ALL 16 Marks SI Attach Mem Approach 2024

Name: ________________________
ALL 16 markers from SI,

Mem, Attach, Approaches
Class: ________________________
Date: ________________________
Time: 760 minutes
Marks: 608 marks
Comments:
Page 1 of 60
Q1.
Discuss research into minority influence.
You may use this space to plan your answer.
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
(Total 16 marks)
Q2.
Describe how situational variables have been found to affect obedience. Discuss what
these situational variables tell us about why we obey.
Page 2 of 60
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
(Total 16 marks)
Q3.
Psychologists investigating social influence have discovered several reasons why people
conform.
Discuss what psychological research has told us about why people conform.
(Total 16 marks)
Q4.
Read the item and then answer the question that follows.
Two psychology students were discussing the topic of social influence.
‘I find it fascinating how some people are able to resist social influence’, said
Jack.
‘It must be the result of having a confident personality.’
Page 3 of 60
‘I disagree’, replied Sarah. ‘I think resisting social influence depends much more
on the presence of others.’
Discuss two explanations of resistance to social influence. As part of your discussion,

refer to the views expressed by Jack and Sarah in the conversation above.
(Total 16 marks)
Q5.
Steph and Jeff are student teachers who recently joined other
members of staff on a one-day strike. When asked why they
decided to do so, Steph replied, ‘I never thought I would strike but I
listened to the other teachers’ arguments and now I have become
quite passionate about it’.
Jeff’s explanation was different: ‘To be honest, everyone else

seemed to be striking and I didn’t want to be the only one who
wasn’t’.
Discuss explanations for conformity. Refer to Steph and Jeff as part of your discussion.
(Total 16 marks)
Q6.
Discuss at least two explanations for defiance of authority. Refer to evidence in your
answer.
(Total 16 marks)
Q7.
‘By today’s standards, many studies of social influence would be judged unethical.’
Discuss ethical issues that have arisen in social influence research. Refer to evidence in
your answer.
(Total 16 marks)
Q8.
Outline and evaluate research into conformity.
Page 4 of 60
(Total 16 marks)
Q9.
Discuss at least two factors that have been shown to affect conformity. Refer to evidence
in your answer.
(Total 16 marks)
Q10.
Discuss research into the effects of anxiety on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony.
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
Page 5 of 60
_______________________________________________________________________
(Total 16 marks)
Q11.
Most PIN codes are 4 digits long and are easy to remember. In contrast, mobile phone
numbers are 11 digits long. Most people would not be able to remember a friend’s new
mobile phone number unless they were able to say it to themselves several times without
interruption.
Discuss the multi-store model of memory. Refer to the information above in your answer.
(Total 16 marks)
Q12.
Outline and evaluate research (theories and/or studies) into the effects of misleading
information on eyewitness testimony.
(Total 16 marks)
Q13.
Describe and evaluate the working memory model of memory.
(Total 16 marks)
Q14.
A woman is being questioned by a police officer about a heated argument she witnessed
on an evening out with friends. The argument took place in a bar and ended with a violent
assault. A knife was discovered later by police in the car park of the bar.
‘Did you see the knife the attacker was holding?’, asked the police officer.
‘I’m not sure there was a knife – yes, there probably was,’ replied the woman. ‘I was so
scared at the time that it’s hard to remember, and my friends and I have talked about what
happened so many times since that I’m almost not sure what I did see.’
Discuss research into two or more factors that affect the reliability of eyewitness
testimony. Refer to the information above in your answer.
(Total 16 marks)
Q15.
Describe and evaluate the multi-store model of memory. Refer to evidence in your answer.
(Total 16 marks)
Q16.
Some psychologists argue that there is always more information about an event in a
person’s memory than can be recalled at any one time. This means that eye-witness recall
can be improved by using certain techniques and methods.
Describe and evaluate at least one way of improving eye-witness recall. Refer to
evidence in your answer.
Page 6 of 60
(Total 16 marks)
Q17.
Describe and evaluate the multi-store model of memory.
(Total 16 marks)
Q18.
Outline and evaluate the working memory model.
(Total 16 marks)
Q19.
Outline Lorenz’s and Harlow’s animal studies of attachment. Discuss what these studies
might tell us about human attachment.
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
(Total 16 marks)
Q20.
Page 7 of 60
Discuss research into caregiver-infant interactions in humans.
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
(Total 16 marks)
Q21.
Discuss research into the influence of early attachment on childhood and/or adult
relationships.
(Total 16 marks)
Q22.
Discuss the effects of institutionalisation. Refer to the studies of Romanian orphans in
your answer.
(Total 16 marks)
Q23.
Page 8 of 60
Outline and evaluate research into cultural variations in attachment.
(Total 16 marks)
Q24.
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment.
(Total 16 marks)
Q25.
Discuss research into the influence of childhood on adult relationships.
(Total 16 marks)
Q26.
Describe and evaluate Ainsworth’s work on attachment. As part of your evaluation, you
should refer to the work of at least one other researcher.
(Total 16 marks)
Q27.
Outline one or more biological explanation(s) for anorexia nervosa. Compare biological
explanation(s) for anorexia nervosa with the family systems explanation for anorexia
nervosa.
(Total 16 marks)
Q28.
Outline the behaviourist approach. Compare the behaviourist approach with the biological
approach.
(Total 16 marks)
Q29.
Tatiana’s parents are concerned about her mobile phone use. She is an anxious child and
has low self-esteem. Tatiana only feels good about herself when she receives messages
or positive comments on social media. She feels safe when she has her phone and
socially isolated without it.
Tatiana’s parents worry that her dependence on her mobile phone is starting to affect her
well-being and achievement at school.
Outline and evaluate the humanistic approach. Refer to Tatiana’s behaviour in your
answer.
(Total 16 marks)
Q30.
Discuss the contribution of behaviourist psychologists such as Pavlov and Skinner to our
understanding of human behaviour.
(Total 16 marks)
Page 9 of 60
Q31.
Describe the psychodynamic approach to explaining human behaviour. Discuss strengths
and limitations of this approach.
(Total 16 marks)
Q32.
Outline key features of the cognitive approach in psychology. Compare the cognitive
approach with the psychodynamic approach.
(Total 16 marks)
Q33.
It has been claimed that the humanistic approach has little to offer psychology. Outline
and evaluate the humanistic approach in psychology. Refer to at least one other
approach in your answer.
(Total 16 marks)
Q34.
Describe the cognitive approach in psychology.
Evaluate the research methods used by cognitive psychologists.

