice/preference of toys. ● Children were tested alone while the
monkeys were tested in groups again
leading to the same conclusion as
above.

● The study also had more female

monkeys than males hence the results
may be more applicable to females
than males as well.

Validity
● Plush and wheeled toys were ● The accuracy of the study’s conclusion
counterbalanced between right and left is questionable considering the
locations on each trial. This helps make comparisons were made between
children who were tested alone and
sure that the location of toys does not
monkeys who were tested in groups. It
explain the result. is likely that the female monkeys chose
the plush toys only because they saw
● Eliminated the effect of socialization-
other females touching it and not
Factors such as age and social rank had because they wanted it. This impacts
little effect on the sex differences in toy our causation and hence outcome.
preference.

[*refer to textbook pg#80, under

strengths and weaknesses*]

● Quantitative data- The study used

quantitative data to collect responses
which makes our analysis objective

6
 rather than interpretative. Statistical
comparisons could be made between
male and female animals on their
choice/preference of toys.
● No demand characteristics as our
subjects were animals, so they behaved
naturally and their responses remain
unaffected by bias.
● Ecological validity- Field experiment,
took place in their natural housing
where they were free to interact with
toys or not.
● Behavioral checklist was made and all
behaviors were operationalised with
descriptions prior to the study. this
ensures that both the researchers were
recording the same behaviors in the
same way accurately.

Individual versus
Situational explanation
● Individual – There is a clear role of an ● Situational – This inborn capacity of
individual's biology in shaping sex typed biological sex typed behaviors interact
behaviors. with gender stereotyping within the
framework of society. Both through
cultural expectations and direct
reinforcement and punishment of
‘gender appropriate’ or ‘inappropriate’
behavior and through sheer exposure
to gender stereotypes.

Nature versus Nurture

● Nature – biological effects that were ● Nurture – When it comes to children
likely to be the result of differences in nature and nurture interact to
sex hormones, show an enduring condition a child’s behavior. We saw
influence of nature in the study by that boys have stronger preference for
Hasset. This illustrated that sex wheeled toys than girls do for plush
differences in the human play of boys toys. This can be explained by the fact
and girls, often assumed to be a that, boys choosing girls toys tend to
product of socialization, may not be receive more negative responses than
entirely caused by nurture. girls choosing boys’ toys.This would
reinforce a pre-existing biological
tendency for boys to be more

7
 masculine in their toy choices and for
girls to remain more variable in theirs.

Research Method
● Type- Field experiment.

● IV – gender
● 2 levels – male monkeys, female monkeys

● Design – IMD (either male or female)

● DV – Activities with toys(behavioral checklist)/ gender differences in preference for toys.

● Controls:
o operational definition of behaviors to improve reliability
o trials lasted for 25 minutes for all animals.

● Correlation- Rank of monkey and frequency or duration of activities with each toy.
● Results were compared to results of children from a different study. [IMD comparison]
Way of collecting data
● Observation- 2 video cameras/2 observers, Behavioral checklist was designed and
meanings of each act were operationalised (such as; throw: project into air with hands)

Quantitative and
Qualitative data ● Quantitative data –Frequency of behavior/duration of continuous activities between male
and female and within each sex. Magnitude of preference was also calculated.

Participant sampling ● Participants – 21 male 61 female participants (for analysis only 11 males and 23 females
were used), housed at Yerkes primate research station in the USA. 25 x 25 meter outdoor
area with access to a temperature controlled indoor environment, given monkey feed
twice, additional fruits and vegetables once every day.

8
 HASSET ET AL.

A strength of Hasset’s study is the fact that it collected quantitative data which helped the
researcher make statistical comparisons between different levels of the independent variable. In
this case, statistical comparisons could be made between males and females and between
each geneder’s preference for wheeled or plush toys on the basis of frequency and duration of
interaction with each toy. This comparison helped us conclude that male monkeys have a strong
preference for masculine toys and females are more variable in their toy preferences. Moreover,
the use of quantitative data is objective as numbers are factual/not open to interpretation
therefore increasing the validity of the findings.

This study was also a field experiment which adds to its strength. The study was well
standardized and controlled for. Trials lasted for 25 minutes for all animals and all animals were
given the same set of toys to play with.This in turn increases the study’s reliability as each
participant was treated in the same consistent manner, thereby making sure that results can be
replicated across different participants. Additionally, a behavioral checklist was made and all
behaviors were operationalised with descriptions prior to the study. This ensures that both the
researchers were recording the same behaviors in the same way accurately(inter-rater
reliability). Plush and wheeled toys were counterbalanced between right and left locations on
each trial ensuring that the location of toys does not explain the result.

However, a weakness of the study is that it has issues regarding validity. The results of the
study are inconsistent to some degree firstly because the children were given different toys to
play with compared to monkeys. Children were also only assessed on the basis of duration and
not frequency. Moreover, they were tested separately compared to monkeys who were tested in
groups. It is therefore likely that the female monkeys may have chosen the plush toys only
because they saw other females touching it and not because they wanted it. These
inconsistencies and doubts in the conclusion made by Hasset’s research make the study less
useful and the comparisons less valid.

Another weakness of this study is its issue with generalization. The researchers restricted the
types of toys by only having 2 categories: ‘wheeled’ for masculine and ‘plush’ for feminine toys.
This choice is not varied to the different types of toys that exist that may not fit into either of
these categories well enough. So it still remains unclear how monkeys will react to toys that are
neutral to either gender or don't neatly fit in either moulds. Hence the results cannot be
generalized to all varieties of toy and preferences of species due to the limited choices. If there
were another category the results may have been different.

9
 Dement and
For Against
Kleitman
Application/Usefulness
● This study measures dreams objectively
and helps us see a range of other
factors that affect dreams – like stress,
medicines, or any other environmental
factors.

● These factors influence our dreams and

our sleep cycles. Therefore, this
information along with an EEG can help
diagnose sleep disorders such as
insomnia,nightmares,sleep walking etc.

Ethics
● Privacy – participants were asked to
● Protection from harm(minimizing disclose their dream content which
harm)– participants were being woken they might have not liked to share,
up repeatedly but would fall back particularly with a stranger, but felt
asleep within 5 minutes. The wires of compelled to do so because of the
the electrodes were attached to a single study.
coil allowing for enough movements/
comfort.
● No protection from harm (maximizing
● Confidentiality – maintained by using harm)– they had electrodes attached to
initials. their heads and were made to sleep in
a laboratory – this may have been
uncomfortable. The bell that was used
● Privacy – people tested individually.
to wake participants up could have
startled or shocked them in their sleep ,
this could have led to distress or
annoyance.

● Deception- Participant WD was misled

about the stage of sleep he was woken
in. This too can be distressing for the
participant.

Reliability
● Standardization. Everyone was woken ● Low generalization- Only 9 participants
up in the same way – by a loud bell. in the sample size so cannot replicate
They were all wearing EEG and EOG with more females or children, since

10
 electrodes and the use of such scientific results would differ – dreams are
equipment led to objective and subjective. As these individuals had
consistent results unaffected by the chosen to participate in a study on
researcher’s personal view. Questions dreaming, they may have dreamed
that were asked were the same and the more frequently than the population in
5- and 15-minute categories were also general, remembered their dreams
kept constant. better, or had more visual dreams for
example.
● The definition of ‘dream’ was
operationalised so this ensured that for
something subjective as dream
description, they had an objective
consistent way to be measuring it.

● Test Retest Reliability- The findings of

this study are supported by the
similarity of the results to those of
previous studies.

● Generalization- there may be

differences in the dreaming of men and
women, or between the way they
report their dreams, it was useful in
terms of generalisability that there
were both genders in the sample.
Validity
● Using EEG and EOG for measuring ● Low ecological validity – sleeping in an
dreams which is objective and scientific artificial environment, wearing
equipment leading to accurate electrodes and being woken up several
quantitative data making it valid. times in the middle of their sleep to ask
questions. Not how it happens in real
life. Participants were also asked to not
● Control for caffeine and alcohol intake –
drink coffee or alcohol during the study
no confounding variables due to diet.
time period, so those who did drink
these beverages, it was unlike real life
● Ecological validity – observing as they for them.
sleep and the bell that rang can acted
as an alarm that people use in real life.
● Lack of population validity – low sample
size and gender biased.

11
 ● 5- and 15- minutes duration – valid
because they were decided in a random
order.

● Practice effect did not have an impact

on our results, as none of the
participants became accurate over time
by learning the pattern of awakenings.

● The participants were not told about

their EEG pattern or whether their eyes
were moving, or were given any false
information about this. This helped
eliminate potential demand
characteristics. For example, if the
participant expected to remember
more detailed dreams in REM sleep,
they may have made greater efforts to
do so.

● Definition of dream was operationalized

which improved validity because it
made sure that recollection included
content and not just the impression
that participant had been dreaming.

● Quantitative data- brain waves eye

movement patterns, sleep duration all
provided objective measures of all
aspects of dream and sleep.

Individual versus
Situational explanation
● Individual – age can affect your sleep ● Situational – REM (REM and nREM
cycle, dream length or dream pattern. sleep have different effects/ impacts).

● Sex could also determine the content, ● The environment in which you are
length or pattern of your dream based sleeping in/before you were sleeping
on hormones and chemicals. can also shape your sleep cycle or the
content of your dream.

12
 Nature versus Nurture
● Nature – REM is a natural process. ● Nurture – life events can shape our
Every night that you go to sleep, you sleep cycles and dream content/ recall.
will go into the REM stage. Thus, ability For example: Diet (caffeine/ alcohol
to recall dream in REM and not nREM is controlled) or occupation (stress).
linked with a biological process that
people are born with. Similarly, the
biological processes underlying
emotions are the product of the brain
and of hormones.

Research Method
● Laboratory experiment.

● IV – type of awakening.
● 2 levels – REM, nREM.

● Design – RMD (each person woke in both REM and nREM).

● DV – frequency of dream recall, number of words used to describe their dreams, direction
of eye movement, content of dreams, brain activity (EEG).

● Controls – waking up after either 5 or 15 minutes of sleep and controls for caffeine and
alcohol intake.

Way of collecting data

● Self-reports – interviews (open and closed ended questions).

● Physiological tests (EEG – measuring depth of sleep and EOG – measuring eye movement).

Quantitative and
Qualitative data
● Quantitative data – number of words, frequency of dream recall.

● Qualitative data – content of dream (what they described, eg – shooting basketballs or

tomato fight).

Participant sampling
● Participants – 7 male and 2 female adults, and 5 of them were studied in detail.

13
 DEMENT AND KLEITMAN

A strength of this study is the fact that it collected quantitative data which helped the
researchers make statistical comparisons between different levels of the independent variable.
In this case, Dement and Klietman could compare the number of times dreams were recalled
between REM and N-REM stages. This way, they could clearly tell that dreams were better
recalled during the REM stage of sleep as compared to N-REM. Moreover, the use of
quantitative data is objective as numbers are factual/not open to interpretation therefore
increasing the validity of the findings.

This study was also a laboratory experiment which adds to its strength. The study was well
standardized and controlled for. All participants were woken up using the same bell and were all
made to wear EEG/EOG caps with the same number of electrodes. Furthermore, each and
every participant was asked to abstain from caffeine and alcohol. They were also asked the
exact same questions throughout the procedure of the study to investigate if they were
dreaming or not. This in turn increases the study’s reliability as each participant was treated in
the same consistent manner, thereby making sure that results can be replicated across different
participants.

However, a weakness of the study is that it lacks generalizability. The sample consisted of just
nine participants with the majority being males. This means that the results could not account
for most of the population since it is possible that females and males differ when it comes to the
content of their dreams or their sleep cycles. Furthermore, certain hormones that could affect
sleep and stress could be present in different amounts in males and females. Other factors like
people’s occupation could also impact their sleep cycles based on working day or night shifts at
work, which was not taken into account in this study.

Another weakness of this study is that it is unethical to a certain extent. Firstly, the guideline of
ensuring privacy was broken to a certain extent. Sleeping in an artificial laboratory environment
and being monitored throughout could cause discomfort to people. Likewise, being asked to
reveal the content of dreams could also invade privacy as some people might feel compelled to
answer even though they may not want to disclose their dreams to a stranger. They were also
made to sleep in laboratory environments and were taken away from the comfort of their homes
and beds which could have maximized harm.

14
 Holzel et al.
For Against
Application/Usefulness ● Study found that an MBSR intervention
can successfully increase mindfulness.
As mindfulness is important to ‘self-
referential processing’, for example the
unity of our sense of self and our
physical body, this could offer a way to
help people with temporo-parietal
junction impairments in which this
system can become faulty.
● For individuals learning to perceive the
body as a ‘complete whole’ this may
help to reduce their out-of-body
experiences.
● The areas of cerebellum where changes
caused by the intervention were
identified are important in regulating
emotions and cognition for healthy
psychological functioning, thus
identifying another possible beneficial
role for mindfulness.
Ethics
● Right to withdraw- 2 participants ● Protection from harm(maximizing
exercised this right after the first MRI harm)- All participants were
scan as they found the procedure experiencing stress, identified through
uncomfortable. doctor or self-referral. The participants
● Protection from harm(minimizing allocated to the control group had to
harm)- It was made sure that none of wait for at least 8 weeks before they
the participants had any metal implants could receive assistance. This delay in
to minimize risk of physical harm and it help again risks a failure to protect
was made sure none of them was participants from harm.
claustrophobic either reducing risk of
psychological harm of any kind.
● Valid Consent- was obtained by all
participants in writing and they
received a discounted MBSR course fee.
● The study was approved by the
University of Massachusetts
Institutional Review Board ethical
committee.
Reliability
● Standardization – laboratory ● Generalization- Participants in the
experiment. It was a longitudinal study study were all selected from the
with participants being tested before University of Massachusetts MBSR
and after intervention. Participants took course. This means that they may have
the FFMQ test twice before and after all been from a certain financial and

15
 MBSR to measure different aspects of educational background, meaning less
mindfulness (such as Awareness/ Non representation of other classes or
judging etc.) and to see if there's any backgrounds. Moreover, there were
changes. only 28 (14 each group) participants in
the whole study and the majority were
● Use of MRI scanner- it measures brain females. Men and women differ greatly
structure in a standardized way. same in cognition and introspection so the
for all participants.This objectivity adds results may not be the same if the
to the reliability of the study. study were to be replicated with more
Moreover,it provides quantitative data or equal males or generally with
that is objective in nature and dont greater numbers of participants.Lastly,
need to be interpreted by a researcher. the study is not ecologically valid as it
● Generalization- The study had used MRI scans and was held in a lab
participants of varied ethnicities: setting etc. which also contributes to
Caucasian, Hispanic, African american why it may not apply to everyday life.
etc. so the sample was quite
representative in that aspect.

Validity
● This study was a longitudinal study that ● Lacks ecological validity – the
tested participants before and after the experience in an MRI scanner is noisy
intervention, rather than a cross and confining, features which are
sectional one where there is a greater potentially emotional and therefore
chance of participant variables relevant.
confounding the results. This itself is
● Lacks population validity – The study
evidence for its accuracy.
had 28 (14 in each group) participants,
● Physiological tests –MRI scans were majority of them female, of specific
used in the study to measure the DV. backgrounds etc.
This gave them Quantitative data which
● Social desirability – Participants
enabled them to make statistical
comparisons between pre and post test received an incentive for take part in
levels of grey matter volume and MBSR the study:discounted MBSR course fee;
this may have altered their responses
and control groups.
whilst doing the FFMQ to please the
● Since its a study from the biological researcher by either downplaying their
approach, participants cannot alter responses or exaggerating them(e.g. in
their grey matter volume in response to a question like: “i’m good at finding
demand characteristics, which increases words to describe my feelings” they
the validity of the data collected. deliberately chose to answer: ‘always
true(5)’, even when that may not be
● Use of Quantitative data- There was no true)
need for interpretation as volumes

16
 were recorded objectively through MRI ● We need to be careful when inferring
scanners. Scores on the FFMQ were too much from MRI scans alone as
also measured objectively. there still many unknowns about the
meaning of changes in volume. The
● Control- none of the participants had interpretation of data with respect to
any real experience of being in a neural changes and how this maps onto
meditation programme before the change in thoughts and emotion is
study. Especially in the last 6 months. much less objective.
This made the base level for all
participants quite equal, reducing ● To improve validity of our study, the
chances of participant variables or control group should have attended 7
individual differences. Also, weekly sessions of social contact as
experimental and control group well, which they believe would reduce
participants were same in their their stress, as well as committing
educational background. ongoing time to their wellness for more
accurate comparable results.

[*refer to pg#88 in the textbook under

strengths/weakness for more detail on
the last 2 pointers ]

Individual versus
Situational explanation
● Individual – the individuals part of this ● Situational – Structural changes in the
research were already enrolled in the left hippocampus arise within an 8
MBSR program and although they didn't week period of participation in a
have any sessions they must be mindfulness course.
personally willing to work on their
wellbeing. Their willingness could be ● Since the hippocampus plays a role in
the reason for why we saw such an learning and memory, this suggests
effective change in hippocampal grey that during the MBSR course
matter. participants had learning experiences
that changed the hippocampal grey
matter.

Nature versus Nurture

● Nature – Biological focus on brain ● Nurture – This study demonstrates that
structure. Brain areas responsible for the experience of the MBSR
certain functions are something that we programme changed brain structure.
are born with; localization of brain This is an effect of nurture and shows
function supports nature. that even those structures and
processes that seem highly constrained
by biology can be influenced by
experience.

17
 Research Method
● Laboratory experiment.

● IV: Type of group

o Experimental group-MBSR intervention
o Control group- Only used for comparing scans

● Design – IMD (exposed to only one type of group either Experimental or Control).

● Controls –No ppt’s had prior MBSR training etc, experimental and control group ppts were
same in their educational background.

● DVs – Changes in grey matter concentration assessed through an MRI scan.

Questionnaires to measure five mindfulness scales.

Way of collecting data

● Physiological tests –MRI scans. to measure changes in grey matter pre- to post-
intervention.

● Self-report – FFMQ. scales to measure different aspects of mindfulness:

Observing/Describing/Acting with Awareness/Non-Judging/Non-Reactivity.
Quantitative and
Qualitative data ● Quantitative data – Scores on FFMQ were obtained through five-point likert type scales
based questions. And volumes of grey matter were recorded objectively through MRI
scanners.

Participant sampling
● Participants – 28 participants (provided usable data points on both the questionnaire and
MRI scan; 14 in each group),enrolled in the MBSR programme in University of
Massachusetts,physically and psychologically healthy, limited experience of meditation
classes, 25-55 years of age, varied ethnic backgrounds, got discounted MBSR course fee as
incentive for participation.

18
 HOLZEL ET AL.

A strength of this study is the fact that it collected quantitative data through an MRI scanner
which helped the researchers make statistical comparisons between different levels of the
independent variable. In this case, they could make statistical comparisons between pre- and
post-test levels of grey matter volume and between the MBSR and control groups. This helped
them in concluding that structural changes in the left hippocampus arise within an 8 week period
of the mindfulness course for the experimental group and not the control. Moreover, the use of
quantitative data was also observed with the use of the FFMQ which allowed an objective
analysis on different aspects of mindfulness,such as: awareness. As numbers are factual and
not open to interpretation, this increases the validity of the findings.

This study was also a laboratory experiment which adds to its strength, and was well
standardized and controlled for. Firstly, an MRI scanner was used to measure the DV which
measures participants' grey matter volume in the same manner, none of the participants had
prior experience of MBSR and all of them came from the same educational background. This in
turn increases the study’s reliability as each participant was treated in the same consistent
manner, thereby making sure that results can be replicated across different participants.
Secondly, this was a longitudinal study where by allowing time for the intervention to have an
effect, the researchers were able to observe and conclude for themselves the effect of the
intervention on the grey matter in real time, rather than a cross sectional one where there is a
greater chance of participant variables confounding the results. Also, the control group allowed
a comparison to ensure changes in the DV were not attributable to the passage of time.

However, a weakness of the study is that it lacks generalizability. Participants in the study were
all selected from the University of Massachusetts MBSR course. This means that they may
have all been from a certain financial and educational background, meaning less representation
of other classes or backgrounds. Moreover, there were only 28 participants (14 each group) in
the whole study and the majority were females. Men and women differ greatly in cognition and
introspection so the results may not be the same if the study were to be replicated with more or
equal males or generally with greater numbers of participants. Thus generalization is a major
weakness for this study.

Another weakness of this study is that it was unethical to some extent. Firstly the participants in
the study should be protected from harm. However being in a machine still, for quite some time
may lead to feelings of claustrophobia which is also why 2 participants left the study after the
first MRI scan because they found the procedure to be uncomfortable. Moreover, what further
led to maximization of pain was the fact that ALL participants reported experiencing stress
which was identified through either doctor- or self-referral. The participants in the control group
were greatly inconvenienced as they had to wait for 8 weeks before they could receive
assistance. The delay in help also caused failure to protect participants from harm.