(Total 16 marks)
Q35.
Describe and evaluate the humanistic approach in psychology.
(Total 16 marks)
Q36.
A student asked his teacher: “Why are there so many approaches in psychology?”
The teacher replied: “Because each has something different to offer to our understanding
of the human mind and behaviour. This means that every approach is unique.”
Discuss what makes the psychodynamic approach unique in psychology. Refer to other
approaches in your answer.
(Total 16 marks)
Q37.
Outline and evaluate social learning theory. In your answer, make comparisons with at
least one other approach in psychology.
(Total 16 marks)
Q38.
Describe the humanistic approach in psychology and discuss differences between this
approach and the psychodynamic approach.
(Total 16 marks)
Page 10 of 60
Mark schemes
Q1.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Level Marks Description
Knowledge of minority influence research is accurate

and generally well detailed. Discussion is thorough and
4 13-16 effective. Minor detail and/or expansion of argument is
sometimes lacking. The answer is clear, coherent and
focused. Specialist terminology is used effectively.
Knowledge of minority influence research is evident but

there are occasional inaccuracies/omissions.
3 9-12 Discussion is mostly effective. The answer is mostly
clear and organised but occasionally lacks focus.
Specialist terminology is used appropriately.
Limited knowledge of minority influence research is

present. Focus is mainly on description. Any discussion
2 5-8 is of limited effectiveness. The answer lacks clarity,
accuracy and organisation in places. Specialist
terminology is used inappropriately on occasions.
Knowledge of minority influence research is very

limited. Discussion is limited, poorly focused or absent.
1 1-4 The answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many
inaccuracies and is poorly organised. Specialist
terminology is either absent or inappropriately used.
0 No relevant content.
Note that ‘research’ refers to theories and/or studies of minority influence.
Possible content:
• knowledge of factors affecting minority influence including consistency/persistence,
commitment (the augmentation principle), flexibility
• knowledge of other factors, e.g. confidence
• synchronic (consistency between members of minority) and/or diachronic
consistency (consistency over time)
• process of conversion/internalisation
• accept minority influence processes involved in social change, such as the ‘snowball
effect’, social cryptoamnesia
• description of studies of minority influence, e.g. Moscovici et al (1969), Wood et al
(1994), Nemeth and Brilmayar (1987).
Accept other valid points.
Possible discussion:
• use of research to support/contradict minority influence factors/processes, e.g.
Moscovici et al (blue-green slides) the importance of consistency; Nemeth and
Page 11 of 60
Brilmayar (jury situation) support for flexibility
• use of real-life examples of social change (e.g. Women’s rights movement), to
illustrate processes
• evidence suggests conversion to minority influence involves deeper thought, e.g.
Martin et al (2003), Wood et al (1994)
• artificiality of tasks/evidence vs struggle of real minorities
• majorities in real-life have power and status, not just numbers
• methodological strengths and weaknesses of research into minority influence,
including ethics.

[16]
Q2.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Knowledge of how situational variables affect

obedience is accurate and generally well detailed.
Discussion is thorough and effective. Minor detail
4 13-16
and/or expansion of argument is sometimes lacking.
The answer is clear, coherent and focused. Specialist
terminology is used effectively.

obedience is evident but there are occasional
inaccuracies/omissions. Discussion is mostly effective.
3 9-12
The answer is mostly clear and organised but
occasionally lacks focus. Specialist terminology is used
appropriately.
Limited knowledge of how situational variables affect

obedience is present. Focus is mainly on description.
Any discussion is of limited effectiveness. The answer
2 5-8
lacks clarity, accuracy and organisation in places.
Specialist terminology is used inappropriately on
occasions.

obedience is very limited. Discussion is limited, poorly
focused or absent. The answer as a whole lacks clarity,
1 1-4
has many inaccuracies and is poorly organised.
Specialist terminology is either absent or
inappropriately used.
Possible content:
• knowledge of procedure and/or findings of research into the effects of:
• proximity – Milgram – teacher and the learner were in the same room,
obedience decreased; touch proximity condition; experimenter leaves the
room issues order over the phone, obedience decreased
Page 12 of 60
• location – Milgram – run-down office block vs Yale; Hofling hospital location
• uniform – Bickman – more likely to obey a man dressed as a guard. In
Milgram’s experiment the experimenter wore a grey lab coat.
• analysis/discussion of factors in the context of explanations: eg uniform as a visible
sign of authority, location/setting makes authority seem more/less genuine
(legitimacy of authority)
• decreased proximity to authority figure meant that participants returned to a more
autonomous state (agentic state)
• discussion of relative power of factors, eg in Hofling study, 21/22 obeyed even
though orders were given over the phone (so legitimacy of setting more important
than proximity)
• discussion of alternative theories, eg authoritarian personality (Adorno) suggests
that dispositional factors are more influential than situational variables
• methodological evaluation of studies/evidence if made relevant to discussion of the
factors/why we obey, eg field studies such as Bickman may have more relevance
than lab studies in this context
• Mandel’s (1998) analysis of the ecological validity of Milgram’s research
• Orne and Holland (1968) Milgram variations were contrived and even more likely to
trigger suspicion in participants.
Credit other relevant material.

[16]
Q3.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Level Mark Description
Knowledge of reasons why we conform is accurate and

generally well detailed. Discussion is thorough and
4 13-16 effective. Minor detail and / or expansion of argument
is sometimes lacking. The answer is clear, coherent
and focused. Specialist terminology is used effectively.
Knowledge of why we conform is evident but there are

occasional inaccuracies / omissions. Discussion is
3 9-12 mostly effective. The answer is mostly clear and
organised but occasionally lacks focus. Specialist
terminology is used appropriately.
Limited knowledge of why we conform is present.

Focus is mainly on description. Any discussion that is
2 5-8 present is of limited effectiveness. The answer lacks
clarity, accuracy and organisation in places. Specialist
Knowledge of why we conform is very limited. Any

discussion is limited, poorly focused or absent. The
1 1-4 answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies
and is poorly organised. Specialist terminology is either
absent or inappropriately used.
Page 13 of 60
Possible content:
Knowledge of reasons why we conform.
• normative social influence – going along with the majority through fear of rejection /
being seen as an outcast; a desire to be liked; leads to compliance; conforming for
emotional reasons – a temporary change in view / behaviour
• informational social influence – going along with the majority through acceptance of
new information; a desire to be right; leads to internalisation; conforming for
cognitive reasons – a permanent change in view / behaviour
• conformity to social roles
• accept types of conformity: identification – wanting to have affinity with a group that
we value; internalisation – private acceptance of the majority view; compliance –
public acceptance despite private disagreement
• accept variables affecting conformity as reasons – group size; unanimity; task
difficulty
• accept dispositional explanations such as having an external locus of control
Possible discussion points:
Discussion of reasons why we conform.
• use of evidence to discuss the reasons (e.g. Sherif (1935), Asch (1951), Anderson
et al (1992), Baron, Vandello & Brunsman (1996), Zimbardo (1973) )
• normative social influence can explain the results of conformity studies in
unambiguous situations e.g. Asch
• informational influence can explain conformity in ambiguous situations in which both
public and private agreement occurs, e.g. Sherif, Jenness
• analysis of Asch variations when linked to discussion of reasons
• discussion of difficulty measuring and / or distinguishing between reasons why
conformity occurs
• discussion of individual differences in reasons for conformity, e.g. gender, culture,
locus of control, level of expertise, nAffiliators
Only credit evaluation of the methodology used in studies when made relevant to the
discussion of the reasons.
[16]
Q4.
[AO1 = 6 AO2 = 4 AO3 = 6]
4 13 – 16 Knowledge of two explanations is accurate and generally

well detailed. Discussion is thorough and effective.
Application to the stem is appropriate and links between
theory and stem content are explained. The answer is
clear, coherent and focused. Specialist terminology is used
effectively.
Page 14 of 60
Minor detail and / or expansion of argument sometimes
lacking.
Knowledge of two explanations is evident. Discussion is