19
 COGNITIVE
APPROACH
Main assumptions of the cognitive approach:
• Information is processed through the same route in all
humans: input – process – output, in a similar way to how
information is processed by a computer.
• People have individual differences in their cognitive
processing such as with attention, language, thinking and
memory. These processes can also help to explain
behaviour and emotion.

20
 Andrade
For Against
Application/Usefulness
● It can be used by teachers to enhance
the attention of students in class.
Doodling, unlike drawing, is an
undemanding task which does not
require deliberate attention by oneself
and therefore is not counterproductive.
This information makes doodling more
effective for students.

● Can be used by people who work in

offices or have boring/ mundane jobs
such as: working in call centers. It'll help
them be more attentive, and get more
work done.

Ethics ● Lacking fully informed consent- they

● Consent – Andrade asked the were given an unexpected test on place
participants if they wished to be a part names.
of this study after they had finished
taking part in another study. Thus, the ● Deception – participants were told they
right to withdraw was also given. did not have to remember anything
from the recording, but they were
given a surprise memory test on it.
● Confidentiality – no individual was
named in the study, and no identifiable
characteristics about them were ● No protection harm (Maximizing
revealed. harm)– the surprise memory test has
the potential to cause distress to some
● Debriefing – Andrade apologized for the participants if they were unable to
deception she caused and explained the remember the names and jog their
procedure before they left the memory.
experiment.

Reliability
● Standardization – the recording, the ● Primary task used to test
rate at which it was played (227 words memory/attention was an auditory
per minute), the volume it was played task. If a different task had been used,
at, the instructions and the test given like a visual one, then results could
were all the same.All these factors differ. Also, boredom levels differ
helped ensure all participants are likely between different people in reality that
to be similarly bored and daydream. can impact daydreaming and

21
 Therefore, the study can be replicated subsequent memory leading to
with consistent findings. inconsistent results. Also the doodling
ranged from 3 to 110 shaded shapes, so
● The operationalization of doodling was there is inconsistency there too which
also standardized, using the doodling
could affect memory.
sheets, otherwise there may have been
individual differences in doodling ● Generalization- All participants were
between participants and some more members of a recruitment panel,
may not have doodled at all. meaning they may share a common
interest in psychology. This could lead
● Participants were varied in age (18-55),
to a biased sample.
so were representative in terms of adult
ages.

Validity

● Lots of controls – control group that ● Lacks ecological validity – they went to
was given a lined paper to write the the laboratory to doodle in pre-printed
names of partygoers. Same level of shapes. Doodling is meant to be
boredom for everyone – after recruiting spontaneous.
them from a different study. Monotony
of the recording, dull room etc. ● Low ecological validity – the recording
made the situation boring on purpose.
● They were deceived so there was less
chance of demand characteristics – they ● Lacks population validity – study was
were told they did not have to gender biased as only 5 males were
remember the list (but debatable used and no children. All came from a
because some participants were recruitment panel, very likely having an
suspicious). interest in psychology thus adding to
the bias.
● Random allocation of participants into
● The number of shapes participants
the control or experimental group
shaded differed ranging from 3 to 110
which decreases participant variables
which shows participant variables.
and chance of bias.
● Participants were also given a small
sum for participation. This incentive
● Quantitative data was collected by
causes room for answers that may have
researchers- number of names,places
been socially desirable. Participants
recalled etc. This is an objective record
may have altered their behavior(for
of memory, that needs no
example by paying more attention to
interpretation and helps in making
the recording) in order to fit their
statistical comparison between scores
perception of the researcher’s
expectations.

22
 of experimental group compare to the
control group.

Individual versus
Situational explanation ● Individual differences – not all the ● Situational – doodling helped the
participants in the doodling group participants perform well in the
doodled at the same pace/rate. Range primary task as compared to
for the number of shapes shaded varied participants in the control group who
from 3-110 shapes. This is a wide range were not doodling. Thus, a situation
and thus shows individual differences in where a dual-task is used is better for
the rate/speed of doodling between performance compared to a situation
different people. with the use of only a single-task.

● People were deliberately made to be

● Everyone also has different memory
bored so the impact of boredom is a
and IQ abilities which could impact their
situational variable.
ability to recall.
Nature versus Nurture
● Nature – cognitive ability, IQ, ● Nurture – the act of doodling helped
attentional ability does have a genetic participants perform better and thus
component to it. could be used to learn how to increase
one’s cognition.

● Life events like triggers, personal

experiences and emotions can impact
our memory/cognitive abilities to recall
things.

Research Method

● Laboratory experiment.

● IV – type of group.
● 2 levels – doodling (experimental) group and control group.
● DV – memory (operationalized by number of correct names of partygoers and places
recalled).

● Design – IMD

● Controls – same lined paper, writing names of partygoers, same instructions, same test,
same recording.

23
 Way of collecting data
● Self-reports – memory test.

Quantitative and
Qualitative data
● Quantitative data – number of correct names of partygoers and places.

Participant sampling

● Participants – 40 members of a participant panel at the Medical Research Council unit for
cognitive research. Age range was 18-55 years. Mainly females.

24
 ANDRADE

A strength of Andrade’s study is the fact that it collected quantitative data which helped the
researcher make statistical comparisons between different levels of the independent variable. In
this case, Andrade could compare the number of monitored (names of party goers) and
incidental (names of places) information recalled between people in the doodling and the control
group. This way, she could clearly tell that doodling did in fact have a positive effect on memory
because participants in the doodling group recalled more information than those in the control
group. Moreover, the use of quantitative data is objective as numbers are factual/not open to
interpretation therefore increasing the validity of the findings.

This study was also a laboratory experiment which adds to its strength. The study was well
standardized and controlled for. Each participant was presented with the same content of the
audio recording (boring conversation over headphones), and it was played at the same rate for
everyone (227 words per minute). Similarly, the instructions given to the doodling group and the
tone of the audio recording were kept constant for all the participants. This in turn increases the
study’s reliability as each participant was treated in the same consistent manner, thereby
making sure that results can be replicated across different participants.

However, a weakness of the study is that it lacks generalizability. The sample consisted of only
40 individuals aged between 18-55 years, most of whom were females and who were part of the
same panel at the Medical Research Council unit. Therefore, the results that were obtained
could not be applied to most men or even children younger than 18 years old. This is
understandable because creativity, memory, and attention could all differ between people of
different genders and ages. For example, older adults have impairments in memory compared
to younger people and thus doodling might act as a source of distraction for them. Also, since all
participants were members of the recruitment panel they share similar characteristics such as:
interest in psychology, which adds to the study not being generalizable to the wider population.

Another weakness of this study is that it is unethical to a certain extent. Firstly, the guideline of
not deceiving participants was broken. This is because participants were told not to remember
any other information apart from noting down the names of party-goers and so were misled to
believe that there won’t be a memory test. However, they were tested on the information they
heard in the audio recording. Additionally, the surprise memory test would have acted as a
source of distress for participants, especially if they could not recall information. This would
make them doubt their memories for the future therefore breaking the guideline of protection
from harm and maximizing it to an extent.

25
 Baron-Cohen et
For Against
al.
Application/Usefulness
● The eyes test could be further
developed to help aid initial diagnosis
of individuals who could be signposted
to appropriate clinical staff to
investigate if there is an underlying
autism spectrum disorder.

● Teachers should be explicit/literal when

teaching concepts to students who
have autism as they might find imagery
and sarcasm difficult to understand
because of deficits in theory of mind.

● Using the findings of this study, it might

be possible to develop a programme to
help teach individuals diagnosed with
ASD to help them develop skills of
interpreting emotions.

Ethics
● Confidentiality – maintained. ● No protection from psychological harm
– asked autistic individuals to identify
the emotions from eyes even though it
● Privacy – Eyes Test administered
is known that they lack theory of mind.
individually in a cubicle.
Could have been triggering/ disturbing
for them since it was stressful. 4
● Valid consent – Autistic group took part
in the study willingly through a
● Findings identifying ‘normal’
newspaper advertisement (volunteer
performance of control groups and
sampling).
‘impaired’ performance of the AS/HFA
● This research has the capacity to group could be seen as representing
provide both an understanding of the neurodiverse groups in a negative way.
nature of the experience of people with
ASD and. Therefore, the potential for
greater understanding in society and
potentially in situations such as school
or the workplace.

Reliability

26
 ● Standardized procedure. ● Sample sizes of groups 1 and 4 were
small. Lack of consistency if results
were to be replicated again because
● Large sample sizes in groups 2 and 3.
only 15 males were tested in the
Therefore, they can get consistent
autistic group, which is not
results.
representative of all individuals with a
diagnosis of AS/HFA.
● Test Retest- The findings of the original
Eyes Test were replicated in the revised
● Difficult to detect subtle individual
Eyes Test (autistic individuals scored
differences using the eyes test – very
less).
narrow margin to do so – will results be
consistent all the time?

Validity
● Matched groups 1 and 4 on IQ and age ● Low ecological validity – static pictures
so differences in their results are not when in real life eyes are dynamic and
explained by age or IQ but by their 3D, they are also not usually observed
theory of mind. in isolation from the rest of the face
and we can also judge from body
language.
● Language barriers minimized because
glossary was given.
● Low population validity – autistic group
● Population validity – sample size for only had 15 males, so cannot generalize
groups 2 and 3 was large. Used them to findings to females with autism as the
validate the Eyes Test before giving it to sample is not generalizable to all
groups 1 and 4. It reflects consensus individuals diagnosed with AS/HFA.
from a large and diverse group.
● Since it was a quasi experiment,
● Revised Eyes Test was more valid than participants could not be randomly
original – greater sensitivity which led allocated which could lead to a
to normal performance being below the confounding variable, as factors other
ceiling of the test. than ASD can cause/explain difference
in scores between control and
experimental groups.
Individual versus
Situational explanation
● Sex differences – females performing ● Situational – autistic individuals can
better than males on the Eyes Test. camouflage their problem by learning
Better empathizers and more compensatory strategies.
emotionally sensitive/reactive.

● Individual differences in theory of mind ● Females scored higher on Eyes Test as

abilities between people who have they are taught to be caregivers who

27
 autism and those who do not have are meant to be more empathetic –
autism - unique traits impacting the stereotypes in society.
ability to understand and judge
emotions.
Nature versus Nurture
● Nature – females performed better in ● Nurture – sex stereotypes. Females
the Eyes Test because they have scored higher on Eyes Test as they are
different hormones (estrogen) which taught to be caregivers who are meant
affect their theory of mind compared to to be more empathetic.
males (testosterone).
● Role of diet, pollutants in the
environment, viruses contracted,
● Autism has a genetic component –
maternal speech,early interactions with
parents of autistic individuals also
siblings could also be linked to autism
scored less.
and research is currently testing these
out.

Research Method
● Laboratory experiment. Can also be considered as a natural/quasi experiment.

● IV – type of group/ condition.

● 2 levels – autism, control group.
● DV – level of theory of mind (operationalized as scores on Eyes Test) and AQ results

● Design – IMD.

● Controls – groups 1 and 4 matched on IQ and age.

Way of collecting data

● Self-reports – questionnaire (closed-ended).

Quantitative and
Qualitative data ● Quantitative data – scores on Eyes Test and AQ.

Participant sampling
● Method – volunteer sampling for group 1 (autistic) and Random sampling for group 4.

● Participants:
o Group 1 – 15 individuals with AS/HFA, mean IQ score of 115 and mean age of 29.7
years.
o Group 2 – adult comparison group selected from adult community and education
classes in Exeter and public library users in Cambridge, mean age of 46.5 years.

28
 o Group 3 – student comparison group from Cambridge University, mean age of
20.8 years.
o Group 4 – 14 IQ matched participants with Group 1, mean age of 28 and mean IQ
score of 116.

BARON-COHEN

A strength of this study is the fact that the researchers collected quantitative data which helped them make
statistical comparisons between different levels of the independent variable. In this case, Baron-Cohen
could compare the scores on the Eyes Test of those in the autism group and those in the control group.
The mean score on the eyes test for the AS/HFA group was lower compared to all the other control groups.
This way, the researchers could clearly tell that an individual with autism lacks a “theory of mind” which
makes the eyes test a sensitive measure of social intelligence. Moreover, the use of quantitative data is
objective as numbers are factual/not open to interpretation therefore increasing the validity of the findings.

This study was also conducted in a laboratory environment which adds to its strength. The study was well
standardized and controlled for any confounding variables. All participants were given the same Eyes Test
which had the same quality of picture, color of picture, options (3 foil and 1 target). They were all tested
individually in a cubicle and all of them were given the same glossary. This increases the study’s reliability
as each participant was treated in the same consistent manner, thereby making sure that results can be
replicated across different participants. By also matching the autistic and control group (number 4) on IQ,
Baron-Cohen et al. made sure that any differences in IQ between groups does not explain differences on
the scores of the eyes test, thereby establishing better causation between the IV (type of group) and DV
(scores on the eyes test) in this study.

However, a weakness of the study is that it lacks generalizability. The autistic group consisted of only 15
men. Therefore, the sample size was low and the results that were obtained cannot be generalized to
females since there are sex differences in the ability to have a theory of mind due. Additionally, only people
who responded to the National Autistic Society Magazine were part of the study, so the sample also lacked
diversity and probably only took into account individuals from the same socio-economic background which
could have skewed the results on the eyes test.

Another weakness of this study is that it collected data using self-reports. Since these were self-
administered, researchers could not take into account fatigue or bias. It is possible that the respondents
displayed social desirability as well or were too tired and randomly selected options to finish the
questionnaires. This is particularly the case with the Autism Spectrum Quotient as people might not have
selected options that truly reflect their personalities but rather what they think the researcher would like to
see. Therefore, this challenges the validity of the results of this study.

29
 Pozzulo et al.
For Against
Application/Usefulness
● The study’s findings indicate that
children would not be as reliable
witnesses as adults in everyday life.

● In a police lineup there is an equal

chance of the perpetrator not being
present in the lineup to begin with.
Children are more erroneous when the
real target is absent, thus increasing
false positives.

● This study also shows that the false

positives are due to social reasons(e.g.
fear of getting into trouble/ feeling the
need to choose etc. ) and not because
children have bad memories. So further
researchers can follow up by
investigating ways to combat social
factors to increase accuracy of witness
identification by children.
Ethics
● Right to Withdraw- given. ● Protection from harm (Maximizing
harm): Since we saw in the study that
● Valid Consent was gained by adults and social factors were more likely to cause
by children After explaining to them in a false positives, children may have been
child friendly way. Also intimidated by researchers who they
parents/guardians of children gave presumed as authority figures and felt
their consent as well. the need to comply. This may have led
● Protection from harm (Minimizing to some level of distress.
harm): Children were settled down and ● Deception- The children were told the
were monitored for any signs of fatigue, study was about TV shows and
anxiety and stress. Also since the computer games while the adults were
children were not victim to actual
told the study was about memory.
crimes they’re risk of harm was
minimized.

● Confidentiality-maintained.

Reliability
● The procedure was extremely ● Generalization- The lineup was not real.
standardized (e.g. content of the video, Instead of humans in real life
color of the video, length of each video, participants were shown photos of
foils, dressing of the experimenters
targets and foils as well as the

30
 etc.) for both the child and the adult. environment was not close to the one
They made sure the experience was as in a judicial system. So there isn't a
identical as it could get for either age certainty that the results we found
group.
would be replicated in a real life setting
hence results cannot be generalized as
differences may be observed.

● Moreover all children came from

private schools. This means that they
were all well learned for their age and
came from financially privileged
backgrounds. Results may be
inconsistent if children from other
various backgrounds are used.

● Validity
● The position of the target or its ● Ecological Validity- the ‘line-up’ was not
matching foil was counterbalanced. real. Therefore the situation must have
● Filler Questions were used for not felt as important to the participants
as it would have done in a real criminal
participants such as: “What did the
case. The emotional experience, for
cartoon look like?” both the children and the adults, would
● Child Friendly Measures- children were therefore have been different from
asked to point to their answer instead being faced with a genuine line-up. This
of writing them down (like adults) is a major weakness as the study is
which is much simpler, increasing the looking at social effects which are
accuracy of their answers. influenced by emotions.
● Quantitative data was collected by
● Demand Characteristics- Though
counting accurate identification or deception usually strengthens internal
rejection of the target. This helped to validity of a study in this study
make statistical comparisons of the however, believing you are in an
condition so we can identify differences experiment about memory may have
caused by IV’s of age and target type. different effects on the dependent
● Lack of Demand Characteristics - variable and recall compared to in an
experiment about television and
Participants were deceived about the
games. The deceived aim could have
real aim of the study. The children were led to inaccurate results.
told the study was about TV shows and ● There were more male children and
computer games while the adults were more female adults. This inequality
told the study was about memory. does make it an unfair comparison as
● All participants were asked to pay sex differences in groups can explain
the result.
attention to the media shown which
helped in making sure they didn't get

31
 distracted and were more accurate
when giving answers.

Individual versus
Situational explanation ● Individual – Difference in accuracy ● Situational – The relatively poor
between children and adults should performance of child witnesses in
have an individual explanation, such as target-absent lineups was due to social
poorer cognitive abilities of children. demands, such as feeling pressured.
Although this is unlikely.
● Children also generally have weaker
attention spans and there is a language
barrier as they may not want to
concentrate or just want to get it done
with. All of this could indicate why they
performed weaker in the target absent
rounds.
Nature versus Nurture
● Nature – Depending on age as well as ● Nurture – Growing up, children are
innate factors people have varying taught to do as they are told by adults.
memories they are born with. This can This makes them feel like they might
impact their identification skills. get into trouble for not complying.
Hence the role of social factors in the
study can be explained by how children
are brought up.
Research Method
● Type- Laboratory experiment.

● 1st IV – Age
2 levels – Children, Adults

● 2nd IV-Line-up Type

2 levels- Identification, Rejection

● 3rd IV- Level of Cognitive Demand

2 levels- Cartoon, Human

● Design:

1st IV – Age: IMD(either child or adult)

2nd IV(Line-up type) and 3rd IV(Level of Cognitive Demand)– RMD
● DV – Whether the participant identified the correct face if present or empty silhouette is
not.

32
 Measure: children pointed, adults responded on a sheet

● Controls – content of the video, color of the video, length of each video, foils, dressing of
the experimenters etc.

Way of collecting data

● Self-reports. Adults responded on a sheet. Children pointed. Experimenters recorded both
of these.
Quantitative and
Qualitative data ● Mostly quantitative data – Accurate identification or rejection.

● Some qualitative data – Filler questions responses were recorded.

Participant sampling

● Participants:
59 child participants. Aged 4 to 7 years old. More males(38) than females(21). Recruited
from Kindergarten classes in 3 private schools in Eastern Ontario, Canada.
53 Adult participants.aged 17 to 30 years old.More females(36) than males(17). Recruited
from the Introductory Psychology Participant Pool in Eastern Ontario, Canada.

33
 POZZULO ET AL.

A strength of Pozzulo’s study is the fact that it collected quantitative data which helped the
researcher make statistical comparisons between different levels of the independent variable. In
this case, Pozzulo wanted to investigate two key differences. First was comparing the difference
between adults and children's accurate identification or rejection of the target. Second was the
comparison of children's identification or rejection accuracy between cartoons and humans.
These numerical ratios helped Pozzulo in concluding that adults were better on most tasks
compared to children and that responses to cartoons were generally more accurate than
humans targets for children. Moreover, the use of quantitative data is objective as numbers are
factual/not open to interpretation therefore increasing the validity of the findings.

This study was also a laboratory experiment which adds to its strength. The study was well
standardized and controlled for any confounding variables. Both the groups(adults and children)
were shown the same 4 videos with the same content for the same duration (6 second clips) in
either categories(human targets and cartoon characters), the color of the video, dressing of
experimenters was also kept the same for all participants. This ensured that extraneous factors
did not effect the DV. Moreover, the position of the target or its matching foil was
counterbalanced, so that the position of the photos did not explain the results either. Hence, this
made our study more valid and causation more believable.

However, a weakness of the study is that it lacks generalizability. The line-up in the study was
not real. It involved photos/videos of cartoon characters instead of human beings in real life.
Since it was a laboratory setting the environment too was different from an actual judicial
system, therefore the situation must have not felt as important to the participants as it would
have done in a real criminal case.The emotions and feelings of participants would be different if
it were a genuine line-up where more is at stake. So the results may not be the same if the
situation were to be replicated in real life, thus the results cannot be generalized to the wider
population’s behavior.

Another weakness of this study is that it is unethical to a certain extent. Firstly, the participants
in the study were deceived about the real aim of the study. The children were told that the study
was about: TV shows and computer games, while the adults were told: The study was about
memory. Additionally, there was also a certain degree of maximizing harm. Since there was
evidence found in the study that social factors are more likely to cause false positives in a line-
up, it can be assumed that exposing children to a line-up can be intimidating for them as they’d
assume the researchers to be authority figures and feel under pressure to answer. This need to
comply can be severely distressing for kids and may have impacted them
psychologically.Therefore, the guideline protection from harm was not followed.