apparent and mostly effective. There are occasional
inaccuracies. Application to the stem is appropriate
3 9 – 12
although links to theory are not always explained. The
answer is mostly clear and organised. Specialist
terminology mostly used effectively. Lacks focus in places.
Knowledge of two explanations is present but is vague /

inaccurate or one explanation only is present. Focus is
mainly on description. Any discussion is only partly
2 5–8 effective. Application to the stem is partial. The answer
Specialist terminology used
inappropriately on occasions.
Knowledge of explanation(s) is limited. Discussion is

limited, poorly focused or absent. Application is limited or
absent. The answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many
1 1–4
terminology either
AO1 Content
Knowledge / description of two explanations of resistance to social influence (usually

those named on the specification and implied in stem):
• locus of control – people with an internal locus of control more likely to resist
pressure to conform and less likely to obey than those with an external locus
of control; people with an internal locus of control believe they control own
circumstances; less concerned with social approval. Credit measurement of
locus of control (Rotter, 1966)
• social support – defiance / non-conformity more likely if others are seen to
resist influence; seeing others disobey / not conform gives observer
confidence to do so; description of forms of social support – disobedient role
models (obedience), having an ally (conformity); explanation of why these
produce resistance, eg breaks unanimity of group in conformity situations,
challenges legitimacy of authority figure.
Credit other acceptable explanations of disobedience / defiance and non-conformity,

eg:
• being in an autonomous state; previous experience; gender; culture; high level

of moral reasoning; reactance / the ‘boomerang effect’.
Credit also the inverse of factors usually used to explain conformity and obedience,
eg (lack of) uniform; (increased) distance between participant and victim / authority
figure; (reduced) group size; (lack of) ambiguity of task.
Page 15 of 60
Credit knowledge of relevant evidence, eg Gamson et al (1982), Schurz (1985),
Feldman and Scheibe (1972), Milgram (1963), Asch (1951).
AO2 Possible application:
• Jack suggests that dispositional factors in resisting social influence are more
important
• Sarah indicates that situational factors are more powerful
• ‘strong personality’ could be read as having an internal locus of control that
makes someone better able to resist social influence
• ‘what other people are doing at the time’ relates to whether ‘they’ are seen to
be conforming / obeying, suggesting social support is influential in resisting
social influence.
AO3 Possible discussion points:
• commentary on two explanations of resistance to social influence

• use of evidence to support / illustrate the influence of the explanations chosen,
eg specific studies of defiance / non-conformity and / or variations of Asch's
and / or Milgram's basic experiments that demonstrated increased resistance
• use of real-world examples to illustrate the explanations
• other social psychological concepts / processes used to support discussion of
the explanations, eg influence of social support may be explained by reduced
normative pressure, minority influence
• comparison / analysis of the relative power of the explanations
• discussion / analysis of different forms of resistance, eg independent
behaviour vs anti-conformity.
Credit other relevant discussion points.
Only credit evaluation of the methodology used in studies when made relevant to
discussion of the explanations.
Q5.
[AO1 = 6 AO2 = 4 AO3 = 6]
Knowledge of explanations for conformity is accurate and

generally detailed. Discussion is thorough and effective.
Application to the stem is appropriate and links between
4 13 – 16 the explanations and the stem content are explained. The
answer is clear, coherent and focused. Specialist
terminology is used effectively. Minor detail and/or
expansion of argument sometimes lacking.
3 9 – 12 Knowledge of explanations for conformity is evident.

Discussion is apparent and mostly effective. There are
occasional inaccuracies. Application to the stem is
appropriate although links to the explanations are not
always well explained. The answer is mostly clear and
organised. Specialist terminology is mostly used effectively.
Page 16 of 60
Lacks focus in places.
Knowledge of explanations of conformity is present but is

vague/inaccurate or one explanation only is present. Focus
is mainly on description. Any discussion is only partly
2 5–8 effective. Application to the stem is partial. The answer
occasions.
Knowledge of research into explanation(s) of conformity is