34
 LEARNING
APPROACH
Main assumptions of the learning approach:
• We all begin life as a blank slate. Experiences and
interactions with the environment shape our behaviour and
these changes are directly observable.
• We learn through the processes of operant conditioning,
classical conditioning and social learning. This can be
understood using the stimulus-response model.

35
 Bandura et al.
For Against
Application/Usefulness
● This study is proof that social learning
exists. Parents and teachers can be
informed that their children/ students
should only be exposed to appropriate
environments. For example, violent
video games can be harmful to the
children playing it (they can imitate the
aggression displayed in it).

● Likewise, parents and teachers are role

models for children who learn how to
act from their environments by
observing. Hence they must regulate
their behavior and language in front of
children.

● There was also evidence found that

children are more likely to copy same
sex models so male and female role
models also need to be more vigilant in
care towards children of their sex.

Ethics
● Confidentiality – maintained, their ● No protection from harm(Maximizing
names were not mentioned although harm) – the aggression the children
their nursery was. were exposed to may have disturbed
them mentally. Children in the process
of copying models behavior may have
● Protection from harm (Minimizing
injured themselves with the toys.They
harm)– to an extent. The models were
could also learn how to become
displaying aggression towards non-
aggressive in the future, causing
living, non-threatening objects instead
potential harm. The arousal phase
of human beings.
causes children annoyance, which can
be psychologically distressing.

● Deception – the toys were never

reserved for any of the participants,
even though they were told the
opposite (aggression arousal – phase
2).

36
 ● No valid consent – children cannot give
consent and so did not even have the
right to withdraw or could be
debriefed.

Reliability
● Standardized – all models in aggressive ● Each group had only 6 participants so
and non-aggressive groups were acting small sample size could lead to
identically within their groups. The toys inconsistency in results.
the children were given to play with
were also the same down to their ● Participants had a similar background
placement. The time duration of the (Stanford going) so the results cannot
exposure to the models was also kept be replicated or be consistent with
constant. other types of children from different
● The observation period was divided into socioeconomic backgrounds etc.
time intervals (5 seconds) and the
categories were clearly defined (e.g.
imitative and non imitative behaviors)
for a more consistent evaluation to be
obtained.
● High inter-rater reliability when coding
behaviors during the delayed imitation
part of the study – phase 3, as well as
prior to the experimental phase when
they were matched for their aggression
levels on 4 different measures.
Validity ● The sample lacks population validity –
● Many controls – they were matched on
everyone in the population does not
initial levels of aggression; the toys
study at the Stanford nursery.Only
were placed in the same order for all
children from privileged families took
children. Therefore, differences in the
part in the research.
behavior of the participants were
because of the model and not the
order/variation of the toys. ● Less ecological validity – adults do not
show aggression towards bobo dolls in
real life in the way it was shown in this
● Less demand characteristics since
study but would rather aggress in
children were observed through a one-
different ways.
way mirror (they did not know that they
were being observed, so they acted
naturally).

37
 ● No researcher bias – the observers
were blind observers, hence the data
collected was objective.

● Quantitative data was collected which

provided an objective record of actions
performed in each category. Helps in
making statistical comparisons between
behaviors of children in the aggressive
group vs children in non aggressive and
control groups.

Individual versus
Situational explanation
● Individual – sex differences. Males were ● Situational – the model. Depending on
more likely to show aggression than how the model behaved, the
females because of how different they participants learnt to imitate them. This
are rewarded for sex-typed behaviors. is the basic idea of social learning
(page. 145 textbook) theory.

Nature versus Nurture

● Nature – sex differences. Males were ● Nurture – social learning theory.
more likely to show aggression than Depending on how the model behaved,
females. This could be because of the participants learnt to imitate them.
underlying differences in hormones that The model is the environment children
influence brain development. Males are learning from.
have greater quantities of the hormone
testosterone compared to females
● Sex stereotypes – males are taught to
which could make them more
be more aggressive. For example, male
aggressive.
children played with guns while female
● Additionally, greater the testosterone children played with tea-sets, as they
or hormonal differences between boys, learnt this was more “appropriate”.
the more aggressive they may be
compared to other boys and hence ● Comments made by children like ‘lady-
there are individual differences even like’, etc. also portray sex stereotypes
between boys. that are learned from the environment.

Research Method
● Laboratory experiment.

● First IV – type of model.

o 3 levels – aggressive, non-aggressive, control.
● Second IV – sex of model.
o 2 levels – male, female.

38
 ● Third IV – sex of participant.
o 2 levels – male, female.
● DV – aggression levels (operationalized by behaviors observed, etc)

● Design – IMD: exposed to only one type of model or no model. Do not get surprised if the
examiner refers to it as a MPD too since children were matched on initial levels of
aggression.

● Controls – matched on initial levels of aggression, toy placement,observed through a one-

way mirror,blind observers.

Way of collecting data

● Structured observation – pre-determined set of behaviors (e.g. imitative verbal
aggression, imitation of physical aggression etc.). Covert in nature – one-way mirror. Time
sampling – every 5 seconds.

Quantitative and
Qualitative data ● Qualitative data – comments children were making (“Sock Him”, “Pow” etc.).

● Quantitative data – number of times that they punched the bobo doll, number of times
that they sat on the bobo doll, etc.

Participant sampling

● Participants – 72 children (aged 3-6 years), 36 boys and 36 girls obtained from Stanford
University nursery school.

39
 BANDURA

One weakness of the study by Bandura et al. is that it is unethical to a certain extent. It is not
possible to get consent from children and thus the participants in this study did not have the
right to withdraw as they were oblivious that they were taking part in a study on aggressive/non-
aggressive behaviors. Moreover, the children could have been harmed during the mild
aggressive arousal phase and were exposed to aggressive acts thus enabling them to act in an
aggressive manner in the future. Also watching the model do aggressive acts alone could have
been distressing for children. This means that they were not being protected from potential
harm, thus maximizing it.

Another weakness of the study is that it cannot be generalized since it used children as a
sample. The sample of children were recruited from the Stanford University Nursery and thus
can be said to belong to a privileged/educated segment of the society. Therefore, these children
might have been trained by their parents in a different way compared to children going to other
nurseries or belonging from rural areas. Consequently, the levels of aggression displayed by
this group may not accurately reflect behaviors and learning in other typically developing
children. Moreover, only six children were used in each of the experimental groups and that is
too narrow/less a sample size to accurately make judgements from.

An advantage of the study was that it collected quantitative data which enabled the researchers
to make statistical comparisons between different conditions. For example, the researchers
could compare the level of physical aggression displayed by boys and girls thus enabling them
to conclude that boys tend to be more physically aggressive than girls. Also, since quantitative
data is objective, the observers recording the data did not have to make any interpretations
about the data thereby increasing the validity of the data collection technique.

This study was also a laboratory experiment which adds to its strength.It was well standardized
and controlled for any confounding variables. All models in the aggressive and non aggressive
groups were acting in the same manner, the toys were placed in the same way, exposure to
models was the same for each child duration wise,high inter-rater reliability was found when
coding behaviors during the delayed imitation part of the study. This increases the study’s
reliability as each participant was treated in the same consistent manner, thereby making sure
that results can be replicated across different participants. Moreover, the children were all
matched on their initial levels of aggression .Therefore, differences in the behavior of the
participants were because of the model and not their personal levels of aggressive tendencies
or the order/variation of the toys. These controls confirm both the validity and reliability of
Bandura’s study.

40
 Saavedra and
For Against
Silverman
Application/Usefulness
● Phobias should be conceptualized as a
form of evaluative learning – new
treatment of phobias if using children

● Can give them rewards for facing their

fears to motivate them as it increases
the frequency of desired behavior, in
this case, handling buttons.

● Psychologists can target disgust to

challenge thoughts of patients about
their phobias – disgust imagery
exposure is useful in reducing phobic
symptoms for the long term.

Ethics
● Valid consent – mother and child gave ● No protection from harm(Maximizing
valid consent to participate. The harm) – behavioral exposure could
mother even gave written consent to have caused the child a lot of distress
the researchers, allowing them to as his distress ratings rose throughout
publish the results of the study. the intervention (pg142: Fig.4.7).

● Confidentiality – maintained. Their

● Privacy – could have been invaded
names remained anonymous.
when researchers asked questions
about disgust and fear related to
buttons. The child was also interviewed
regarding past trauma/abuse when
inquiring the cause of phobia. Child
would have felt compelled to answer.

Reliability ● Test-retest reliability – followed up with

● Replication of a case study is not
the same participant multiple times.
possible since there was only one
Even 6 months a one year after therapy
participant with a unique case.
finished to see consistency in results
Therefore, we cannot get consistent
over time.
results if we investigate different age
● Standardized measures were used such
groups, genders, types of phobias, etc.
as: Feelings Thermometer before,
Hence, results cannot be generalized.
during, and after therapy.

41
 Validity
● Participant diagnosed with DSM-IV ● Demand characteristics – possible that
criteria – it is a well-established and mother or child changed/faked
valid tool. symptoms intentionally because they
were not deceived. They knew the aim
● No room for interpretation with feelings of the study and so could be acting
thermometer (quantitative data/highly accordingly to show progress even if
objective) – makes it accurate and valid. there was not any made.

● Followed-up with him multiple times so ● Language barriers – it was difficult for
received detailed data and were the child to describe how he felt
assured that the treatment accurately disgusted about buttons in detail
worked. because of his age.

● Child was rewarded by the mother ● Lacks population validity – only one
during behavioral exposure. Mothers do participant so cannot generalize.
give rewards in real life to their
children, so the study has high ● Researcher bias may have
ecological validity. compromised validity because the child
and researchers were working so
● Triangulation: different techniques closely together to build rapport and so
were used to collect accurate data such there's a higher risk the researcher had
as interviews, self reports etc, to a subjective outlook instead of an
validate similar conclusions. objective one.

Individual versus
Situational explanation
● Individual – the participant is unique ● Situational – the negative encounter in
because not everyone who has kindergarten that triggered his phobia
encounters with buttons will develop a was a situation that caused his
button phobia or a feeling of disgust behavior (avoidance of buttons).
towards them. It is a case study, so it
adds to its uniqueness. Age, gender,
personality could all be unique
characteristics that can explain the
prevalence of phobias.

Nature versus Nurture

● Nature – phobias can be genetically ● Nurture – the negative encounter in
inherited. One can be born susceptible kindergarten that triggered his phobia
to it. was a situation that made him learn to
feel disgust towards buttons, via
classical conditioning. Phobias are a
learned phenomenon.

42
 Research Method
● Case study. In-depth analysis on one male participant. Follow-up – after 6 and 12 months.

Way of collecting data

● Self-reports – closed ended questions (feelings thermometer – rate distress from 1 to 8).

● Interviews conducted with mother and child.

Quantitative and
Qualitative data ● Quantitative data – feelings thermometer (rate distress from 1 to 8).

● Qualitative data – how they described his thoughts when asked to imagine buttons falling
on him.

Participant sampling

● Participant – 9-year-old Hispanic American boy.

43
 SAAVEDRA AND SILVERMAN

A strength of this study is the fact that it collected quantitative data which helped the researcher
make statistical comparisons. In this case, Saavedra and Silverman could compare the scores
on the feelings thermometer to measure the boy’s distress ratings and compare it over time to
see how he was feeling. For example, these ratings decreased from 8 to 5 to 3 when he was
told to imagine hundreds of buttons falling on him. This way, they could clearly tell that exposure
therapy was effective in reducing the disgust and distress he had associated with buttons.
Moreover, the use of quantitative data is objective as numbers are factual/not open to
interpretation therefore increasing the validity of the findings.

Another strength of this study is that it followed many ethical guidelines. The boy and his mother
gave informed consent and were well-aware of the aim of the study which was to investigate the
boy’s phobia of buttons and treat it. The mother also gave written consent to the researchers for
publishing their findings, so no deception occurred. Furthermore, throughout the course of this
study, the researchers helped the boy to overcome his phobia which protected him from
psychological harm. Therefore, this study can be deemed as ethical.

However, a weakness of this study is that it cannot be generalised since it used a case study to
investigate phobias. The sample consisted of only one male (since such studies only include
one participant) and he was a Hispanic American and only 9 years old with a specific phobia of
buttons. The results of this study cannot be applied to older people, females, people of other
ethnicities or even those with other types of phobias. This is because not everyone will have the
same phobias or even the same levels of imagination (disgust). Similarly, sex or ethnic
differences could also exist in the prevalence and intensity of anxiety disorders.

Another weakness of this study is that it lacks validity. Since the participant was informed about
the aim of the study, there may have been demand characteristics. The boy and his mother may
have exaggerated symptoms or even knowingly given lower ratings in the end to deem the
therapies administered as useful. Hence, bias could have been involved making the results lack
validity. Similarly, there could have been language barriers because of using children as
participants and so miscommunications or misinterpretations could have occurred. It is possible
that the boy did not clearly understand how the feelings thermometer worked – which would
really hamper the validity of the findings. Also there is a chance researcher bias may have
compromised validity because the child and researchers were working so closely together to
build rapport and so there's a higher risk the researcher had a subjective outlook.

44
 Fagen et al.
For Against
Application/Usefulness
● Researchers were able to find a more
ethical way of training elephants that
included rewards instead of
punishments or intimidation, ensuring
positive reinforcement can help get
desired results with
elephants(especially the young ones).
● Researchers were also successful in
producing usable trunk wash samples
that can help with early diagnosis and
treatment of Tuberculosis of elephants.
This will also prevent a disease that is
transmissible between both animals
and humans to spread.
● These learning techniques also enhance
captive animal welfare and safety of
those working with animals.

Ethics ● Protection from harm (Minimizing ● Very little harm (Maximizing harm).
harm). Negative reinforcement was Adult elephants had trunk weakness
abstained from during the training and foot abscess during the duration of
process. They were even desensitized
the study and training may have been
to the fear of syringe, prior to the ‘trunk
here’ part. more difficult or distressing because of
● Housing. Elephants were allowed to it, so the procedure maximized harm in
graze freely (even when chained had 6- some ways.
8 feet room to move around), fed
adequately (nutritional
supplements/access to river water),
allowed to socialize.
● Rewards. Primary reinforcer during the
SPR training was a banana.
● Mahouts were present during training
for safety purposes in case of any
problems or distress.
● Number. Only 5 female elephants (4
juvenile, 1 adult).
● For the purposes of research, already
captivated elephants were used rather
than capturing new ones.
● Right to withdraw. Elephants could
choose not to engage by turning or
walking away from the trainer.
Reliability

45
 ● The study was a controlled observation ● The study used a small group of female
which can be easily replicated using the elephants, this makes it harder to
same observation schedule in the generalize the results to the larger
future.
population. Most of them were young,
● A criteria was set for what qualifies as a
“pass” or “fail” which was applicable to belonged to 1 stable,obedient,none
all elephants in the same manner were pregnant which makes the result
making the evaluation process harder to be replicated in the future.
consistent. ● Training sessions were flexible to suit
● Standardization: same 5 behavioral the mood of each animal(such as time
tasks and methods of training, mahouts spent training varied based on the
were present for all elephants, offered
elephant). Meaning if the study were to
drinks before training session.
be replicated it is likely that the
experience of trainers and
condition/personalities of elephants
could affect the results.

Validity
● To avoid demand characteristics: ● Only five female elephants – low
mahouts were present, but were always population validity. Not reflective of
looking to the side and never speaking the general population. They were all
to the elephants directly. Moreover, the docile, mostly young etc, findings may
verbal cues had no meaning in English not be accurate because there’s not
or Nepali as to avoid it having any enough representation available.
meaning to the mahout or elephant.
● Low controls for distractions: The
● Ecological validity. They were all housed presence of tourists and other
in an elephant stable, the same one elephants (such as the baby calf
they were born in or lived at, so the interruption) may have affected the
environment was not novel or artificial
elephants concentration or willingness
to any of them. to participate.
● None of the animals had previous SPR
training. Meaning none was
experienced more than the other. This
is an important control as the baseline
was the same for each of them.

● Collected Quantitative data(responses

to the verbal cues or offers) which helps
us make an objective assessment of
whether SPR was successful. Makes
statistical comparisons possible pre to
post training.

46
 Individual versus
Situational explanation
● Individual differences were found in the ● Situational - 4 out of 5 elephants were
study as there was 1 adult elephant able to successfully change their
who was unable to pass the SPR testing behavior due to the SPR training
procedure. This indicates that factors procedure used by their mahouts or
such as age and personality of an trainers.
elephant can affect their ability to learn
new behaviors such as trunk washing.

Nature versus Nurture

● Nature – Positive reinforcement was ● Nurture – Training by researchers
unable to shape the adult elephant’s shaped elephants behavior through
behavior despite the training, meaning rewards,they were able to show trunk
there was a decline in her natural ability washing as a learned behavior.
to learn as she aged, or a natural
personality difference,trunk weakness,
or vision problems.

Research Method
● Controlled/Structured Observation using a behavioral checklist.

Way of collecting data

● Behavioral Checklist to record the elephant's responses as a percentage pass(80%).

Quantitative and
Qualitative data ● Quantitative data – noting the number of correct behavioral responses to cues/offers.

Participant sampling
● Participants – 5 elephants. 4 juveniles (age 5 to 7 years) 1 adult (50s),housed in the same
stable in Nepal. Docile,not pregnant or looking after calves. No previous SPR training.

47
 FAGEN ET AL.

The study by Fagen can be rated as high in validity due to the amount of controls that were
administered by the researcher. To avoid demand characteristics mahouts were present but
were always looking away and never speaking to the elephants. Moreover, the verbal cues had
no meaning in English or Nepali as to avoid it having any meaning to the mahout or elephant.
This made sure that any deliberate or intentional cues by the mahouts did not explain the result.
The study ensured that none of the animals had previous SPR training, which made neither one
more experienced than the other. This was an important baseline control. The study was also
ecologically valid. All elephants were housed in the same stable they were born or lived in so
the environment too was accurate to their natural habitat. All these controls helped the study in
terms of its validity, thus verifying causation.

Another advantage is that the study used quantitative data to collect the animals' responses.
This was beneficial for many reasons.Using quantitative data enabled the researcher to make
statistical comparisons between pre to post intervention behavior of elephants by recording the
total number of responses each time the elephant was given a ‘cue’ or ‘offer’ to conclude if the
elephant passed the behavioral sequence(score: 80% or above). This helped us make an
objective assessment of whether the SPR was successful. Consequently, the elephant's
responses were easier to interpret and were not open to interpretation, making the results more
valid.

However, the study by Fagen also had some weaknesses. Firstly, problems with generalization.
The study only consisted of 5 elephants- 4 of whom were juvenile. These were young docile
animals, none who were pregnant or looking after a calf. The results therefore are restricted in
terms of making generalizations to the wider population of elephants of different ages and sex,
as these results may not be replicable. Male or older elephants may have been more stubborn
in learning new behaviors making the outcome less successful. Hence, the wider elephant
population may not benefit from the findings of this study.

Another weakness of this study is that it is unethical to a certain extent. Firstly, there is evidence
in the study of maximizing harm to some degree. The older elephant had some visual
impairment which made her an unhealthy participant. She also suffered from trunk weakness,
was reportedly distracted and had foot abscess during the duration of the study. This very likely
meant that she may have suffered through distress or discomfort during the study and was
probably why she failed the behavioral exam. Hence, the participants' health was overlooked in
the study to a certain extent, making the study unethical by some measure.

48
 SOCIAL
APPROACH
Main assumptions of the social approach:
• Behaviour, cognitions and emotions are influenced by
social contexts, social environments and groups.
• Behaviour, cognitions and emotions are influenced by
the actual, implied or imagined presence of others.

49
 Milgram
For Against
Application/Usefulness
● A good reminder for those who are in
authority. Prods – use a stern voice.
Army men have their khaki uniform
with badges (medals) which are a
symbol of power/ authority. Help
people to be more authoritative
(through their dressing).

● Authority can lead to destructive

consequences. This study not only
creates awareness about this, but
policies to encourage reporting about
authoritative figures have been
developed in workplaces, hospitals, etc.

● What makes this study useful is also the

fact that previously it was believed that
acts of destructive obedience had an
individual explanation(e.g. “Germans
are different” hypothesis). Now
however findings have now shown
situational factors can elicit similar
behaviors(e.g. legitimacy of authority).

● Also indicates that people can be

extremely submissive and be coerced
into doing something dangerous even
when they feel uncomfortable doing it
when faced by authority, so influence of
power should be used wisely.

Ethics
● Valid Consent – people volunteered to ● Deception in various ways – the
take part in the study and went to Yale. participants were told that the study
was on learning and memory. They
● Confidentiality – maintained, no names thought everyone had an equal chance
were mentioned. of being a teacher or learner, but it was
rigged. They were also introduced to
● Protection from harm(Minimizing harm) the stooge and not told that they were
– friendly reconciliation between the part of the researcher’s team. They

50
 teacher and learner to destress the were also made to believe that the
participants. This can also be shocks they administered were real.
considered an act of debriefing – they
were told about the study at the end, ● No right to withdraw – the verbal prods
and were assured that they had not encouraged them to keep on going
done any real harm. Since no actual they must have felt obligated to
electric shocks were registered, there register shocks till the end.
was also minimizing physical pain.
● No protection from harm(Maximizing
● Right to withdraw – 14/40 participants harm) – participants went through
withdrew from the study. They even did extreme distress and were sweating,
so after the fourth prod was used. stuttering, trembling and some even
had seizures. There is also potential for
lasting negative consequences to the
participants, who may have felt
distressed by their own behavior.