limited. Discussion is limited, poorly focused or absent.
Application is limited or absent. The answer as a whole
1 1–4
lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies and is poorly
organised. Specialist terminology is either absent or
Possible content:
Knowledge of at least two explanations for conformity (usually those named in the
specification and implied in the stem):
Normative social influence
• Refers to the social rules that govern behaviour and the need to be seen as a
member of the social group/fit in.
• This relates to a desire for social approval/acceptance/avoidance of rejection.
• Suggests that conformity is public agreement with the group and not private
agreement (compliance).
• Change in attitude/behaviour is temporary.
Informational social influence
• Refers to the idea that the individual believes the group has more
knowledge/expertise.
• Suggests that conformity is agreement with the group due to uncertainty about
correct responses or behaviour on the part of the individual.
• When public behaviour and private opinion match (internalisation).
• Conformity is driven by the need to be right/have accurate perception of reality.
• Change in attitude/behaviour is likely to be more permanent.
• Credit description of evidence eg. Sherif (1935), Asch (1951), Anderson et al (1992),
Baron, Vandello & Brunsman (1996).
Application
Page 17 of 60
• Links to the stem: Steph – conformed for informational reasons – explanation of why
this; has become ‘quite passionate’ suggesting the change in attitude is permanent;
internalisation has taken place.
• Jeff – conformed for normative reasons – explanation of why this is; didn’t want to
be the ‘odd one out’; suggests behaviour is temporary; compliance.
Possible Discussion
• Use of evidence to evaluate/discuss the explanations.
• Normative social influence can explain the results of conformity studies in

unambiguous situations eg Asch.
• Informational influence can explain conformity in ambiguous situations in which both

public and private agreement occurs eg Sherif, Jenness.
• Analysis of Asch variations when linked to normative social influence or

informational social influence.
• Credit use of examples to illustrate explanations.
• Discussion of alternative explanations of conformity eg dispositional factors and

other explanations such as ingratiational.
• Discussion of difficulty measuring and/or distinguishing between the two

explanations.
• Only credit evaluation of the methodology used in studies when made relevant to
the discussion of the explanations.
Q6.
Marks for this question: AO1 = 6, AO3 = 10
Knowledge is accurate and generally well detailed.

Discussion / evaluation / application is thorough and
4 13 – 16 effective. The answer is clear, coherent and focused.
Specialist terminology is used effectively. Minor detail
and / or expansion of argument sometimes lacking.
Knowledge is evident. There are occasional inaccuracies.

Discussion / evaluation / application is apparent and
3 9 – 12 mostly effective. The answer is mostly clear and
organised. Specialist terminology is mostly used
effectively. Lacks focus in places.
2 5–8 Some knowledge is present. Focus is mainly on

description. Any discussion / evaluation / application is
Page 18 of 60
only partly effective. The answer lacks clarity, accuracy
and organisation in places. Specialist terminology is used
One explanation at Level 4
Knowledge is limited. Discussion / evaluation /

application is limited, poorly focused or absent. The
answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies
1 1–4 and is poorly organised. Specialist terminology either
One explanation at Level 3
Please note that although the content for this mark scheme remains the same, on most
mark schemes for the new AQA Specification (Sept 2015 onwards) content appears as a
bulleted list.
AO1
Marks for description / elaboration of at least two explanations of defiance of

authority. Likely explanations: the influence of disobedient role models / presence of
social support; internal locus of control - being in an autonomous state; past
experience. Also credit the inverse of factors / explanations usually used to explain
obedience to authority, eg (lack of) proximity of authority figure; proximity of victim;
(lack of) legitimacy of authority figure / uniform / setting; (lack of) authoritarian
personality. Credit description of relevant evidence up to two marks.
Likely studies include Milgram 1963, 1974, Bickman 1974, Hofling 1966, Feldman
and Schelbe 1972, Gamson 1982, Hamilton 1978, Rochat and Modigliani 1995.
AO3
Marks for discussion of at least two explanations of defiance of obedience. Use of

evidence to support / illustrate the influence of the explanations chosen, eg specific
studies of defiance and / or variations of Milgram's basic experiment that
demonstrated increased defiance. Discussion of the wider implications of the
explanations, eg in real-life situations of defiance. Credit any other social
psychological concepts that are appropriately applied to defiance of authority.
Comparison of relative power of explanations. Only credit evaluation of the
methodology used in studies when made relevant to discussion of the explanations
eg use of specific studies.
Q7.
4 13 – 16 Knowledge is accurate and generally well detailed.

Evidence is clear. Discussion / evaluation / application is
Page 19 of 60
thorough and effective. The answer is clear, coherent and
focused. Specialist terminology is used effectively. Minor
detail and / or expansion of argument sometimes lacking.

Evidence is presented. Discussion / evaluation /
3 9 – 12 application is apparent and mostly effective. The answer
is mostly clear and organised. Specialist terminology is
mostly used effectively. Lacks focus in places.
Some knowledge is present. Focus is mainly on