● In some ways this research can be

considered harmful to the reputation of
psychology and lead to distrust by the
general public who may not want to
take part in future research.

Reliability
● Standardized – laboratory experiment. ● The sample was gender biased – cannot
The stooge behaved the same way each replicate with females and get same
time, the prods and the sequencing (3 results because males and females may
wrong and 1 correct answer) were the have different obedience levels. All the
same every time. All participants were men also came from the same
told that they had to use the word-pair area(New Haven) so there may be a
task. Replicated in some way for every cultural bias. Consequently, high
person. Even the experimenter’s use of obedience levels observed in this study
prods had the same content and were may not be replicable with different
delivered in the same order for samples.
everyone.

● Test Retest-Milgram's study has been

replicated many times. With more
variables like money (without), etc.

● Milgram selected participants of various

ages,professions and backgrounds and

51
 the results were consistent throughout
these differences.

Validity
● Participants were deceived so there was ● Lacks ecological validity- in real life, we
a lack of demand characteristics which do not shock people for such a minor
made the study more valid. They mistake. For such mistakes people are
thought the study was on learning and usually just scolded or given more work
memory. to revise.

● They were covertly observed through a ● Also lacks ecological validity because in
one-way mirror which further real life word-pair tasks are not used by
decreased the likelihood of demand 40 year olds to learn, we usually learn
characteristics. something with more logic or practical
use.
● Face validity-The participants genuinely
believed that they were administering ● Lack of population validity – same point
real shocks (shown by self-reports and as discussed above - only consisted of
sample shocks) which made the results males, no females.
more valid. The shock generator was
designed perfectly to look like a real
one which adds to the perceived
legitimacy of the study for the
participants.

● It was a controlled observation meaning

extraneous variables could easily be
controlled such as the age and
appearance of the actor playing the
stooge.

● Quantitative record of obedience was

measured (i.e. voltage of shocks
delivered). This makes it easy to
compare the results of participants
about the overall amount of destructive
obedience seen in the study.

● Triangulation: different techniques

were used to collect accurate data such
as interviews, self reports etc, to
validate similar conclusions about
participants behavior.

52
 Individual versus
Situational explanation
● Individual – not everyone went till the ● Situational – location. Yale University is
maximum shock level (26/40 were a professional academic environment
obedient and shocked all the way, 14 and very prestigious. When the study
had more empathy and did not shock was replicated elsewhere the results
till the maximum level) despite the differed.
incessant verbal prods.
● Money could have been an incentive to
● Everyone copes differently – some were obey and comply.
okay while others laughed nervously,
trembled, and even had seizures. This ● The prods and legitimacy of authority
could reflect differences in personality encouraged the participants to deliver
and coping strategies in stressful shocks.
situations.

Nature versus Nurture

● Nature – administering shocks is an act ● Nurture – obedience can be a learned
of aggression. Males have more behavior. We are taught since
testosterone compared to females and childhood who to respect and how to
so are more aggressive and listen to authority, as well as not cause
authoritative. They are born with these harm to others. Also men generally in
hormones. society are expected and even
rewarded to be aggressive(sex-typed
behavior) for a cause.

Research Method
● Laboratory experiment.
● IV – prods (intensity – starting with polite request).
● 4 levels – prod 1, prod 2, prod 3, prod 4.
● Design: not clear but elements of RMD (everyone exposed to all the prods).
● DV – obedience (operationalized by number of shock levels administered).

● Controls – allocation of roles, stooge, and sequence of prods same for all.

Way of collecting data

● Covert observation – one-way mirror.

● Self-reports – quantitative data (14-point scale on how painful the shocks were) and
qualitative data (open-ended questions on thoughts about the study after they were
debriefed).

53
 Quantitative and
Qualitative data ● Quantitative data – shock levels and 14-point scale.

● Qualitative data – open-ended questions on thoughts about the study after they were
debriefed, their comments.

Participant sampling
● Method – volunteer sampling (newspaper advertisement, $4.50 money as an incentive).

● Participants – 40 men between 20 and 50 years of age from the New Haven area in the
USA. The men came from a range of different backgrounds and occupations. Subjects
were unskilled workers, white collar workers and professionals. Subjects ranged also in
educational levels.

54
 MILGRAM

A strength of Milgram’s study is the fact that it collected both quantitative and qualitative data.
The quantitative data collected helped the researcher make statistical comparisons between
different levels/numbers of shocks that different people administered. Specifically, it helped him
to compare the number of people who were obedient (max shock levels administered) and
those who were not obedient (stopped before the max shock level) to understand the effect of
an authoritative figure on obedience. Additionally, qualitative data helped to provide in-depth
data about people’s experiences/behaviors. In this study, Milgram could observe the signs of
nervousness of the participants – them sweating, groaning or getting seizures and note down
their comments. This provided additional details that helped researchers understand their
subjective experience of feeling pressure that authoritative figures can put on individuals, which
made the data collected more valid.

This study was also a laboratory experiment which adds to its strength. The study was well
standardized and controlled for. The stooge used in the study in the form of a learner was acting
in the same way for all participants like showing verbal protests at the 300 volt level and giving
approximately three wrong answers to one right answer. The authoritative figure (experimenter)
also gave standardized feedback to all participants like the prods which were also used in the
same order for everyone. The allocation of teacher-learner was also done through rigging, so
each participant was put in an identical condition – of the teacher. This, then, increased the
study’s reliability as each participant was treated in the same consistent manner, thereby
making sure that results can be replicated across different participants.

However, a weakness of the study is that it lacks generalizability. The sample consisted of all
males from the New Haven and surrounding area which means that there was no inclusion of
women or people from diverse locations. This means the findings cannot be applied to such
individuals because it is possible that males might be more aggressive, and females might be
more empathetic. Consequently, females would not have administered shocks to such high
voltages because of hormonal differences, which would have changed the course of the study’s
findings. The age range of the sample was also very narrow so the results cannot be
generalized to young children or very old people who may differ in levels of obedience and
aggression.

Another weakness of this study is that it is unethical to a certain extent. Firstly, the guideline of
not deceiving participants was broken in several ways. People thought that the study was about
investigating the effects of punishment on learning and memory but in reality it was about the
effect of an authoritative figure on levels of obedience. Likewise, people were also deceived
because they thought they were divided into their role (of a teacher) randomly through lots but in
reality that process was rigged. Moreover, participants were also harmed – they were seen to
be sweating, shaking or groaning and one participant even went into a violent seizure,
presumably from the stress of the procedure which is unethical.

55
 Piliavin et al.
For Against
Application/Usefulness
● If we know how people behave in
emergencies, we can use this
information and predict behavior and
have police or ambulances act
accordingly. For example, we can apply
the cost-reward analysis to understand
when people may or may not help
(race, sex, etc.). We can also create an
environment where people can easily
get help – more visual cues lead to
greater helping.

● The study also shows that a person in

need may be more likely to get help
from a stranger if they don't risk
embarrassing, intimidating or disgusting
them. Also people are more willing to
offer help where the situation is such
that they just can't walk past(i.e. close
proximity etc).

Ethics
● Right to withdraw – the participants ● No valid consent – none of the
could have moved from the critical area participants knew that they were being
to the adjacent area. observed for a research study.

● Protection from harm (Minimizing ● No right to withdraw – the train was a

harm) – to an extent. The drunk victim non-stop ride, so participants were
was not showing dangerous behavior stuck in an uncomfortable situation
(there was not so much fear or disgust). with nowhere to go.

● Confidentiality – to an extent, no ● Deception – there was no actual

individual was named. We only know emergency – the victim was a stooge
the trains they used. but the participants believed that the
victim had genuinely collapsed and
needed help.

● No debriefing – once the train finally

halted the passengers left and so did
the research team. They were not

56
 informed about the research or that
they were being observed.

● No protection from harm (Maximizing

harm)- Some participants felt
intimidated by the acts of the stooge
and some also felt guilty for not being
able to help (e.g. females saying “I wish
I could help him- I’m not strong
enough”)or had concern about the
victims actual well being.

Reliability
● Standardized procedure. The stooge ● What if the same person on the train
behaved the same way and had the observed the same emergency multiple
same appearance within each condition times? They may have suspected the
– drunk and ill. Same time duration of emergency to be a set up and would
the ride (7.5 minutes) for all 103 have altered the actions causing
trials(test retest reliability, as the same inconsistency in the study’s findings
procedure was conducted multiple and increased demand characteristics.
times with different participants each
time). ● Low Generalization- All participants
were from New York so the results
● 4450 people participated in this study don't help us in predicting bystander
who were of mixed genders and
behavior in other countries or outside
ethnicities. This makes our sample more of subways.
representative and study more
generalizable.

● 2 female observers sat in the adjacent

area to record helping behavior and
passengers’ comments. Since there
were two of them the results are more
likely consistent.

Validity
● Ecologically valid – field experiment. ● Lack of controls: Since it was a field
Took place on an actual subway that experiment as well as an IMD, there is
people take in real life. Since these less control over extraneous or
participant variables such as: train
participants were wholly unaware of
delays/weather conditions etc. that
the study, they behaved naturally. The could affect participants behavior(i.e.
emergency they created is also true to make them less or more likely to help).
real life as they do occur in subways.

57
 ● Covert observation so less demand ● What if the same person (on the train)
characteristics, making the responses observed the same emergency multiple
more valid. times? They may have suspected the
emergency to be a set up and would
● Controls – victims were dressed have altered the actions causing
identically/same male stooge in each inaccuracy in the study’s findings and
trial(ill or drunk)/same display of increasing demand characteristics.
behavior etc.
● Low ecological validity – no threat to
● Population validity – large and diverse the helper for helping as the drunk was
sample(4450 ppt’s) within 103 trials. passive. Victims were only males, when
in real life they can be females too.
● Both Quantitative(no.of helpers/how
long it took them to help) and
Qualitative data(remarks and
movements of passengers) was
recorded adding to the objectivity of
the study as well as giving us more in
depth data regarding thoughts and
feelings of the bystanders’ behavior.

Individual versus
Situational explanation
● Individual – some females said they ● Situational – ill or drunk condition. The
wished they could help but they were context mattered in the amount of help
not strong enough while males felt each of them got (less helping occurred
strong enough. Sex differences in due to disgust). Similar case for same
helping behavior. race helping, but only in the drunk
condition.
● Some females also made comments like
● Model’s presence also impacted
“it's for men to help him” suggesting a
helping behaviors. If the model was
sex stereotype when it comes to
early to help, more people stepped in
helping behaviors.
compared to when the model was late.

● People with different personalities (e.g.

varying levels of empathy) can be
helpful or not. These participant
variables could have explained helping
in the study.

● individual’s personal feelings(disgusted,

sympathetic,courage, aversion etc.) also
came in the way of their helping.

58
 Nature versus Nurture
● Nature – the adrenaline rush/ arousal ● Nurture – modeling effects. Learn from
one feels in an emergency is biological. the model (if they help, participants
Stress hormones, etc. There might be also help).
gender or age differences in the level of
arousal experienced. ● Same race helping – people learning
racial stereotypes or racial solidarity.

Research Method
● Field experiment.

● First IV – type of victim.

o 2 levels – ill or drunk.
● Second IV – race of victim.
o 2 levels – black or white.
● Third IV – modelling effects.
o 2 levels – present or absent. If present could come from the critical or adjacent
area – early or late.
● DV – frequency of help, latency of help, sex of helper, race of helper, comments being
made, etc.

● Design – IMD (each participant only witnessed one emergency condition).

● Controls – same dressing within the ill and drunk condition of stooges.

Way of collecting data

● Covert observation – 2 female observers (but observed/coded different behaviors).
● Structured – predetermined set of behaviors.

● Primarily observing but also asked participants questions and noted their comments.
Quantitative and
Qualitative data ● Quantitative data – frequency of help, latency of helper, race of helper, sex of helper.

● Qualitative data – noted comments, elicited comments.

Participant sampling
● Method – opportunity sampling (already present in the subway).

● Participants – Passengers traveling on an underground service between Harlem and the

Bronx weekdays between 11am and 3pm. Estimated 4450 people, 45% black and 55%
white. Mean number of passengers per carriage was 43.

59
 PILIAVIN

One advantage of the study by Piliavin was that it was conducted as a field experiment which
increased its ecological validity. For example, the study was conducted on a subway line in New
York City and staging the emergency on a train made participants believe in the reality of the
emergency. Emergencies like a drunk or ill victim falling do occur on a train and that is what the
researchers showed. Moreover, because it was a field experiment, participants were also
unaware about their participation in the study, since they were covertly observed by the two
female observers, thereby decreasing demand characteristics and increasing validity.
Another advantage of the study was that it collected quantitative data which enabled the
researchers to make statistical comparisons between different conditions. For example, the
researchers could compare the mean and median frequencies of helping that occurred between
the ill and the drunk victim which enabled them to conclude that the ill victim received more help
compared to the drunk victim. Also, since quantitative data is objective, the observers recording
the data did not have to make any interpretations about the data thereby increasing the validity
of the data collection technique.
However, one weakness of the study by Piliavin is that it was unethical. Firstly, since the
participants were covertly observed in the study, they did not have informed consent as they
were not aware that their helping behaviors and comments were being recorded for a
psychological study. Secondly, the participants were also deceived because there was no real
emergency on the train since the victim was faking emergencies. However, the victim’s act was
interpreted as a ‘true’ emergency by the participants. Harm to participants was also maximized
to a certain degree. Quite a few participants reported saying they felt guilty for not being able to
help, especially women as the victims were male and intimidating in some cases.Thus their
general well being was compromised.
Another weakness of the study was the use of an independent measures design (IMD). A
problem of using an IMD in research is the notion of participant variables explaining the results.
Since different people were exposed to different victim conditions, any differences in helping
behaviors between the drunk and the ill victim conditions might be explained by the
characteristics of the participants such as their age, personality in terms of how helpful they are,
education levels, and ethnicity rather than the condition of the victim itself. In fact, one of the
variables we know that impacted the study is gender. Women were less willing to help because
the victim was male and not because he was drunk or old (evidenced by comments like “it's for
men to help him” ). This decreases the validity of the study.

60
 Perry et al.
For Against
Application/Usefulness
● The findings from this study
have a lot of implications for
those with social difficulties for
example people with Autism
Spectrum Disorders or social
anxiety disorders.

● Many people expect oxytocin as

a social hormone to have a
universally positive effect.
However, research has shown
the effect of OT to be more
complex as it was found to
differently enhance the
importance of existing social
cues. Meaning OT could
actually cause further social
difficulty especially for those
who already prefer greater
personal space, in other words
strengthen patients’ initial
social biases.

● This study also reaffirmed the

idea set by previous research
that for close friends people
require less personal space
compare to an approaching
stranger.

Ethics

● Valid Consent- Written consent was ● Lack of Deception- This guideline was
taken from all participants and was broken in Experiment 2 of the study
approved by University of Haifa’s ethics when participants were asked to
committee which ensures the choose a room for a “personal
participant's well being was discussion”, which never took place.
safeguarded (minimizing harm).

61
 ● Protection from harm (maximizing
● Protection from harm (minimizing harm)- Participants were asked to
harm)- Participant’s faced no side imagine a stranger/authority figure
effects from the administration of the approaching them which, as the results
OT or the placebo. The administration show, they did find needing more
procedure was also not painful, personal space in those scenarios. It
reducing distress and minimizing harm. may have been a little psychologically
Also the deception was also unlikely to uneasy for low empathizers.
cause psychological distress. Lastly,
participants were only asked to imagine
a stranger/authority figure approaching
them rather than having one physically
approach them which could have been
more uncomfortable or worrying for
some participants, thus again
minimizing harm.

● Debriefing- Participants were debriefed

about the aim of the study and were
fully informed (including the deception
that took place) in the end.
Reliability

● Highly Standardized procedure- same ● Lack of generalization- All participants

instructions were given to all were male so results cannot be
participants for CID procedure and for generalized to females. Also since they
Experiment 2. Computer program are all undergraduates, results may not
projected the images of the room for a stand consistent for adults in their late
consistent 2 secs each time. All images 30s or teenagers etc. they are all
were computer generated to make healthy so we cannot presume the
them free of error and consistent, same findings to apply to those with
increasing the study’s reliability. all social difficulties e.g. for those with
participants attempted the IRI to autism.
measure their levels of empathy, so the
same tool was used(also no subjective
interpretations can be made as the data
is objective making it further reliable).
● 54 participants- large sample size,
makes the study likely to be
generalized.
Validity
● Counterbalancing- the order of the ● Participants were undergraduates and
experiments was counterbalanced: were given course credit/ payment as

62
 some took OT the first week, saline on an incentive for taking part in the
the second one and the other half took study. This may have led to socially
saline in the first week and OT the desirable answers(for example under
second week. This helped prevent order
estimating how much personal space
effects, so that they don't explain the
changes in our DV. they actually need so as to not seem
socially awkward etc.) to please the
● Extraneous Variables were controlled researcher, instead of honest ones.
for as social interaction after OT or
saline administration was minimized ● Lacks Ecological validity/Mundane
through use of the waiting room. realism- Firstly, it took place in a
laboratory which is an artificial
● Double Blind- Neither the participants
nor the researcher administering the OT environment. Secondly, participants
or saline were aware of the solution may make a different decision about
they were giving, hence chances of personal space if someone they actually
Demand Characteristics and researcher know, or a stranger they don't,
bias reduced. approaches them in real life. Moreover,
participants were asked to judge their
● To measure participants' self rated
preferred distances using computer-
empathy levels they were all given a
validated Self Report Measure: generated images and respond using
Interpersonal Reactivity Index(IRI) that keyboards. In real life our choices about
had 28 items. This was an objective personal space are made using complex
measure with quantitative data being cues(eg: facial cues) which were not
collected which means there was no really taken into consideration in the
room for interpretation and helped in
study .
identifying participants for our first IV
(High or Low Empathisers) by making
statistical comparisons between their ● Since the IRI was a self report
scores. There was also a set objective participants may have answered it in a
criteria (scores above 40: high, or below socially desirable manner (exaggerating
40: low) for identification. or underestimating their levels of
empathy to appear a certain way. They
● Also quantitative data was collected like
were all men so they might not want to
the mean percentage distance from the
center of the circle for IV: condition, in appear “too soft” etc.) which could lead
experiment 1 etc making the study to inaccuracy in our IV and therefore
more objective, holistic and findings.
representative.
● RMD: All participants were exposed to
both placebo and OT and all
conditions(eg: friend/stranger…)so here
they acted as their own control for
participant variables.

63
 Individual versus ● Individual- All participants were ● Situational – Need for space depends
Situational explanation
exposed to the same social hormone on the relationship with the person we
(OT), however depending on their are interacting with such as a
personal traits: if they were high or low friend/stranger etc.
empathizers their personal space needs
differ.
Nature versus Nurture
● Nature – OT enhances social cues in ● Nurture – From a very young age
opposite ways for individuals with parents teach their kids to not interact
naturally different empathetic abilities. with strangers and to keep a safe
People with Low empathetic abilities distance from people you don't know.
respond to OT with a preference for This could be a lesson children take
increased personal distance, and those with them all the way up to their adult
with High empathetic abilities respond life, which is why we see even men in
to OT with a preference for decreased their older years preferring greater
personal distance. personal space with authority and
strangers.
Research Method
● Type- Laboratory experiment.

● 1st IV – Empathy
2 levels – High, Low

● 2nd IV-Treatment
2 levels- OT administered, Placebo administered

● 3rd IV- Condition

4 levels- Stranger, Authority,Ball,Friend

● DV – Personal Space Requirement

Experiment 1:Preferred distance measured between participant and approaching

person/object.

Experiment 2: Preferred distance and angle between 2 chairs in a room.

● Design – Mixed.
*1st IV – Empathy: IMD(naturally occurring, either High Or Low)
*2nd IV- Treatment: RMD (both placebo and OT to all participants by counterbalancing)

64
 *3rd IV- Condition : RMD (have to imagine all 4 approaching)
[THIS IV WAS ABSENT IN EXPERIMENT 2]

● Controls – social interaction administration was minimized through the waiting room,
shown images of the room for a consistent 2 secs each time, all computer generated
images etc.

Way of collecting data

● Self Report: Interpersonal Reactivity Index(IRI) that was a 28 item measure with 7 item
subscales for Identifying levels of empathy.
● Paper-based test- CID paradigm. Here the participants answered by tapping the spacebar
key on the keyboard.
● Select preference out of the 2 picture sets shown on a computer screen.