2 5–8 only partly effective. The answer lacks clarity, accuracy

1 1–4 answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies
and is poorly organised. Specialist terminology either
bulleted list.
AO1
Marks for description of ethical issues that have arisen in social influence research.
Likely issues include protection from harm / participant embarrassment / stress;
deception; right to withdraw; informed consent; confidentiality. Description of
relevant evidence to illustrate specific issues eg how Milgram deceived participants,
how Asch caused participants stress / embarrassment, etc. Limited credit for simply
listing or naming ethical issues.
Likely studies include Milgram 1963, 1974, Sherif 1936, Asch 1951, 1956, Bickman
1974, Hofling 1966. Crutchfield 1955, Michaels 1982, Zimbardo 1971.
AO3
Marks for discussion of ethical issues in social influence research. Likely points
include: counter arguments such as why deception or other unethical procedures
were necessary to reduce / prevent demand characteristics, and thus increase
validity. Discussion of procedures that were designed to address / resolve ethical
issues eg use of debriefing / retrospective consent. Contradictory evidence eg many
of Milgram's participants claimed they were happy to have been involved when
questioned. Cost-benefit analyses of ethical concerns set against the relative
merits / importance of the findings. Credit discussion about when BPS / APS
guidelines were set up and why.
Q8.
Page 20 of 60




bulleted list
AO1
Candidates may offer any research that is relevant to conformity. The most likely
studies are those by Asch, Crutchfield, Sherif, Perrin and Spencer; but any other
relevant study is creditworthy. Zimbardo’s prison study investigated conforming to
social roles and is also creditworthy.
AO3
The evaluation may be in terms of methodological issues such as the artificiality of

laboratory research; cultural and historical bias; ethical issues. For example, Asch’s
studies were carried out in America in the 1950s and have been criticized as only
being relevant to that particular culture and in that historical time. When Perrin and
Spencer replicated Asch’s study they did not find such high levels of conformity.
Q9.
Page 21 of 60

Evidence is clear. Discussion / evaluation /
application is thorough and effective. The answer is
4 13 – 16
clear, coherent and focused. Specialist terminology is
used effectively. Minor detail and / or expansion of
argument sometimes lacking.
Knowledge is evident. Evidence is presented. There

are occasional inaccuracies. Discussion / evaluation /
application is apparent and mostly effective. The
3 9 – 12
terminology is mostly used effectively. Lacks focus in
places.

description. Any discussion / evaluation / application
2 5–8 is only partly effective. The answer lacks clarity,

1 1–4 answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many
terminology either absent or inappropriately used.
bulleted list.
AO1
Marks for elaboration (not naming / identification) of factors. Likely factors: group
size, unanimity / size of majority, task difficulty, presence of another dissenter,
presence of another dissenter who then begins to conform, opinion expressed in
public (rather than in private), fear of ridicule, perceived competence of other
members, personality of individual, self-esteem, culture, gender. Credit description
of effect of factors on conformity levels.
Credit knowledge of evidence. Likely studies: Sherif (1935), Asch (1951), Crutchfield
(1954).
AO3
Marks for discussion of the factors. Explanation of why factor increases or

decreases conformity eg increased / decreased normative pressure / likelihood of
compliance, increased / decreased likelihood of informational influence /
internalisation; the implications of evidence / use of evidence specifically to support
Page 22 of 60
or refute influence of stated factors eg detail of Asch variations. Discussion of the
wider implications of the factors eg in real life conforming situations. Comparison of
relative power of factors. Credit evaluation of the methodology of studies only when
made relevant to discussion of the factors.
Q10.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Knowledge of research into the effects of anxiety on

eyewitness testimony is accurate and generally well
detailed. Discussion is thorough and effective. Minor
4 13-16
detail and/or expansion of argument is sometimes
lacking. The answer is clear, coherent and focused.
Specialist terminology is used effectively.

eyewitness testimony is evident but there are
occasional inaccuracies/omissions. Discussion is
3 9-12
mostly effective. The answer is mostly clear and
Limited knowledge of research into the effects of

anxiety on eyewitness testimony is present. Focus is
mainly on description. Any discussion is of limited
2 5-8
effectiveness. The answer lacks clarity, accuracy and
organisation in places. Specialist terminology is used

eyewitness testimony is very limited. Discussion is
limited, poorly focused or absent. The answer as a
1 1-4
whole lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies and is
poorly organised. Specialist terminology is either
Note that ‘research’ refers to theories and/or studies of the effects of anxiety on EWT.
Possible content:
• knowledge of studies of the effects of anxiety on EWT, eg Johnson and Scott
(1976), Yuille and Cutshall (1986), Deffenbacher, Christiansen and Hubinette, Loftus
and Burns
• knowledge of theories/explanations that account for the effects of anxiety, eg
weapon focus; tunnel theory
• the inverted U hypothesis (Yerkes-Dodson) – concept of optimal arousal
• understanding that anxiety/arousal may have an enhancing or deleterious effect
upon the reliability of EWT.
Page 23 of 60
• use of evidence to support/contradict the effects of anxiety on EWT, eg Johnson and
Scott (knife/pen) supports weapon focus/tunnel theory; Christiansen and Hubinette –
higher anxiety, superior recall
• the element of surprise, rather than anxiety, may account for findings, eg Pickel
(scissors, handgun, wallet, chicken)
• cognitive factors in recall may be more important than emotional factors
• methodological strengths and weaknesses of research into anxiety and EWT eg
demand characteristics vs real life
• discussion of contradictory findings of lab vs more real-life investigations
• ethical issues associated with manipulation of anxiety in studies
• alternative explanations for (un)reliability of EWT, eg misleading information.