Quantitative and
Qualitative data ● Quantitative data – Scores on the Interpersonal Reactivity Index(IRI) to identify low vs high
empathizers.

In Experiment 1, researchers recorded the percentage of remaining distance from the

total distance (mean percentage was calculated from the center of the circle).

For Experiment 2, Mean preferred distance between chairs, between table and plant and
angle for these furniture pairs was calculated.

● Correlation- Moderate correlation between average distance chosen in Experiment 1

under placebo and average chair distance chosen in Experiment 2 under placebo.

Participant sampling

● Participants – 54 male undergraduates, 19-32 years of age, coming from the University of
Haifa,received course credit or payment for participation. Normal Vision, No history of
psychiatric or neurological disorder.5 were also left handed.

65
 PERRY ET AL.

A strength of Perry’s study is that it was a laboratory experiment, meaning the study was well
standardized and controlled for. The computer program projected the images of the room for a
consistent 2 seconds each time, images were computer generated for maximum accuracy, the
order of the experiments(1 and 2) was counterbalanced to prevent order effects, and
extraneous variables such as social interaction after intervention was controlled for. The study
was a double blind, where the researcher administering the OT or saline and the participant
receiving it had no awareness of the solution. All these procedures make the study reliable and
provide good internal validity.

Another strength of the study is that it followed several ethical guidelines. Firstly, the study was
able to acquire written and valid consent. Protection from harm was observed as participants
reported no side effects from the administration of saline or oxytocin hormone. Pain was further
minimized as it was administered in a painless manner. Participants were also debriefed by the
end of the study about all the details of the experiment as well as the deception(which was
highly unlikely to cause any psychological distress anyway).The study was approved by the
ethical committee of University of Haifa which which was important for safeguarding the
wellbeing of participants, researchers and the reputation of psychology.

However, a weakness of this study is that it lacks ecological validity. The study took place in a
laboratory which is an unnatural environment to begin with. Participants' decisions about
personal space may not be the same with individuals who are known to them or strangers that
aren't, as the decisions they made about personal space in the study. Moreover, participants
were asked to judge their preferred distances using computer-generated images and respond
using keyboards. In actuality decisions are made using more complex cues, like: facial
expressions/body language, but these were not taken into consideration. Hence, the study
might not be applicable in real life situations due to its lack of mundane realism.

Another weakness of the study is that it lacks generalizability. The sample consisted of only
males. Males and females differ greatly in terms of emotions, perception, empathy, which
means the results in this study may be altered if women were to partake. Moreover, these males
were all undergraduates. University students are not representative of the greater population.
Different age groups may react differently due to their naivety or wisdom, so these results may
not be consistent for people older or younger than these university going participants. Lastly, all
participants were healthy so the findings of this study may not be applicable to those with social
difficulties e.g. autistic individuals.

66
 PAPER 1
8 MARK ESSAYS
(second last question)

and

SHORT QUESTIONS

67
 SIMILARITY AND/OR
DIFFERENCE

● Similarity – Quantitative data

● Difference – Sample (or sampling technique)
● Other points to consider:
o Environment – laboratory vs field
o Ethics
o Data collection techniques

68
 Q. Explain one similarity and one difference between the study by Fagen at al. and one
other core study from the learning approach. [8 marks]

One similarity between the study conducted by Fagen et al. and the study by Saavedra and
Silverman is the fact that they both collected quantitative data. In the study conducted
by Fagen et al. researchers collected quantitative data by recording the total number of
times the elephant was given a cue or ‘offer’ for behaviour. Researchers collectively
decided an 80% or above had to be achieved on a sequence for the elephant to be
considered a ‘pass’. Likewise, in the study by Saavedra and Silverman researchers
collected a rating of the distress the boy felt through a Feelings Thermometer that rated
severity on a 9 point scale. They used this measure before and after each kind of therapy
to assess effectiveness and changes in the boy’s rating for his distress.

One difference between the two studies is the way data was collected by each researcher.
Saavedra and Silverman mostly relied on self reports and interviews, whereas Fagen et
al. relied on observations. Fagen et al. relied on observations by recording the total
number of responses each time the elephant was given a ‘cue’ or ‘offer’ to conclude if the
elephant passed the behavioural sequence. This measure gave an objective assessment of
whether the SPR was successful. On the other hand, Silverman used the Feelings
Thermometer to record distress ratings observed by the child during the reinforcement
therapy or imagery exposure. Moreover, to summon case history for the client, interviews
were conducted of the mother-son pair. Hence, his measures were rather subjective.

Q. Explain two differences between the study by Hasset et al. and the study by Holzel et
al. [8 marks]

One difference between the studies conducted by Hasset et al. and the study by Holzel et
al. is their sample. Hasset conducted an animal study consisting of 21 male 61 female
rhesus monkeys living in natal groups, who were housed at the Yerkes primate research
station in the USA. For the purposes of research, they were kept in a temperature
controlled environment, and were facilitated for all their basic nutritional needs. On the
other hand, Holzel conducted his study on humans. He acquired 28 participants
enrolled in the MBSR programme at the University of Massachusetts. They were
physically and psychologically healthy, with limited experience of meditation classes,
25-55 years of age and came from varied ethnic backgrounds.

Another difference between the studies conducted by Hasset et al. and the study by
Holzel et al. is their technique of data collection. Hasset’s study conducted observations
to measure the dependent variable of activities with the toys. The monkeys’ behaviour
was seen through 2 video cameras by 2 observers working together to reach a consensus.

69
 They each had a behavioural checklist to record frequency and duration of play with
each toy (such as; throw: project into air with hands). On the contrary, MRI scans were
used in the study by Holzel to assess changes in grey matter pre- and post-MBSR course
of participants in the experimental group compared to those in the control group. A
questionnaire was also conducted to make an objective analysis on different aspects of
mindfulness,such as: awareness etc. through the FFMQ (Five Facet Mindfulness
Questionnaire) ; a 39 item measure.

Q. Explain one similarity and one difference between the study by Piliavin et al. and one
other core study from the social approach. [8 marks] [Specimen 2024-9990/01]

One similarity between the study by Piliavin et al. and the study by Perry et al. is that
both the studies collected quantitative data. In the study by Piliavin the researchers
collected the mean and median frequencies of helping that occurred between the ill and
the drunk victim for each race which enabled them to statistically conclude that the ill
victim received more help compared to the drunk victim. Likewise, in the study by
Perry, mean percentage distance from the centre of circle to the participant, was
calculated as well as the preferred distance and angle between two chairs in a room,
which helped in concluding that administration of OT enhances social cues differently
for people with different empathetic abilities.

One difference between the two studies is the ecological validity of each researcher’s
experiment. The study by Piliavin et al. had good ecological validity due to the fact that it
was a field experiment. The environment of the New York City subway was realistic, and
the participants were ordinary train passengers who were unaware they were taking part
in a study. They likely behaved naturally as they would if an emergency situation were to
arise in their everyday life. Because the study by Perry et al. took place in an artificial
environment, it lacks ecological validity. Participants' decisions about personal space may
depend on whether they are with someone familiar, or a stranger. In real life, they don’t
judge preferred distances using computer-generated images and keyboards. Normally,
choices about personal space are made using complex cues (such as: gestures) which were
not really taken into consideration in the study.

Q. Explain two similarities between the Andrade study and one other core study from the
cognitive approach. [8 marks]

One similarity between the study conducted by Andrade and the study by Pozullo et al. is
the fact that they both collected quantitative data. In the study conducted by Andrade,
researchers collected quantitative data by assessing the number of correct names of
partygoers and places each subject was able to recall in the surprise memory test part of
the study, to see if the doodling group had a stronger recall rate compared to non-

70
 doodlers. On the other hand, Pozullo too collected quantitative data by assessing the
number of times participants were able to make accurate identification or rejection
depending upon if the target was present or absent respectively. For this study results of
children and adult participants were then compared in order to see who performed better.

Another similarity between the two studies is that they both use Independent Measures
Design in their experiments ie: each participant was only exposed to one level of the IV.
The study by Andrade divided its participants randomly to either the doodling group or
the control condition and hence they were exposed to one level each. Parallel to that, in
the study by Pozullo, the participants were either adults or children. His study had
multiple IV’s one of which was age. Since this factor could not be manipulated, depending
on the participants age, they were either an adult or children and were allocated to their
groups accordingly.

Q. Explain one similarity and one difference between the study by Dement and
Kleitman and the study by Holzel et al. [8 marks]

One similarity between the study conducted by Dement and Kleitman and the study by
Holzel et al. is the fact that they both collected quantitative data. In the study by Dement,
researchers collected quantitative data in multiple ways. Firstly, they kept note of
frequency of dream recall to compare if there is greater recall in the REM stage of the
sleep cycle or the NREM stage. Secondly, they also recorded the number of words that
were used by each participant whilst describing the dream while gathering its content.
Similarly, in the study by Holzel quantitative data was collected firstly through recording
the scores on the FFMQ which is a five-point likert type scale that allows an objective
analysis on different aspects of mindfulness,such as: awareness. And changes in volumes
of grey matter were also recorded objectively through MRI scanners to check the
effectiveness of the MBSR course.

One difference between the studies by Dement and Kleitman and the study by Holzel et
al. is the design they each used in their experiment. Dement and Kleitman used a
Repeated Measures Design in his experiment as all 9 of his participants were exposed to
or woken up in both levels of the IV i.e. type of awakenings: REM and NREM. On the
other hand, in the study conducted by Holzel et al., he used an Independent Measures
Design instead. Participants in his study were exposed to only one level of the IV i.e.
either the MBSR intervention group(experimental) or the control group used for
comparing scans.

71
 ISSUES
DEBATES

72
 Q. Explain how one result from the study by Milgram supports the situational explanation
of obedience and how one result does not support the situational explanation of
obedience. [8 marks] [M/J 2020-9990/11]

Result that supports the situational explanation of behaviour:

People will be obedient for the sake of authority to the extent that they will harm other
people as 26 out of the 40 people in the study administered the maximum shock level
(30th) which corresponded to 450 volts.

Explain how:
Milgram identified a number of factors that contributed to the high level of obedience
such as perceived legitimacy, the professional academic environment of Yale, the use of
uniform along with the prods given by a seemingly authoritative figure. All of these are
situational cues that potentially may have caused the behaviour and results that were
recorded.

Result that does not support the situational explanation of behaviour:

14 out of 40 participants chose to drop out in the middle of the study rather than
administering the maximum shock level.

Explain how:
Despite the presence of the situational factors mentioned above, there were participants
that chose to discontinue to participate despite the incessant verbal prods. They may have
found the acts being demanded by the researcher conflicting and contradictory to their
own moral standards or they were instead more empathetic individuals who couldn’t
administer pain onto someone else, a stranger perhaps. Hence despite the situation they
were presented with their own characteristics made them back down which shows more
individualistic thinking.

73
 Q. Explain how one result from the study by Bandura supports the individual explanation
of behaviour and how one result supports the situational explanation of behaviour. [8
marks]

Result that supports the individual explanation of behaviour:

The mean for imitative physical aggression for boys with a male model was much higher
than that for girls. This indicated that boys imitated physical aggression more than girls
did.

Explain how:
The difference between their responses can be explained by the underlying differences in
hormones that influence brain development. Males have greater quantities of the
hormone testosterone compared to females which could make them more aggressive.
Hence this supports the individualistic theory as something innately present in males
makes them more aggressive compared to females.

Result that supports the situational explanation of behaviour:

Children exposed to aggressive models imitated their exact behaviours and were
significantly more aggressive, both verbally and physically, compared to those in the non-
aggressive model or control groups.

Explain how:
The entire concept of Social Learning Theory is based on learning new behaviour that is
observed in a role model and imitated in the absence of said model. The children exposed
to aggressive environments learnt specific aggressive acts that were performed in their
vicinity by the model, and later replicated them in the absence of the model. Similarly,
those exposed to a non-aggressive environment did not learn those acts and instead
exhibited a calmer set of behaviour and play.

74
 Q. Explain how one result from the study by Perry et al. supports the individual
explanation of behaviour and how one result supports the situational explanation of
behaviour. [8 marks]

Result that supports the individual explanation of behaviour:

People with low empathetic ability respond to OT (oxytocin) with a preference for
increased personal distance and those with high empathetic ability respond to OT with a
preference for decreased personal distance.

Explain how:
The administration of OT (oxytocin) enhances social cues in opposite ways for individuals
with different empathic abilities. All participants were exposed to the same social
hormone (OT), however, depending on their personal traits: if they were high or low
empathizers their personal space needs differ. Hence, this supports the individual
explanation of behaviour.

Result that supports the situational explanation of behaviour:

People need less distance between themselves and their close friends than they need with
strangers or authoritative figures.

Explain how:
A person's need for space depends on the relationship they have with the person in front
of them that they are interacting with such as a friend/stranger etc. Usually and rightfully
so, people have their guards up even those who are high empathizers, when they
encounter someone unfamiliar or intimidating. So depending on the situation, whether it
is a friendly environment or a strange one, their personal needs regarding space may
alternate.

75
 Q. Explain how one result from the study by Piliavin supports the diffusion of
responsibility hypothesis and how one result contradicts the diffusion of responsibility
hypothesis. [8 marks] [F/M 2020- 9990/12]

Result that supports the diffusion of responsibility hypothesis:

The result relating to the variable of sex was that the majority of helpers, i.e. 90% of them
were male, meaning females were not as inclined to be in the helping position at most
times.

Explain how:
This supports the hypothesis of diffusion of responsibility to an extent as females
hesitated to initiate help when circumstances arose and expected men to help instead as
seen by some of the comments made by them- “It’s for men to help him”. Perhaps females
felt a reduced sense of personal responsibility to help as the victims were male, and took
a back seat on assuming the helping role and anticipated men around them to come to aid
instead.

Result that contradicts the diffusion of responsibility hypothesis:

The study reported that seventy eight percent of the victims in Piliavin’s case received
spontaneous help before the model could intervene or in no model conditions and in 60%
of the cases more than one person offered help.

Explain how:
In contradiction to previous research, this study did not find much evidence to support
this hypothesis as helping behaviour was observed in majority cases. In fact, there was
some evidence to suggest that when more passengers were present, helping slightly
increased and response was faster, meaning more people assumed the role and
responsibility of a samaritan in a case of this emergency.

76
 Q. Explain how one result from the study by Baron Cohen supports the nature side of the
nature–nurture debate and how one result supports the nurture side of the nature–
nurture debate. [8 marks]

Result that supports the nature side of the debate:

On the Eyes Test, participants with AS/HFA correctly identified significantly fewer target
words than participants in the three comparison groups.

Explain how:
This result indicates that biologically people with AS/HFA have a biological genetic
component that falters their ability to understand social cues and be vary of other people’s
emotions. Hence the genes they are born with leads to a faulty grasp on recognizing
emotions of others, hence the result.

Result that supports the nurture side of the debate:

In the adult comparison and student comparison groups, sex differences were apparent
between males and females on the Eyes Test. The results for male participants were rather
similar to those with ASD than females who scored comparatively higher.

Explain how:
Generally speaking, females are taught to be the primary caregivers who are meant to be
more empathetic. Most women are raised to be nurturing and aware of other people’s
moods and emotions in order to resonate with them. Hence, this explains why females
scored higher on Eyes Test as this may come more easily to them than males.

77
 Q. Explain how one result from the study by Hasset et al. supports the nature side of the
nature–nurture debate and how one result supports the nurture side of the nature–
nurture debate. [8 marks]

Result that supports the nature side of the nature–nurture debate:

Statistical analysis found that males preferred wheeled compared to plush toys, both in
terms of frequency and duration compared to females, who preferred plush toys
compared to wheeled.

Explain how:
The study controlled for confounding factors such as age and social rank to have an impact
on toy preferences. Analysis demonstrated that these social factors had little effect on the
sex differences in toy preference. This is because in monkeys, unlike humans, only
hormonal differences in development can be responsible for the differences in
development of males and females. This illustrated that sex differences in the human play
of boys and girls, often assumed to be a product of socialisation, may not be entirely
caused by nurture and that our biology inherently may determine our choices and
preferences.

Result that supports the nurture side of the nature–nurture debate:

The preference for wheeled toys by males was stronger compared to the preference for
plush toys by females. Males were more firm about their choices compared to females,
who were more variable.

Explain how:
Despite both sexes showing some form of preference for a specific toy it was also observed
that there are still differences in the extent of their preferences. This can be explained by
the fact that boys choosing girls' toys tend to receive more negative responses than girls
choosing boys’ toys. This would reinforce a pre-existing biological tendency for boys to be
more masculine in their toy choices and for girls to remain more variable in theirs. Hence,
girls were not as firm in their choices in contrast to their male counterparts due to the
influence of external surroundings.

78
 Q. Explain how one result from the study by Bandura supports the nature side of the
nature–nurture debate and how one result supports the nurture side of the nature–
nurture debate. [8 marks] [M/J 2020- 9990/13]

Result that supports the nature side of the nature–nurture debate:

The mean for imitative physical aggression for boys with a male model was much higher
than that for girls. This indicated that boys imitated physical aggression more than girls
did.

Explain how:
This could be because of underlying differences in hormones that influence brain
development. Males have greater quantities of the hormone testosterone compared to
females which could make them more aggressive. Hormonal differences hence explain
the difference in behaviours we have observed between the two genders.

Result that supports the nurture side of the nature–nurture debate:

Children are more likely to copy a same-sex model, that is more male participants
replicated the actions of the male model and female participants replicated the female
model.

Explain how:
Although this may depend on the extent to which this behaviour is sex-typed, children are
more prone to finding a role model of the same gender as them to replicate behaviours
and learn from. This is true for girls and mothers and boys and fathers or even peers of
the same sex as them. Women instil behaviours sex-typed in girls and men are taught to
be rather aggressive by their male counterparts hence this result is essentially a reflection
of that.

79
 RESULTS

80
 Q. Explain what psychologists have learned about phobias using two results from the
study by Saavedra and Silverman. [8 marks]

One finding psychologists can take away from the study by Saavedra and Silverman is
that even if positive reinforcement therapy leads to a successful completion of all the
exposure tasks listed in the fear hierarchy, it will still lead to an increase in subjective
ratings of distress. We saw as the boy approached buttons in greater frequency, his
distress ratings continually rose from 6 in session 1 to 8 by session 3. Hence, positive
reinforcement may help achieve desirable behaviour but it is important when it comes
to reducing phobias, to also deal with emotions and cognitions relating to disgust
otherwise this intervention will only worsen the situation.

Another major finding from this study is that imagery exposure can have a long term
effect on reducing the distress associated with specific phobias as it tackles negative
emotions. This was evident in the study since the boy reported to have diminishing
feelings of phobia and distress when exposed to imagery. His distress ratings fell from 8
to 5 to 3 as sessions went by. During follow-up for his treatment psychologists learnt
that his negative feelings had minimised greatly to the point that they no longer affected
his normal functioning. Hence, the psychologists were able to find an adequate way to
ensure a lasting treatment to cope with specific phobias through the results of this
study.

Q. Explain what psychologists have learned about theory of mind using two results from
the study by Baron Cohen. [8 marks]

Firstly, psychologists have learned that people with AS/HFA have a specific deficit in
their cognitive processes that should help them identify emotions in other individuals,
i.e. that contributes to theory of mind. This was evident in the study since participants in
the autistic group performed worse in the eyes test compared to those in the non-
autistic group. It is important to note that these participants were otherwise intelligent
and were able to differentiate between genders. Hence, it helped psychologists conclude
that those who score higher on the Autistic Quotient (AQ) may lack the skills to interpret
and understand emotions, as well as other related social cues.

Secondly, Baron’s results also highlight that there is sex difference between males and
females in the comparison groups. This was evident in the study since males had lower
scores on the Eyes test, and showed greater levels of autistic traits on the AQ test, than
females. It is generally considered that females are more sensitive and intuitive about
others emotions and they empathise greatly considering they are known to be the
primary caregivers etc. However, the study showed with evidence that it is factually true
as they were able to perform better than males on the revised version for the eyes test

81
 that was purposefully made more difficult to measure social intelligence. Hence
psychologists learnt that females are more receptive to emotional cues from the
environment compared to males, and can respond more accurately to them.

Q. Explain what psychologists have learned about sleep and dreams using two results
from the study by Dement and Klietman [8 marks] [O/N 2021- 9990/12]

One of the findings psychologists discovered about sleep and dreams is that people tend
to dream more in the REM stage of sleep compared to in the NREM stage. Around 80%
of dreams were recalled when woken in REM compared to 7% when woken in NREM. The
latter was explained by psychologists by the fact that participants were in their beginning
periods of NREM and had transitioned not too long ago from REM, hence have some
residual dream content otherwise they were not likely to remember specific dream
content. So psychologists now have an objective measure to see study dream progress in
real time as brain waves show differing stages of brain activity.