[16]
Q11.
[AO1 = 6 AO2 = 4 AO3 = 6]
Knowledge of the multi-store model is accurate and

generally well detailed. Application is effective.
4 13-16
Knowledge of the multi-store model is evident but there

are occasional inaccuracies/omissions. Any application
3 9-12 and/or discussion is mostly effective. The answer is
mostly clear and organised but occasionally lacks
focus. Specialist terminology is used appropriately.
Limited knowledge of the multi-store model is present.

Focus is mainly on description. Any discussion and/or
2 5-8 application is of limited effectiveness. The answer lacks
Knowledge of the multi-store model is very limited.

Discussion and/or application is limited, poorly focused
1 1-4 or absent. The answer as a whole lacks clarity, has
many inaccuracies and is poorly organised. Specialist
Possible description:
• capacity, duration and coding of the separate stores − sensory register, short-term
memory (STM), long-term memory (LTM)
• transfer processes between stores − attention and rehearsal
Page 24 of 60
• rehearsal loop − maintenance in STM
• how information is lost from each store, e.g. decay/displacement
• information processing model − linear made up of unitary stores.
Credit an accurately annotated diagram.
Possible application:
• four-digit numbers are easy to remember as 7(+/−2) items is the average capacity of
STM
• eleven-digit mobile numbers would exceed this limited capacity
• these longer mobile numbers can be recalled if people ‘say it to themselves several
times’ which implies maintenance in STM/transfer to LTM
• interruption disrupts recall because it causes displacement from STM
• credit reference to ‘chunking’ and/or primacy-recency effect in this context.
• useful starting point for memory research, first model to incorporate three different
stores
• evidence that supports the coding, capacity, duration of the three stores, e.g.
Baddeley, Jacobs, Sperling, Bahrick et al
• evidence that supports the functional separation of the stores, e.g. Glanzer and
Cunitz
• evidence that challenges the unitary nature of STM and LTM, e.g. Shallice and
Warrington
• evidence which suggests that rehearsal is not the only method of transfer from STM
to LTM/ distinction between maintenance and elaborative rehearsal
• critical comparisons with alternative models, e.g. working memory.
Only credit methodological evaluation of studies if this used to discuss the

strengths/limitations of the model.

[16]
Q12.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Knowledge of research is accurate and generally well

detailed. Evaluation is thorough and effective. Minor detail
4 13 – 16 and/or expansion of argument is sometimes lacking. The
Knowledge of research is evident but there are occasional

inaccuracies/omissions. Evaluation is mostly effective. The
3 9 – 12
answer is mostly clear and organised but occasionally
lacks focus. Specialist terminology is used appropriately.
2 5–8 Limited knowledge of research is present. Focus is mainly
Page 25 of 60
on description. Any evaluation is of limited effectiveness.
The answer lacks clarity, accuracy and organisation in
places. Specialist terminology is used inappropriately on
occasions.
Knowledge of research is limited. Evaluation is limited,

poorly focused or absent. The answer as a whole lacks
1 1–4 clarity, has many inaccuracies and is poorly organised.
Specialist terminology is either absent or inappropriately
used.
AO1 content
Knowledge of research (theories and/or studies) into the effects of misleading information
on EWT.
Leading questions:
• Loftus and Palmer (1974) – estimates of speed based on changing verb in the
critical question
• Loftus and Zanni (1975) – ‘Did you see the/a broken headlight?’
• Loftus (1975) – ‘How fast was the car going when it passed the white barn?’
• response-bias explanation – leading questions do not affect memory, just choice of
answer
• substitution bias/explanation – question wording actually distorts memory.
Post-event discussion:
• Gabbert et al (2003) – paired discussions influence recall of crime
• memory contamination – co-witnesses mix (mis)information
• memory conformity – witnesses go along with others for social approval.
Accept other relevant theories/studies.
AO3 content
Evaluation/discussion of research into misleading information:

• real-life application – links to cognitive interview
• use of artificial materials in studies, eg films – less anxiety-inducing than in real-life
• demand characteristics in lab studies reduce validity
• lack of consequences in lab studies compared to real-life – Foster et al (1994)
• memory for important events/details is less susceptible to distortion
• credit other methodological issues in studies, eg sample bias
• credit ethical issues if made relevant to discussion
• use of evidence to support/challenge effects of misleading information.
Accept other valid evaluation points.
Q13.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Page 26 of 60
Knowledge of components and functioning of model is

accurate and generally well detailed. Evaluation is
4 13 – 16 thorough and effective. The answer is clear, coherent and
focused. Specialist terminology is used effectively. Minor
detail and / or expansion of argument sometimes lacking.
Knowledge of components of model is evident and there is

some reference to function of model. There are occasional
3 9 – 12 inaccuracies. Evaluation is apparent and mostly effective.
The answer is mostly clear and organised. Specialist
terminology mostly used effectively. Lacks focus in places.
Knowledge of some components of model is present.