It was also discovered that the direction of eye movement in REM relates to dream
content so it is not random. This was evident as when participants were observing vertical
eye movements they had witnessed a dream like: climbing a ladder and looking up and
down while doing so, throwing basketballs at a net, shooting, looking up at the net and
then down at the ball again etc. On the other hand when there was horizontal eye
movement it was reported that the dream content looked something like: two people
throwing tomatoes at one another. Hence, psychologists learnt that our eye movements
have a reason for why they move the way that they do and it's not spontaneous.

Q. Explain what psychologists have learned about personal space using two results from
the study by Perry et al. [8 marks]

One key finding derived from the study by Perry et al. is that people with low empathetic
ability respond to OT (oxytocin) with a preference for increased personal distance and
those with high empathetic ability respond to OT with a preference for decreased personal
distance. This finding suggested to the researchers that the administration of OT has a
differential effect rather than the same effect on high and low empathizers. Meaning
although all participants were exposed to the same social hormone (OT), depending on
their personal traits: if they were high or low empathizers their personal space needs
differ. Henec, psychologists now know that the effect of the social hormone varies with
one's personal traits.

82
 Another important finding is that it was found that people need less distance between
themselves and their close friends that they know well, compared to with strangers or
authoritative figures where they seek greater distance instead. It was seen in the study
that participants preferred a greater mean difference up to 40% when it comes to
strangers while only 8% approximately with those who they are familiar with. This makes
sense as comfortability of an individual can vary depending on the situation they are in
and their surroundings so psychologists have learnt that the type of person can also be a
factor when it comes to people deciding their preferred level of personal space they
require.

Q. Explain what psychologists have learned about aggression using two results from the
study by Bandura. [8 marks] [O/N 2021-9990/13]

One result from Bandura’s study is that aggressive behaviours are imitated as children
who see aggressive models are likely to be more aggressive than those seeing a non-
aggressive model or no model at all. The study strongly supports the nurture-istic idea
in this capacity as it brings focus towards the fact that social learning theory exists.
Participants in the aggressive model group learned specific behaviours from the models
in their surroundings and imitated their acts even in their absence. Hence,
psychologists' hypothesis about the existence and influence of social learning theory was
confirmed using the results of this study.

Another significant finding from this study is that boys are more likely to copy
aggression than girls. This sex-typed behaviour was evident both in the quantitative and
qualitative assessments made of participants' behaviour. Not only did male participants
show aggressive acts in greater frequency according to observations, comments were
also made alluding to the same idea. Statements like “That's not the way for a lady to
behave. Ladies are supposed to act like ladies” made towards female models showed
that aggressive acts done by them were not being received by the participants as
appropriate sex typed behaviour and hence not replicated by female participants to as
high a degree as by male participants. Hence, it teaches psychologists that behaviour
that is more likely considered appropriate by society at large has greater likelihood to be
replicated than those considered inappropriate.

83
 ETHICS
● ALWAYS define the ethical guideline FIRST!
● Then mention if the guideline was broken OR
not
● Then explain in DETAIL how was it broken OR
not broken – LINK!

84
 Q. Explain whether each ethical guideline below, relating to animals, was broken in the
study by Fagen (elephant learning):
• housing
• pain and distress
• reward
• number

housing During a study, animals should be housed with enough space to move freely and
with sufficient food and water for their well-being.The elephants were housed at the same
stable in Nepal they were born in. They spent most of their day grazing in the jungle, even
when chained they had the freedom to move 6-8 feet around the stake. They had fresh
grass, grain and nutritional supplements for food and were provided access to water at a
nearby river. Hence, this guideline was not broken.

pain and distress Attention should be paid to the animals daily care and any costs to
the animals should be justified by the scientific benefit of the work. Animals in this study
were not subjected to pain and distress if anything Fagen ensured the method should
absolutely abstain from any negative reinforcement during the training process. They
were even desensitised to the fear of syringes, prior to the ‘trunk here’ part. However one
elephant reportedly had trunk weakness and foot abscess during the study so its training
may have been more distressing because of it. But overall, this guideline is not broken.

reward The use of preferred food should be considered as an alternative to deprivation.

Part of the SPR training relied on a primary positive reinforcer, which in this study was a
banana to promote the frequency of desired behaviour. Hence elephants were rewarded
each time or at different intervals, with the primary reinforcer to encourage them to keep
up the correct responses. Hence, this guideline was not broken.

number Minimum number of animals should be used to decrease the probability and
the amount of harm. Fagen et al. ensured that the elephants he used were already those
who were captivated and so he used only the animals who were in the stable i.e. 5 female
elephants (4 juvenile, 1 adult). This makes for a relatively smaller sample and fulfils the
number guideline.

85
 Q. Explain whether each ethical guideline below was broken in the study by Piliavin:
• valid consent
• confidentiality
• protection from harm
• right to withdraw
[F/M 2023-9990/12]

valid consent This refers to the getting agreement from potential participants by giving
them sufficient information for them to decide if they want to participate. This study
lacked valid consent as none of the participants knew that they were being observed for a
research study. The participants were taking the subway as usual and they happened to
do so on the days the study was being conducted. The observation was covertly conducted
hence participants were unaware of the study and their participation in it.

confidentiality All data should be stored separately from the participants’ names and
personal information held, and names should never be published unless the individuals
have specifically agreed to this. Piliavin ensured that all data collected of participants was
revealed, without revealing any of their identifiable personal information so that their
true identities remain hidden to anyone outside the study.

protection from harm Participants have the right to be protected in study and should
not be exposed to any greater risk than they would be in their normal life. The study by
Piliavin maximised harm as some participants reported to have felt intimidated by the
acts of the stooge and some also felt guilty for not being able to offer any help (e.g. females
saying “I wish I could help him- I’m not strong enough”) and were concerned about the
victims actual well being. Hence, participants may have felt distressed or even unsafe
being part of this environment and since they weren't debriefed, these feelings may have
lingered after the study as well.

right to withdraw Participants should be able to leave a study whenever they wish. In
this study they were allowed to exercise this right partially. The train ran for 7.5 straight
minutes meaning if the participants wanted to they couldn't have stepped off the train
whilst the study went on. However, participants could have moved from the critical area
to the adjacent area and removed themselves from the emergency zone.

86
 Q. Explain whether each ethical guideline below was broken in the study by Saavedra and
Silverman (button phobia):
•confidentiality
•valid consent
•privacy
•protection from harm
[M/J 2022-9990/11]

confidentiality All data should be stored separately from the participants’ names and
personal information held, and names should never be published unless the individuals
have specifically agreed to this. In this study, Silverman made sure that both the boy and
her mother remained unidentifiable and their personal details remained anonymous to
the general public when the study was published.

valid consent This refers to the getting agreement from potential participants by giving
them sufficient information for them to decide if they want to participate. The boy and
his mother gave written informed consent to participate in this study. They were willing
to give data and allowed the boys treatment by the researchers.

privacy A study that uses participants personal information is at risk of invading

privacy. So measures should be taken to avoid misuse or gathering information the
participant would want to rather keep to themselves. In this study, the guideline was likely
broken because the participant had to share a traumatising event that took place that led
to the inception of the phobia. Moreover, the therapy included a lot of recalling and
subjecting the participant to uneasy feelings he may not have been comfortable feeling,
hence this was very likely broken.

protection from harm Participants have the right to be protected in study and should
not be exposed to any greater risk than they would be in their normal life. Again the
participant was not physically harmed in any sense however the behavioural exposure
therapy could have caused the child a lot of distress as his distress ratings rose throughout
the intervention hence the boy was subjected to harm to quite a degree.

87
 Q. Explain whether each ethical guideline below, relating to animals, was broken in the
study by Hasset et al. (monkey toy preferences):
• housing
• pain and distress
• species
• number

housing During a study, animals should be housed with enough space to move freely and
with sufficient food and water for their well-being. Animals received regular and
appropriate food (twice daily monkey feed plus daily fruit and vegetables once a day), and
had constant access to water. They were also housed in family groups, in large enclosures,
with access to both a temperature-controlled indoor area and an outdoor area.

pain and distress Attention should be paid to the animals daily care and any costs to
the animals should be justified by the scientific benefit of the work. Since they were
observed through cameras it wouldn't have been very distressing and their level of
interaction with the toys suggest less likelihood of psychological distress or physical pain
hence this guideline was not broken in this study.

species The species or strain should be such that experience the least amount of pain
and they should not be such that go extinct. The study didn't really involve any methods
or techniques that would subject the monkeys to any kind of pain in the duration of the
study, so the species was protected regardless. Hence, this guideline was also upheld.

number Minimum number of animals should be used to decrease

the probability and the amount of harm. The study consisted of 21 male 61 female rhesus
monkeys which is a large number hence this guideline was likely broken.

88
 Q. Explain whether each ethical guideline below was broken in the study by Pozullo et al.:
• valid consent
• confidentiality
• protection from harm
• deception

valid consent This refers to the getting agreement from potential participants by giving
them sufficient information for them to decide if they want to participate. In Pozullo’s
study this was upheld as it was gained by adults and by children after explaining to them
in a child friendly way. Also parents/guardians of children gave their consent as well.

confidentiality All data should be stored separately from the participants’ names and
personal information held, and names should never be published unless the individuals
have specifically agreed to this. In Pozullo’s study none of the participants whether it be
the child or adults’, personal information was revealed hence any identifiable features of
their person were kept hidden from the public and so this guideline was fulfilled.

protection from harm Participants have the right to be protected in study and should
not be exposed to any greater risk than they would be in their normal life. In the study by
Pozullo, there was maximising harm to a certain extent as we saw in the study that social
factors were more likely to cause false positives, and children may have been intimidated
by researchers who they presumed as authority figures and felt the need to comply with.
This may have led to some level of distress and hence the guideline was broken.

deception Participants should not be deliberately misinformed about any aspect of the
study. The children were told the study was about TV shows and computer games while
the adults were told the study was about memory. Both sets of participants were lied to
about the true nature of Pozullo’s experiment and hence this guideline was broken.

89
 Dement and Kleitman (Sleep and Dreams)

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. Describe the psychology that is being investigated in this study. [4]

2. Outline the difference between the circadian and ultradian rhythms. [2]
3. Give two differences of REM and N-REM sleep. [2]
4. Describe EEG. [3]
5. Identify two features of REM sleep. [2]

Aim and Research Methods:

6. Outline the independent variable of aim 1? [2]

7. Outline the dependent variable of aim 1? [2]
8. Outline the independent variable of aim 2? [2]
9. Outline the dependent variable of aim 2? [2]
10. Outline the independent variable of aim 3? [2]
11. Outline the dependent variable of aim 3? [2]
12. Outline and evaluate the type of experiment. [4]
13. In the study by Dement and Kleitman, each participant was woken after different lengths of
REM sleep.
(a) Describe the experimental design used in this part of the study. [2]
(b) Describe one advantage of using this experimental design in this part of the study. [2]
14. (a)Describe two features of the sample. [2]
(b) Explain one disadvantage of this sample. [2]
15. If the participants slept in their own bed rather than in a laboratory, what effect might this
have on the results? [2]

Procedure:
16. How did Dement and Kleitman test the theory that dreaming is more likely to occur in REM
sleep than N-REM sleep? [2]
17. The study by Dement and Kleitman on sleep and dreaming looked at a few different
relationships between eye movements and dreaming.
Briefly describe two of the relationships that were investigated. [4]
18. Describe the procedure after electrodes of EEG were fitted on scalp of participants. [5]
19. Describe the procedure by dement to collect data about dream recall. [5]

Results/findings and Conclusion:

20. What did Dement and Kleitman conclude about the relationship between eye movements
and dream content?[2]
21. Describe the qualitative and quantitative data collected in the study by Dement and
Kleitman.[4]
22. The study by Dement and Kleitman (sleep and dreaming) involved participants’ self-reports
of dreams and the use of equipment to measure REM and NREM sleep.
(a) Outline one finding about the relationship between sleep and dreaming. [2]
(b) Give one reason why the conclusions of the study might not generalise. [2]
23. From the study by Dement and Kleitman on sleep and dreaming:
(a) Outline qualitative measures in this study. [2]
(b) Outline one way in which the results of the measures may not have been valid. [2]

90
 24. The study by Dement and Kleitman (sleep and dreaming) collected data about dream
duration and used an electroencephalograph (EEG).
(a) Describe the data for dream-duration estimates after 5 minutes and 15 minutes of
REM.[2]
(b) Explain one advantage of using an EEG in this part of the study. [2]
25. From the study by Dement and Kleitman (sleep and dreaming), outline two ways in which
observations of the participants were made. [4]

Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:

26. Outline one methodological strength/weakness of the study. [2]

27. State one weakness of the type of experiment used. [2]
28. How was the internal validity increased in the study. [2]
29. Why was the ecological validity decreased in the study. [2]
30. Explain one way the study was standardized. [2]
31. State the ethical issues maintained or broken in the study. [8]
32. State one real world application of this study. [4]
33. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports nature or nurture
debate. [4]
34. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports individual or situational
debate. [4]
35. Describe any one assumption of the biological approach and explain how one finding of this
study supports the assumption that you have described. [4]

91
 Hassett et al. (monkey toy preferences)

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. Describe the psychology being investigated in this study. [4]

2. Define the term gender stereotype. [2]

Aim and Research Methods:

3. Outline the aim of the study. [2]

4. Identify the type of experiment. [2]
5. Which research measure design was used. [2]
6. State one weakness of this design. [2]
7. How was the data collected. [2]
8. Outline the IV and DV. [2]
9. Why was the correlation conducted. [2]
10. State two features of the sample. [2]

Procedure:

11. Describe the toys used in this study. [4]

12. How was the data recorded. [5]
13. Give three examples of behaviors of monkeys that were operationalized. [3]

Results/findings and Conclusion:

14. Outline the results of the wheeled toys between the male and female monkeys. [2]
15. Outline the results of plush toys between the male and female monkeys. [2]
16. Outline the results of male monkeys in comparison to two different toys. [2]
17. Outline the results of female monkeys in comparison to two different toys. [2]
18. How was data about children obtained. [2]
19. Outline one conclusion of the study. [2]

Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:

20. Evaluate the use of animals in this psychological research. [2]

21. How was the reliability of the study maintained. [2]
22. Outline one ethical guideline that was maintained. [2]
23. Outline one ethical guideline that was broken. [2]
24. Suggest one real world application of this study. [2]
25. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports nature or nurture
debate. [4]
26. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports individual or situational
debate. [4]
27. Describe any one assumption of the biological approach and explain how one finding of this
study supports the assumption that you have described. [4]

92
 Hölzel et al. (mindfulness and brain scans)

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. Describe the psychology being investigated in this study. [4]

2. Define localization of function. [2]
3. Give one strength on the use of MRI. [2]
4. What do you mean by mindfulness. [2]

Aim and Research Methods:

5. Outline the aim of the study. [2]

6. State one strength of longitudinal design. [2]
7. Outline the IV of the study. [2]
8. Outline the DV of the study. [2]
9. Describe MBSR. [4]
10. What exercises were included in the course MBSR. [3]
11. Apart from MRI how was the data collected. [2]
12. Describe two features of experimental sample. [2]
13. Describe two features of control sample. [2]
14. Outline any one similarity between two samples of experimental and control. [2]

Procedure:

15. Describe FFMQ. [5]

16. Define the term reverse scoring. [2]
17. What were the two things about brain collected through MRI. [2]
18. What is the difference between MRI and FFMQ in context to data collection. [4]
19. Define grey matter concentration. [2]

Results/findings and Conclusion:

20. Outline results of the ‘whole brain analyses. [2]

21. Outline the results of FFMQ. [2]
22. Describe the correlation found between the data collected by MRI and FFMQ. [2]
23. Outline the brain areas found to increase in MBSR participants. [2]
24. Outline one conclusion from the study. [2]
25. What was the association proposed between mindfulness and the area of brain activity. [2]

Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:

26. Outline one methodological strength of the study. [2]

27. Outline one methodological weakness of the study. [2]
28. Outline one ethical concern drawn from the study. [2]
29. Outline one ethical concern broken down by the study. [2]
30. Suggest one real world application from the study. [2]
31. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports nature or nurture
debate. [4]

93
 Andrade (doodling)

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. Describe the psychology that is being investigated in this study. [4]

2. Define the term day dreaming. [2]

Aim and Research Methods:

3. Outline the aim of the study. [2]

4. For the study by Andrade (doodling)
(a) Describe what the participants were told about the purpose of the study. [2]
(b) Explain why they were not told the real aim. [2]
5. Andrade (doodling) conducted a laboratory experiment.
(a) Describe either of two controls employed. [2]
(b) What is the disadvantage of conducting a lab experiment? [2]
6. Outline two DVs in the study. [2]
7. Describe how Andrade recruited her sample of participants and explain why she decided to
recruit them in this way. [4]
8. Identify two features of the sample from this study. [2]
9. State the experimental design used in this study, include a reason for your answer. [2]

Procedure:

10. Describe the materials that were used in both the ‘doodling’ condition and the ‘control’
condition in the study by Andrade. [4]
11. What is counterbalancing and how was it implemented? [4]
12. (a) Why were the participants told to listen to a mock telephone call in the study by Andrade
(doodling)? [2]
(b) Describe the recall task. [2]
13. How was the monitoring performance score calculated for each participant. [1]
14. Outline the procedure used in the Andrade study for a participant who was in the doodling
condition. [4]
15. Identify two examples where a response would be recorded as a false alarm for the recall of
names. [2]
16. Identify two features of the mock telephone message that was played to the participants. [2]

Results/findings and Conclusion:

17. How were qualitative and quantitative data collected? [4]

18. Outline the results of doodling group. [2]
19. Outline one result from the monitoring performance scores. [2]
20. Outline one conclusion from this study. [2]
21. Outline the result for false alarms for places (incidental information) in the study. [2]

94
 Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:

22. Explain one similarity and one difference between the Andrade study and one other core
study from the cognitive approach. [8]
23. Studies in cognitive psychology could be used to help workers doing repetitive jobs who find
it hard to concentrate. Describe how the results of the study by Andrade (doodling) could be
applied to help with this problem. [4]
24. For the study by Andrade (doodling):
(a) Describe the conclusions from the study. [2]
(b) Explain one useful application of the findings of Andrade. [2]
25. From the study of Andrade, what were the ethical guidelines followed, and which were
broken? [4]
26. The study of Andrade used adult participants; describe one methodological problem that
could arise if child participants were used. [2]
27. Describe one way in which the findings of the study by Andrade (doodling) were more valid
and more reliable. [4]
28. Explain one reason why the procedure was standardized in this study. [3]
29. It is mentioned in the study by Andrade (doodling) that alternatively, a brain scan could have
been used to indicate whether doodling reduced the activation of the cortex. Give one
advantage and one disadvantage of using this method. [4]
30. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports individual or situational
debate. [4]
31. Describe any one assumption of the cognitive approach and explain how one finding of this
study supports the assumption that you have described. [4]
32. The teacher, Jayne, has a new class of students. Her students are not concentrating during
films in class. She is thinking of ways to help them and asks you for advice.
Outline the advice you would give to Jayne, using your knowledge of the study. [4]

95
 Baron-Cohen at al. (Eyes test)

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. What is meant by ‘theory of mind’? [2]

2. Describe the psychology that is being investigated in this study. [4]
3. Describe the theory that Baron Cohen et al. were testing with their ‘Reading the mind in
the Eyes’ test. [3]

Aim and Research Methods:

4. Baron-Cohen et al (eyes test) conducted their study to test several aims. Describe two of
these aims. [4]
5. (a) Identify the sampling technique used to recruit the AS/HFA group in this study. [1]
(b) Outline one strength of the technique mentioned above. [4]
6. Describe how the AS/HFA sample was recruited in this study. [3]
7. Describe how the participants were recruited for group 2 and 3. [3]
8. Identify two characteristics of the sample in group 1. [2]
9. Identify two characteristics of the sample in group 2 and 3. [4]
10. Identify two characteristics of the sample in group 4. [2]
11. Identify two of the four tests from WAIS-R used to assess IQ in AS/HFA group. [2]

Procedure:

12. Describe how the target words and foil were developed for the revised ‘Reading the
mind in the Eyes’ test. [4]
13. Describe the implementation of the revised test. [3]
14. Identify two problems with the original test. [2]
15. Each participant’s attribution of mental state was tested by their selection of a word to
describe the pair of eyes in a photograph. Explain one reason why this test may not
accurately measure attribution of mental state.[2]

Results/findings and Conclusion:

16. Outline how one result from this study supports the concept of theory of mind. [2]
17. Describe the results for Autism spectrum Quotient (AQ) test for two groups of
participants. You must use data in your answer. [3]
18. Outline one conclusion from this study. [2]
19. Describe how the results of the study by Baron Cohen can help with understanding or
treating autism.[3]

Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:

20. Outline one methodological strength of this study. [2]

21. Outline one ethical weakness of this study. [2]
22. Suggest one real world application based on the procedure of this study. [2]
23. Outline one real world application based on the results or conclusions from the study by
Baron Cohen et al. [2]
24. Describe any one assumption of the cognitive approach and explain how one finding of
this study supports the assumption that you have described. [4]
25. State the ethical issues maintained or broken in the study. [8]
26. State one real world application of this study. [4]

96
 27. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports nature or nurture
debate. [4]
28. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports individual or
situational debate. [4]

Pozzulo et al. (line ups)

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. Describe the psychology that is being investigated in this study. [4]

2. Define the term false memory. [2]
3. What are the social factors due to which children may be more likely to make incorrect
decisions in a line up. [3]
4. State the factors due to which children made errors specially in the target absent lineups
of human faces and why. [4]

Aim and Research Methods:

5. What is the aim of the study. [2]

6. What are the 4 predictions of the study. [4]
7. State the type of experiment. [2]
8. State three independent variables. [3]
9. What was the design of the study. [4]
10. State the dependent variable of the study. [2]
11. Describe the features of the sample in this study. [4]
12. Identify the sampling technique used in this study. [2]
13. How was the procedure of the study standardized. [4]
14. State the filler questions used in this study. [2]

Procedure:

15. Describe the target present line ups. [2]

16. Describe the target absent lineups. [2]
17. Describe the two types of cartoons that stimulate stimulus materials. [4]
18. Describe the two types of human faces stimulus materials. [4]
19. How was the position of each target in the line up presented. [1]
20. Describe the female experimenters. [2]
21. Why were the experimenters dressed in casual formal attire. [2]
22. State the key differences between children and adult participants. [4]

Results/findings and Conclusion:

23. How did the results differ between adults and children. [2]
24. State the results of the children group in cartoon versus humans in the target present
identification. [2]
25. State the results of the adult group in cartoon versus humans in the target present
identification. [2]
26. State the results of the target present identification of children versus adults in
comparison of cartoon faces. [2]

97
 27. State the results of the target present identification of children versus adults in the
comparison of human faces. [2]
28. State the results in the target absent condition in the children’s group of the cartoon
versus human faces. [2]
29. State results in the target absent condition in the adult’s group in the cartoon vs human
faces. [2]
30. State results in the target absent condition of children versus adults regarding cartoon
faces. [2]
31. State the results in the target absent condition of children versus adults regarding human
faces. [2]
32. Which 2 results in the target present condition turned out as predicted. [4]
33. Which 2 results in the target absent condition turned out as predicted. [4]
34. State one conclusion of the study. [2]

Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:

35. Why were filler questions used in this study. [2]

36. Outline one methodological strength/weakness of the study. [2]
37. State one weakness in the difference in the way children and adult responded to the
photographs. [2]
38. State the advantage of the type of data used in the study. [2]
39. State one weakness of the type of experiment used. [2]
40. How was the internal validity increased in the study. [2]
41. Why was the ecological validity decreased in the study. [2)]
42. State the ethical issues maintained or broken in the study. [8]
43. State one real world application of this study. [4]
44. Evaluate use of children as a participant in this study. [4]
45. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports nature or nurture. [4]
46. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports individual or
situational. [4]
47. Describe any one assumption of the cognitive approach and explain how one finding of
this study supports the assumption that you have described. [4]

98
 Bandura et al. (aggression)

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. Describe the psychology being investigated in this study. [4]

2. Define gender stereotyping. [2]

Aim and Research Methods:

3. Identify two features of the sample. [2]

4. Outline one aim of the study. [2]
5. State the number of participants used in this study.[1]
6. Describe the sample used in this study. [3]
7. Outline how participants were allocated to one of the conditions in this study. [2]
8. How was the DV collected in this study. [3]
9. Outline the IVs of the study. [3]

Procedure:
10. Describe the aggression arousal procedure in the study.[4]
11. Identify three examples of imitation of physical aggression from this study. [3]
12. Describe how the children were rated on aggressive behavior in their nursery school, prior to
the study. [5]
13. What did the model do in no model condition. [2]
14. In the final part participant spent 20 minutes in experimental room and behavior were
observed. Outline the procedure for this final part of the study. [3]

Results/findings and Conclusion:

15. Outline two quantitative results about ‘imitative aggression’ from the study by Bandura et al.
[2]
16. Describe how the results of the study can be applied to helping parents reduce aggressive
behavior in their children. [4]
17. Explain how one result supports individual explanation of aggression and how one result
supports situational explanation of aggression. [8]
18. Describe one result about aggressive gun play in the aggressive experimental groups.[2]

Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:

19. Outline one way in which this study has real world application for adults. [2]
20. Outline one result from Bandura study that supports social learning theory and one result
that does not support social learning theory. [8]
21. Outline how one finding supports one assumption of learning approach. [2]
22. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports nature or nurture. (4)

23. Explain how 2 ethical guidelines were followed or broken. [2]

24. Describe how the study lacks validity. [2]
25. Outline how the study was standardized. [2]

99
 Fagen at al. (elephant learning)

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. What is the psychology of being investigated? [4]

2. Define what is positive reinforcement. [2]
3. Define what is secondary positive, reinforcement training (SPR). [2]
4. State one advantage of using the SPR method. [2]

Aim and Research Methods:

5. What type of study was this? [2]

6. What type of observation was this? [2]
7. Describe the sample of the study. [2]
8. What was the diet of the elephants? [2]
9. State the primary and secondary reinforcer of the study. [4]
10. State three methods in which the elephants were trained. [6]
11. What is the aim of the study? [2]

Procedure:

12. State the behavioral tasks and methods taught to the elephants.
(Any one or two maybe asked) [2]
13. Which three tasks were discarded in the study. [2]
14. define what is behavior chaining. [2]
15. State one individual difference within the elephants [2]

Results/findings and Conclusion:

16. How was the data recorded in the study? [2]

17. What type of data was collected? [2]
18. State one/two result of the study. [2]
19. State one conclusion from the study. [2]

Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:

20. Evaluate the study in terms of generalization. [2]

21. State the practical issues in the study. [4]
22. State the application to everyday life of the study. [4]
23. Evaluate the animal ethical guidelines maintained/broken in this study. [2]
24. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports nature or nurture
debate. [4]
25. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports individual or situational
debate. [4]
26. Describe any one assumption of the learning approach and explain how one finding of this
study supports the assumption that you have described. [4]

100
 Saavedra and Silverman (button phobia)

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. Describe the psychology being investigated in this study. [4]

2. Define classical conditioning, with example. [4]

Aim and Research Methods:

3. Outline the aim of the study. [2]

4. Describe the type of research method used in this study. [2]
5. Outline how data was collected in this study. [2]
6. Describe the participant used in this study. [3]

Procedure:
7. Describe what happened during the behavioral exposures’ intervention phase of the therapy.
[4]
8. Outline how the subjective rating of distress was measured in this study. [2]
9. Describe the disgust/fear hierarchy. [3]
10. Describe how the boy in the study was diagnosed with this phobia. [2]
11. Describe the ‘behavioral exposure’ procedure as used in this study. [4]
12. Outline the post-treatment follow up assessment session. [2]
13. Describe the feelings thermometer. [2]
14. Describe how Saavedra and Silverman used the Child Anxiety and Phobia Program to
diagnose the boy who had a phobia of buttons. [4]
15. Describe the disgust related exposure sessions. [3]

Results/findings and Conclusion:

16. Describe how the results of the study can help with understanding and treating phobias.
17. Describe how the boy’s distress rating changed over the first three sessions in response to
imagining hundreds of buttons falling on his body. [2]
18. Outline the results from the post treatment assessment session. [3]
19. Outline the results from 6 month follow up. [2]

Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:

20. Outline one piece of information from this study that supported the nature side of the
nature nurture debate. [2]
21. Describe one methodological strength of this study. [2]
22. Outline one real world application based on results or conclusion of this study. [2]
23. Explain one problem when using children in psychological research, using this study as an
example. [2]
24. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports individual or situational
debate. [4]
25. Describe any one assumption of the learning approach and explain how one finding of this
study supports the assumption that you have described. [4]
26. Simone is a student who never uses a spoon to eat with at lunchtime because he has a
phobia of spoons.
Outline how he could be helped to overcome his phobia of spoons, using your knowledge
from the study. [4]

101
 27. Two friends, Javier, and Lorena are discussing the ethics of the study. Javier thinks the study
is ethical, but Lorena thinks it is unethical.
Explain one reason why Javier is correct and one reason why Lorena is correct, using
evidence from this study. [6]
28. Explain why this study is from a learning approach. {2]

102
 Milgram (obedience)

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. What is meant by the term ‘obedience’? [2]

2. Suggest one reason why obedience in society is desirable. [2]
3. Describe the psychology being investigated in this study. [4]

Aim and Research Methods:

4. What was the original aim of the study? [2]

5. What was the deceptive aim of the study? [2]
6. Outline dependent variable and how it was operationalized? [2]
7. To what extent did the results of the study support Milgram’s hypothesis? [2]

Procedure:
8. From the Milgram study on obedience, give two reasons why some participants did not
continue to 450 volts. [4]
9. From the study by Milgram (obedience):
(a) Describe how the experimenter tried to stop participants from withdrawing from the
study. [2]
(b) Why are participants given the right to withdraw from psychology studies? [2]
10. From the study by Milgram (obedience):
(a) Briefly describe one piece of apparatus used. [2]
(b) Explain why this apparatus was necessary to the study. [2]
11. Before ‘drawing lots’ to decide who became the teacher and who became the learner.
Milgram told participants about the effects of punishment on learning.
Describe what the participants were told. [4]
12. Describe the shock generator used in the study. [4]
13. Describe what the experimenter said if a participant asked whether the learner ws suffering
permanent injury. [3]
Results/findings and Conclusion:

14. What did Milgram conclude from his findings? [2]

15. Briefly describe one finding from the study. [2]
16. Why might it be difficult to apply the findings from this study to obedience in
everyday life?[2]
17. (a) Outline the prediction made by these students. [2]
(b) Suggest whether the findings of the experiment supported this prediction. [2]
18. In Milgram’s study on obedience, he says that we learn in childhood that it is a ‘breach of
moral conduct to hurt another person’.
(a) To what extent did Milgram’s participants follow the moral conduct they had learned? [2]
(b) What did Milgram conclude? [2]
19. Outline how one finding supports or contradicts this aim. [2]
20. (a) What were the results of this investigation? [2]
(b) What do these results tell us about the sense of obligation for Milgram’s original
participants? [2]

103
 Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:
21. The study by Milgram on obedience to authority recruited participants through a
newspaper advertisement.
(a) Suggest one advantage of recruiting participants through newspaper advertisements. [2]
(b) Suggest one disadvantage of recruiting participants through newspaper
advertisements.[2]
22. In the study by Milgram on obedience to authority, of the 40 participants 14 stopped at 300
volts or before, whilst 26 participants continued to 450 volts.
(a) Give one reason why some participants continued to 450 volts. [2]
(b) Give one reason why some participants stopped before 450 volts. [2]
23. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports nature or nurture. [4]
24. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports individual or situational.
[4]
25. Describe how the procedure of the study could be applied to help with training military
personnel. [4]

104
 Perry

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. Outline the psychology being investigated in this study? [4]

2. According to Edward what are the 4 different time zones of space? [4]
3. State 2 factors that can influence personal space requirements? [2]
4. Define empathy. [2]

Aim and Research Methods:

5. What is the aim of the study? [2]

6. Outline the type of experiment? [2]
7. Describe the experimental design of the study. [4]
8. State 2 features of the sample. [2]
9. State 2 features of the interpersonal reactivity index. [2]

Procedure:
10. How were the participants divided between the OT condition and placebo condition? [1]
11. Describe the procedure of the comfortable interpersonal distance (CID) Paradigm. [4]
12. When did the animation stop in the CID paradigm. [2]
13. Which objects were in the rooms in experiment 2. [3]
14. What stimuli was in the experimental condition in experiment 2. [2]
15. What stimuli was present in the control condition in experiment 2. [2]
16. What were the 3 independent variables manipulated in experiment one. [3]
17. What was the dependent variable of experiment one. [2]
18. In experiment one what were the differences found between preferred distances between
stranger, authority, ball, and friend [2]

Results/findings and Conclusion:

19. What was the result of treatment (OT) And empathy? [2]
20. What was the result of treatment and condition and empathy [2]
21. In experiment 2 what were the results in terms of chairs? [2]
22. In experiment 2 what were the differences between the high and low empathy groups after
OT administration [2]
23. What correlation was seen between the results of experiment one and experiment 2 [2]
24. State the conclusion of the study by Perry. [2]

Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:

25. State one weakness of using a lab experiment in the study by Perry. [2]
26. State how the study by Perry had high internal validity. [4]
27. How was the study by Perry high in reliability? [2]
28. State one weakness of the sample in the study by Perry [2]
29. Discuss the ethical issues maintained and broken in the study by Perry [8]
30. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports individual or situational.
[4]

105
 Piliavin et al. (subway Samaritans)

The psychology being investigated and background:

1. Describe the psychology being investigated in the study. [4]

2. Define bystander apathy. [2]
3. Describe two reasons why the study by Piliavin et al was done. [4]
4. What is the difference between old and new study conducted. [2]
5. What is meant by the term diffusion of responsibility. [2]
6. Briefly describe the context that led to research on ‘diffusion of responsibility’. [2]

Aim and Research Methods:

7. Outline the aim of the study. [2]

8. Outline any one independent variable of the study. [2]
9. Outline the dependent variable of the study.
10. How was the DV operationalized and collected in this study. [3]
11. Define the type of experiment used. [2]
12. Briefly describe the location of the study. [2]
13. Describe the sample and sampling technique used. [4]
14. Identify two characteristics of the sample used. [2]

Procedure:
15. Give two ways in which the drunk victim behaved. [2]
16. Give two ways in which the ill victim behaved. [2]
17. Describe early and late adjacent model condition. [4]
18. Describe early and late critical model condition. [4]
19. Outline the role of confederates in the study. [2]
20. Identify two similarities and one difference between the victims. [3]
21. Describe the group of students who conducted this study. [4]

Results/findings and Conclusion:

22. Outline one measurement of behavior (dependent variable) that was recorded by the
observers. [2]
23. Outline one finding from the study.[2]
24. Outline conclusion from this study. [2]
25. Outline how one result from the study does not support the concept of diffusion of
responsibility. [2]
26. Describe one quantitative result of the behavior of the participants in the critical area. [2]
27. Explain what psychologists have learned about bystander behavior using two results from
the study. [8]
28. Describe one result about spontaneous helping of white victims and one result about
spontaneous helping of black victims. [5]
29. Describe what was recorded by females observers in the study. [4]

106
 Assumption, Strengths and weaknesses, issues, debates, and approaches:
30. Explain one methodological strength of this study. [2]
31. Explain one methodological weakness of this study. [2]
32. Outline one ethical weakness of the study. [2]
33. Outline one ethical strength of the study. [2]
34. How was the study high in ecological validity. [2]
35. How was the study low in reliability. [2]
36. Using evidence from the study, explain whether the study supports individual or situational.
[4]

37. Explain why this study is from a social approach. [2]

107
 Social approach

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Milgram (obedience).

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes obedience; social pressure.

e.g.
Obedience was investigated, in particular destructive obedience;
People will follow orders from a person in authority even if it means harming other individuals;
People will show signs of distress when engaging in destructive obedience. Participants in the
study showed sweating, nervous laughing, biting of lip, violent seizures, etc;
People will break their own moral guidelines (not harm others) to fulfill an authoritative figure’s
instructions;
‘Blind obedience’ can lead to severe consequences as seen in the real world;
‘Germans are different’ hypothesis – individual;
Here obedience was more situational and therefore Germans might not be so different after all;
Rather a natural human tendency to succumb to authority;

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Piliavin et al. (subway Samaritans.

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes bystander apathy; diffusion of responsibility.

e.g.
Diffusion of responsibility;
This is when a person is less likely to take responsibility for their actions/inactions when others are
present;
That is, the more people are present, the less likely a person may help someone who is in need;
There is also an idea that responsibility is shared (in the group);
Also, if they do decide to help then they will take more time to do so; People have the belief that
‘other people’ will help someone out if they are around;
An example was seen in the Kitty Genovese case where some people believed others would help
her;

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Perry et al. (personal space).

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes interpersonal distance (personal space); social hormones;

empathy.
e.g.
Interpersonal distance;
This refers to the relative distance between people / the area of space around a person in which
they prefer others not to enter.
This preferred space can vary depending on different social situations such as how intimately we
know the other person? How often do we interact? etc. These factors, we can become more or
less responsive.
Through interaction effects researchers wanted to investigate in this study the effect of 3
independent variables (Oxytocin, empathy,conditions) on people's need for personal space.
It was observed how need for personal space compares when one encounters strangers vs when
they encounter a friend depending on individual differences in oxytocin and empathetic abilities
which shape people's social salience.

108
 Learning approach

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Saavedra and Silverman.

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes evaluative learning; operant conditioning; classical conditioning;

phobias.
e.g.
Phobias were investigated (1). These are when people develop some irrational fear of an
object/situation (1).
Investigated evaluative learning and expectancy learning – two forms of classical conditioning
(identification mark);
A person comes to perceive (evaluate) a previously neutral object or an event negatively.
The person negatively evaluates the object/event without anticipating any threat/danger.
This negative evaluation elicits a feeling of disgust rather than fear.
Differs from expectancy learning as the person is being cognitively active by thinking about disgust
and consequences rather than being a passive organism (2 marks)
Operant Conditioning. One example of this is using a reward to increase the probability of a
behaviour being repeated.
Classical Conditioning. This is when stimuli are associated together after several pairings happen.

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Bandura et al. (aggression).

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes social learning theory; aggression.

e.g.:
Social Learning theory was being investigated which centers around observing and imitating
behaviours;
People pay attention to a role model;
They retain this information in their memory;
They must feel like they are capable of imitating the behaviour;
They must feel motivated to want to imitate the behaviour / feel will get rewarded for imitation.
Aggression can be physical (hitting) and verbal (shouting).
Delayed imitation is when someone witnesses a behaviour at one time point, but only reproduces
that behaviour at a different time point (like in Bandura the exposure occurred in the 1st phase of
the study but the measurement of behaviour occurred in the 3rd phase which was conducted in a
new room in the absence of the model;

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Fagen et al.

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes operant conditioning; reinforcement; shaping; behavioral

chaining.
e.g.
Captive animals were studied in this piece of research in their natural environments. And to protect
animal welfare and keeper safety;
Operant Conditioning was used. This is using a reward to increase the probability of a behavior
being repeated. Psychologists specifically used positive reinforcers like: a banana, to reward
elephants for correct behaviors.
Secondary Positive Reinforcement Training;
This method teaches animals to associate specific sounds called ‘markers’ with food, to reward
wanted behaviors ie: reliable and voluntary engagement in trunk washing procedures.
This training procedure helped find an alternative way of collecting samples from elephants for
prevention or diagnoses of Tuberculosis, without using traditional methods of punishment.

109
 Biological approach

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Dement and Kleitman (sleep and
dreams).

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes sleep patterns, dreaming, REM, nREM, EEGs.

e.g.
Rapid Eye Movement / REM sleep is a phase of sleep when eyes are moving;
Eyes do not move constantly but flicker/show jittery movements then pause, and then continue;
Non-Rapid Eye Movement / nREM sleep are the other stages of sleep and they differ in brain
activity as no eye movements occur;
Electroencephalograms (EEGs) measure brain wave activity and can be used to measure REM
and nREM;
They are used to measure the amplitude and frequency of brain waves;
REM – high frequency, low amplitude
nREM – low frequency, high amplitude

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Hasset et al (monkey toy preferences).

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes sex differences; socialisation; play; the role of hormones.
e.g.
The study wanted to observe how sex differences in males and females can cause physical and
behavioral differences in play;
Play refers to a typical childhood behavior that appears to be done for fun rather than a useful
purpose.
Gender stereotype was observed between male and female monkeys to see if their preference of
toys they play with has link to their own sex. Such as female monkeys being engaged in nurturing
play with plush toys (eg. teddy bear), or male monkeys engaging in aggressive play with Wheeled
toys (eg. trucks).
Impact of biological and social differences were investigated to determine what plays a bigger role
in toy preference: the influence of hormones and brain activity in a monkey's biology? or, the
influence of socialization i.e. behaving in ways that are socially acceptable or gender-appropriate?

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Holzel et al (mindfulness and brain
scans).

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes mindfulness; localisation of function.

e.g.
Localisation of Function: Particular brain areas are responsible for different activities.
This study looks closely at the brain area associated with controlling emotion, arousal and
responsiveness i.e. the Hippocampus.
Mindfulness is the practice that brings increased awareness of the present moment and enables
one to appreciate more positive experiences helping soothe their distress.
The impact on hippocampal volume and plasticity of hippocampus, was observed in response to a
MBSR meditation course that centered around mindfulness.
An MRI machine was used to measure these changes in the hippocampus. The strong magnetic
fields of the MRI are able to detect even the smallest structural changes in the concentration of
gray matter and hence it was able to also notice if meditation increases gray matter or not.

110
 Cognitive approach

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Andrade (doodling).

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes attention; memory.

e.g.
Looking at whether doodling aids (cognitive) concentration/memory/attention;
Single tasks where only one thing needs to be done/attended to is easy as it requires less
cognitive processing;
Dual tasks on the other hand can be more difficult to manage because more cognitive processing
is required;
The secondary task might act as a distractor and impair our performance;
Or it could reduce boredom and/or overcome day-dreaming;
Thereby aiding concentration in the primary task;

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Baron-Cohen (Eyes test).

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes theory of mind; social sensitivity.

e.g.
Theory of Mind;
This refers to our ability to attribute mental states to ourselves and others;
These can be desires, emotions etc.;
It is linked to empathy which is the ability to understand how other people are feeling/thinking;
This can be done by imagining what the other person is feeling/thinking / putting ourselves in the
shoes of others;
It is also about how we use this knowledge to explain the actions of other people;
It is also about how we use this knowledge to predict the actions of others; We use this knowledge
to understand that people may have different ideas and hold different emotions to us;
It can be tested using the Eyes Test where people have to judge the emotions of others’ by looking
at eyes only (example mark)

Describe the psychology being invested in the study by Pozullo et al (lineups).

Creditworthy ‘psychology’ includes false positive responses; eyewitness testimony.

e.g.
Eyewitness testimony;
In legal cases, eye witnesses who have either seen or heard a crime are called up to give
information about the details of an incident or criminal event. In some cases a child may be the
only witness. Whether they are reliable or prone to false memories was examined in this study.
False Memories;
Eyewitnesses may experience a distortion in what they are able to recall and may confidently
believe in the validity of events that are untrue and may never have taken place. This is often seen
in cases where witnesses are followed up for post-event information and they answer with false
statements or judgements.
Lineup; an array of people are shown to witnesses to identify the likely culprit they most assume
was the perpetrator. Here witnesses may showcase False Positive responses by giving incorrect
answers mistakenly. This identification error can be more likely made by a child compared to an
adult and so this study compared each of their accuracy in identifying the culprit or rejecting it.
Several social and cognitive factors were also looked at that may impact decision-making such as:
role of authority figure, perceived pressure, familiar vs unfamiliar targets etc.

111
 Lab Experiment Field Experiment Observation Self-report Case Study
Who  Sample characteristics:
(sample) o Number (only ONE for case study)
o Age range
o Sex distribution
o Any special characteristics (e.g. autism/etc.)
 Sampling technique:
o Either opportunity OR volunteer/self-selected
Where  Some aspect of a  Some aspect of a  Variable  Variable  Variable
(location) laboratory field/real-life setting
o Controlled and
standardized
environment
When (time-  Usually for 15-60 mins  Usually for 15-60 mins  Usually for 15-60 mins  Usually for 15-60 mins  For months -
period) years
(longitudinal)
What  IV  IV  Overt OR covert Questionnaire Interview  Based on the
(measurement) Type Open and/or Structured, question.
and  DV measured using  DV measured using  Controlled OR naturalistic closed-ended semi-structured
How (measuring (appropriate to the (appropriate to the OR un-  Use a
device) question): question):  Structured OR un-structured (I structured combination of
o Self-report o Self-report prefer structured!) different data
Administer Paper-pencil Face-to-face OR
o Observation o Observation collection
task OR online telephone
o Physiological o Physiological  Participant OR non-participant techniques such
OR postal
tests tests as different self-
 Behavioral categories (what Number of Variable Variable reports AND
 Design  Design are you going to observe – questions observations
o IMD o IMD give 3-4 examples)
o RMD o RMD o Use the word Examples Question Question  Triangulation
number of times of dependent dependent
 Type (already stated –  Type (already stated – [frequency] questions
lab) field) (3-4) Open and/or Open and/or
 Measurement closed-ended closed-ended
 Controls/standardizatio  Controls/standardization o Tally table questions questions
n
 Two observers observing the Likert Audio-recording
same behaviors scales/True or using
o Will do a correlation Measure False for participant’s
check for inter-rater closed-ended. consent OR
agreement/reliability Box/space for note-taking
open-ended

Add Likert Content-analysis

scale/True for qual. Add
Score values values for quan

NOTE: READ, READ, READ the question carefully and apply the scenario given when writing your answers. DO NOT MAKE STUDIES TOTALLY UNETHICAL (half marks only)!

112
 Correlation
Who  Sample characteristics:
(sample) o Number (only ONE for case study)
o Age range
o Sex distribution
o Any special characteristics (e.g. autism/etc.)
 Sampling technique:
o Either opportunity OR volunteer/self-selected
Where  Variable
(location)

When (time-  Variable

period)

What  Relationship word = correlational study

(measurement)
and  Collect quantitative data ONLY!
How (measuring o Self-reports - interviews or questionnaires…CLOSED-ENDED QS
device) o Observation - behavioral categories that are measured using a tally table
o Physiological test - some biological factor will be quantitatively measured

 Identify variable 1 and then identify variable 2 in the question

 Come up with quantitative measurements for each variable. Both variables can be measured using the same data collection technique (e.g., self-reports for both) OR
different data collection techniques can be used (e.g., self-reports for one variable and observations for the other).

 Data will be plotted on a scatter-diagram and then a positive or negative trend will be observed to find out the exact relationship

NOTE: READ, READ, READ the question carefully and apply the scenario given when writing your answers. DO NOT MAKE STUDIES TOTALLY UNETHICAL (half marks only)!

113
 Specimen Paper 2024:

Dr Felix believes that adults between the ages of 55 and 65 cope less well with their job
regardless of whether they stay in the same job or change jobs. Dr Felix plans to use a sample
of adults aged 55 at the beginning of the study. She will re-contact the participants by
telephone as she has a record of each individual’s telephone number and will be following
appropriate ethical guidelines.

(a) Describe how Dr Felix could conduct a longitudinal study to investigate how well adults
between the ages of 55 and 65 cope with their jobs. Do not describe how Dr Felix would re-
contact her participants, the sample/sampling technique, or ethical issues/guidelines in your
answer.

Every year on December 20th, for 11 years, her participants will give their interview regarding
coping abilities in association to their jobs. Felix will be conducting a semi-structured interview
where she’ll have a few questions prepared and depending on her participants responses
she’ll adapt and ask more if need be. The interview will be conducted online over Zoom so
that even if her participants move states or cities etc. they don’t have to drop out of the study
and still can report back. Number of questions will range somewhere from 10 to 15. Examples
of questions are: “How old are you?”, “Have you changed your job since the last time we saw
you? Yes or No”, “Describe how difficult this year was for you professionally, and how you
handled it with its stressors?”, “On the scale of 1 to 10, from 1 being- extremely bad and 10
being- extremely good, how would you rate your relationship with your work
friends/colleagues”, “Describe, what were some of the highlights you experienced
professionally this year?”. The interview will take 45 minutes to an hour.

Felix will measure the responses using audio recording. To evaluate the responses she shall
be conducting a content analysis for Qualitative data and see how her participants' vocabulary
and viewpoint (positive or negative) regarding their job has changed over the years, and what
that says about how well they were able to cope. Scores will also be added up for Quantitative
data to help us in our analysis to find if coping has been healthy or not over the years for each
participant. The higher the scores on the quantitative data the better the participants will be
assumed to have been coping well. Some of these questions will be standard each year so a
comparison can be made over the years, others will be tailored to fit each participant's
circumstances to acquire adequate detail.

114
 (b i) Describe one practical/methodological strength of the procedure you
have described in your answer to part (a). Do not refer to re-contacting the participants,
sampling or ethics in your answer.

One methodological strength of Felix’s study is the use of Quantitative data which will help
the researcher in making statistical comparisons between the participants' coping ratings at
age 55 compared to age 65. This will indicate what kind of impact/change they have
experienced over the duration of the study. An average can also be estimated to gain a figure
for how well this age range is at coping with their jobs.

(b ii) Explain why the feature of the procedure you have identified in (i) is a
strength. Do not refer to re-contacting the participants, sampling or ethics in your
answer.

The use of Quantitative data is a strength because it is a validated measure to acquire

participants responses regarding their coping behaviors. It does not leave room for
interpretation which minimizes subjectivity and enhances an objective outlook on coping. The
statistical comparison is a direct way of showcasing the gradual change we intend to see for
which we have conducted this longitudinal research.

115
 S21/22: Q10

Seth is planning a study to investigate the communication and emotion in a family. The family
consists of a mother, father, grandmother and one son. They live in a remote house and do
not interact with other people often.

(a) Describe how Seth could conduct a case study to investigate the communication and
emotion in this family.

The sample for Seth’s case study is the family aforementioned consisting of 4 members (2
males and 2 females). The study contains a varied age range from the son being 18 years
old to grandmother of age 70. The study will take place in their home and will last for a year.
Valid consent will be obtained from all the family members to make the study ethical.

Seth can conduct a questionnaire to obtain responses about communication and emotion in
the family. The questionnaire will be 15 questions long and will contain both close- and open-
ended questions to obtain Quantitative as well as Qualitative data. It will be conducted every
3 months on the 1st of that month, meaning 4 times in the year to obtain ample data. This will
be a paper pencil task that will take 45 minutes up to an hour to complete. The examples of
questions are: On the scale of 1 to 10, 1 being- not comfortable at all and 10 being- extremely
comfortable, how comfortable are you talking to your family members?”, “Describe which
family member you go to when you are struggling with something in your life, and why?”, “On
the scale of 1 to 5, 1 being- not at all to 5 being- a large amount, how much privacy would
you say you have in your home?”, “In detail, explain how open you are to sharing your feelings
with the rest of your family?”, “Do you wish to always live in isolation? Yes or No”. The same
questionnaire will be filled by all members of the family.

The study will also contain an observational method of data collection. These observations
will be conducted daily for 10 minutes for the span of the 1 year. Seth along with a friend of
his should conduct these observations covertly so the family remains unaware of it. They can
install CCTV cameras in the house and go through the footage at any time of the day for 10
minutes. This will be a naturalistic, structured, non-participant observation. Since it's
structured, Seth will have a set of behaviors he will aim to observe. Examples are: number of
times one family member shouts at another, number of times they sit and have dinner
together, number of times they watch something on the TV, number of times one family
member hugs another member of the family etc. The behaviors will be measured using a tally
table and for inter rater reliability Seth and his friend will fill their own tables to do a correlation
check towards the end.

The scores will be added up for closed-ended questions to measure the responses of the
participants, the higher the scores the better the communication and emotion will be
presumed to be in the family. For the open ended questions, an in depth content analysis will
be conducted to see if over the duration of that study their outlook of communication and
emotion has changed as the months went by. In the end a triangulation will be conducted
using the data from both the observations and questionnaire to assess the communication
and emotion between the family. The questions and behavioral categories will remain
standardized for all months so a comparison can be made towards the end and an inter-rater
reliability check can be observed.

116
 (b i) Describe one practical/methodological strength of the procedure you have described in
your answer to part (a). Do not refer to sampling or ethics in your answer.

One methodological strength of Seth’s study is the use of Quantitative data in questionnaires
which will help the researcher in making statistical comparisons between the participants'
responses about communication and emotion over the months. The quantitative data
collected by observations helped ensure the reliability of our study as a correlation check was
conducted for inter-rater agreement.

(b ii) Explain why the feature of the procedure you have identified in (i) is a strength. Do not
refer to sampling or ethics in your answer.

The use of Quantitative data is a strength because it is an objective measure to acquire

participants' responses regarding their subjective outlook on the family’s communication and
emotions. It does not leave room for interpretation which minimizes subjectivity and enhances
validity of the study. The statistical comparison is a direct way of showcasing the difference
in responses we intend to see for which we have conducted this longitudinal research.

117
 S18/21; Q10.

Fajar has noticed that some of the younger children in her school believe their toys have
feelings but the older children generally do not. She wants to find out more about what
children believe and when beliefs change. She is planning to use a questionnaire.

(a) Describe how Fajar could conduct a study using a questionnaire to find out about the
children’s beliefs.

Fajar should recruit 60 children, equal number of males and females from the nearest school
in her locality making it an opportunity sampling. Half the students should be classified as
young which would be operationalized as 4-6 years old, whereas the other half would be
classified as old and would be ranging from 10-12 years. Consent would be taken from the
children’s guardians and their principal as well to make the study ethical.

Fajar should conduct the study in the school during break time and it would take
approximately 20 minutes to fill the questionnaire. The questionnaire should be a closed-
ended questionnaire which would be administered as a paper-pencil task in a quiet room in
the school. There should be 10 questions asked. Some examples of the questions to be
asked are ‘To what extent do you think your toy has feelings’, ‘To what extent do you think
your toy gets angry when you shout at it?’, ‘To what extent do you think your toy feels happy
when you take care of it?’, ‘To what extent do you think your toys know when you are sad?’
These questions should be measured using a child-friendly Likert scale from 1-5, 1
corresponding to not at all and 5 corresponding to almost always.

The answers on the Likert scale will be scored by adding them up and a higher number would
correspond to more agreement with the fact that toys have emotions.

(b i) Describe one practical/methodological strength of the procedure you have described in

your answer to part (a). Do not refer to sampling or ethics in your answer.

One methodological strength of Fajar’s study is the use of Quantitative data which will help
the researcher in making statistical comparisons between the younger participants' and the
older ones about their belief in toys. This will indicate which age group is more likely to believe
in this idea.

(b ii) Explain why the feature of the procedure you have identified in (i) is a strength. Do not
refer to sampling or ethics in your answer.

The use of Quantitative data is a strength because it is an objective measure to acquire

participants' responses regarding their beliefs about toys/inanimate objects. It does not leave
room for interpretation which minimizes subjectivity and enhances validity of the study. The
statistical comparison is a direct way of showcasing the difference in responses we intend to
see between the two age groups.

118
 W18/22; Q10.

Dr Fox is planning a field experiment to investigate obedience in school children. Her aim is
to test whether they are more obedient to teachers who are dressed in informal or formal
clothes.

(a) Describe how Dr Fox could conduct a field experiment to test her aim.

Dr. Fox should recruit 60 students, an equal number of males and females, ranging from the
ages of 10-12 to take part in the study. As the sample would already be in their classrooms,
an opportunity sampling technique should be used. Consent would be taken from the
children’s parents as well as the school administration to make the study ethical.

The study should be conducted in two separate classrooms at the school, each having 30
students, and would last for approximately 45 minutes – the duration of one class lesson. The
independent variable in the study would be the dressing style of the teacher with two levels,
formal and informal. The same teacher would be teaching both the classes thus the sex of
the teacher would be controlled. When the teacher is formally dressed, he would be wearing
a suit. When he is informally dressed, he would be wearing jeans and a t-shirt. Since each
class, and therefore participants, is only exposed to one dressing of the teacher, the study
uses an independent measures design. An overt observation will be conducted by two
observers who will be introduced as new teachers in the school, called to observe the
students. They would be conducting a naturalistic, non-participant and structured observation
in the classroom using a predetermined list of behaviors to observe. Some behaviors on that
list would be the number of times students are talking to each other in class, number of times
they are raising their hands to ask a question, number of times they are out of seat and
number of times they are yelling at each other. Thus, these are the ways in which obedience
is operationalized and they form the dependent variable. A tally table will be used to measure
the frequency of each of these behaviors. Other controls to be used in the study would be
that the teacher would be teaching the same topic and in the same way across both the
classes and will be appearing to be in the same happy mood.

(b i) Describe one practical/methodological strength of the procedure you have described in

your answer to part (a). Do not refer to sampling or ethics in your answer.

One methodological strength of Fox’s study is the use of Quantitative data which will help the
researcher in making statistical comparisons between obedience of students for teachers in
formal clothes compared to informal ones. The scores on the tally table will help determine
which dressing is more likely going to make students obedient.

(b ii) Explain why the feature of the procedure you have identified in (i) is a strength. Do not
refer to sampling or ethics in your answer.

The use of Quantitative data is a strength because it is an objective measure to acquire

participants' obedience levels by their outward behavior. It does not leave room for
interpretation which minimizes subjectivity and enhances validity of the study. The statistical
comparison is a direct way of showcasing the difference in compliance we intend to see
between the two styles of dressing.

119
 W19/23; Q10

Fazli wants to study the relationship between kindness and obedience. He is not sure whether
people who are more obedient will be more or less kind to others.

(a) Describe how Fazli could conduct a correlational study to investigate this relationship.
Your study must be ethical.

Fazli should recruit 60 people, equal number of males and females, ranging from 18 to 60
years of age, by placing an advert on social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and
Twitter. The advert will ask people to take part in a study on the relationship between
personality and general habits towards other people. Thus, Fazli would be using a volunteer
sampling technique to recruit people. Valid consent shall be obtained upon their arrival.

People would be asked to visit Fazli’s laboratory which will be housed in the basement of a
university, and this is the place where people will fill out questionnaires to measure the
mentioned variables in the study. The questionnaire will take approximately 30 minutes to
answer. Both the variables obedience and kindness will be measured using the same
questionnaire. The questionnaire will be a closed-ended questionnaire administered as a
paper-pencil task to people in the laboratory individually. The questionnaire will contain
roughly 20 questions, 10 each for obedience and 10 for kindness. Some examples of
questions to be asked for obedience would be: ‘To what extent would you listen to your
parents?’ ‘To what extent would you follow traffic rules?’ ‘To what extent do you listen to
people in positions of authority?’ and ‘To what extent would other people call you an obedient
individual?’. All of these questions would be measured using a Likert-type scale ranging from
1 (not at all) to 5 (all the time/extremely). In order to measure kindness, some examples of
questions are: ‘To what extent do you help others in need?’ ‘To what extent do you greet
strangers?’ ‘To what extent do you speak politely to people around you?’. These questions
will also be measured using the same Likert-type scale mentioned above - ranging from 1
(not at all) to 5 (all the time/extremely).

The answers on questions for obedience and kindness will be added separately and higher
scores means people are more obedient and/or kind. The data will then be plotted on a
scatter-diagram and then a positive or negative trend will be observed to find out the exact
relationship between obedience and kindness. In the end participants will be debriefed
regarding all the procedures of the study.

120
 (b i) Describe one practical/methodological strength of the procedure you have described in
your answer to part (a). Do not refer to sampling or ethics in your answer.

One methodological strength of Fazli’s study is the use of Quantitative data which will allow
the researcher to plot the scores on the scatter plot to observe the trend and relationship
between levels of obedience and kindness of people. This will help in inferring whether the
relationship is positive or negative.

(b ii) Explain why the feature of the procedure you have identified in (i) is a strength. Do not
refer to sampling or ethics in your answer.

The use of Quantitative data is a strength because it is an objective measure to acquire

participants' obedience and kindness levels using numbers alone. It does not leave room for
interpretation which minimizes subjectivity and enhances validity of the study. The graphical
representation of this data is a direct way of showcasing the relationship we intend to see
between the two variables of the study.

121
 M19/22; Q10

Jim is planning an observational study about the way people respond to facial expressions.
He intends to go to a train station and either smile or frown at people. He wants to see how
people respond to him.

(a)Describe how Jim could conduct an observational study at a train station to find out how
people respond to smiling and frowning.

Jim could conduct a naturalistic participant observation by appearing to be one of the

commuters at the train station. He could carry a backpack with him, hold a train ticket in his
hand and covertly observe commuters at the train station by walking around and faking
different facial expressions, thereby using opportunity sampling. He should observe 20
people, an equal number of males and females of diverse ages at the station. Jim should
observe each person for about a minute only so that he does not come across as harassing
someone. This would protect people from psychological harm and thus result in the
observation being partially ethical. For half the people that Jim observes, he should be smiling
at them while for the other half he should be frowning, making sure that his participants see
him. Jim should have a predetermined set of behaviors listed in his notebook that he would
use to record behaviors, thus using a structured observation. Some behaviors that Jim could
observe are the people’s reactions towards him such as number of times people make eye
contact, the number of times they smile and/or frown back at him, number of times they walk
away from him in fear, and number of times they cover their face with their hands. Jim along
with a friend of his should conduct this covert observation. They will be sitting opposite to one
another so as to not seem suspicious. The behaviors will be measured using a tally table and
for inter rater reliability Jim and his friend will fill their own tables to do a correlation check
towards the end and inter rater reliability will be assessed.

(b i) Describe one practical/methodological strength of the procedure you have described in

your answer to part (a). Do not refer to sampling or ethics in your answer.

One methodological strength of Jim’s study is the use of Quantitative data which will help the
researcher in making statistical comparisons between the varied responses of the
participants towards Jim’s expressions. The quantitative data collected by observations also
helped ensure the reliability of our study as a correlation check was conducted for inter-rater
agreement. This helps in confirming that Jim didn’t miss out on any important behavior or
misinterpret it.

(b ii) Explain why the feature of the procedure you have identified in (i) is a strength. Do not
refer to sampling or ethics in your answer.

The use of Quantitative data is a strength because it does not leave room for interpretation
which minimizes subjectivity and enhances validity of the study. It gives us an objective
assessment of participants' response to a stranger's facial expression in a public setting. The
statistical comparison is a direct way of showcasing the difference in responses we intend to
see for which we have conducted this research.

122