Focus is mainly on description. Any evaluation is only partly
2 5–8 effective. The answer lacks clarity, accuracy and
organisation in places. Specialist terminology used
Knowledge of model is limited. Evaluation is limited, poorly

1 1–4
has many inaccuracies and is poorly organised. Specialist
AO1 Content:
• version of STM which sees this store as an active processor

• description of central executive and ‘slave systems’ – visuo-spatial scratch /
sketch pad; phonological store / loop; articulatory loop / control process;
primary acoustic store; episodic buffer (versions vary – not all of slave systems
need to be present for full marks)
• information concerning capacity and coding of each store
• allocation of resources / divided attention / dual-task performance.
AO3 Possible evaluation points:
• strengths include: explains how cognitive processes interact; memory is active

rather than passive; provides explanation / treatments for processing deficits;
highlights different memory tasks that STM can deal with by identifying
separate components; explains results of dual task studies
• limitations include: vague, untestable nature of the central executive;
supported by highly controlled lab studies which may undermine the validity of
the model
• use of evidence to support or refute the model
• credit other relevant evaluative points.
Only credit evaluation of the methodology used in studies when made relevant to
discussion of the model.
Page 27 of 60
Q14.
[AO1 = 6 AO2 = 4 AO3 = 6]
Knowledge of research into two or more factors is accurate

effective. Application to the stem is appropriate and links
4 13 – 16 between factors and stem content are explained. The
terminology is used effectively. Minor detail and/or
expansion of argument sometimes lacking.
Knowledge of research into two or more factors is evident.

occasional inaccuracies. Application to the stem is
3 9 – 12 appropriate although links to the factors are not always well
explained. The answer is mostly clear and organised.
Specialist terminology mostly used effectively. Lacks focus
in places.
Knowledge of research into at least two factors is present

but is vague/inaccurate or research into one factor only is
present. Focus is mainly on description. Any discussion is
2 5–8
only partly effective. Application to the stem is partial. The
answer lacks clarity, accuracy and organisation in places.
Specialist terminology used inappropriately on occasions.
Knowledge of research into factor(s) is limited. Discussion

is limited, poorly focused or absent. Application is limited or
1 1–4 absent. The answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many
AO1 Content
Knowledge of research into two or more factors affecting the accuracy of eyewitness
testimony (usually those named in the specification and implied in the stem)
Misleading information, including leading questions:

• Loftus and Palmer’s (1974) experiment where the verb in the critical question
was changed (smashed, collided, bumped, hit or contacted).
• Loftus and Palmer: “Did you see any broken glass?”
• Loftus et al (1978) study using a red Datsun and Stop or Yield signs.
• Research relating to age in relation to misleading information could also be
relevant: e.g. Warren et al (2005) found adults less likely to be influenced by
leading questions than children.
• Credit other relevant research/theory: e.g. post-event contamination;
confabulation; reconstructive memory/the formation of schemas;
confabulation.
Page 28 of 60
Anxiety:
• Loftus’s (1979) weapon focus experiment found that more participants
correctly identified a person holding a pen (49%) than a person holding a knife
covered in blood.
• Loftus and Burns (1982) found that participants who saw a violent version of a
crime where a boy was shot in the face had impaired recall for events leading
up to the accident.
• Peters (1988) found that participants who visited a healthcare centre were
better able to recognise a researcher than a nurse who gave an injection.
• Yuille and Cutshall (1986) found that witnesses who had been most distressed
at the time of a shooting gave the most accurate account five months later.
• Christianson and Hubinette (1993) found that victims of genuine bank
robberies were more accurate in their recall than bystanders.
• Credit other relevant research/theory: e.g. the Yerkes-Dodson law of arousal.
Post-event discussion:
• Source monitoring theory; effects of conformity; Bodner et al (2009) – the
effects of post-event discussion can be reduced if witnesses are warned of its
effects.
AO2 Application points

• Links to leading questions – ‘Did you see the knife?’ (as opposed to a knife);
question from officer is leading the witness who was not sure that there was a
knife in the first place.
• Links to anxiety – witness claims that she was ‘so scared’ when the incident
took place; this may inhibit or enhance her memory depending upon how
severe the fear was.
• Links to post-event discussion – ‘my friends and I have talked about what
happened so many times since that I’m almost not sure what I did see’.
AO3 Discussion points

Will depend on research chosen but might include:
• Issue of validity in laboratory studies or lack of control in real-life situations.
• Methodological issues, including sampling, replication and corroboration with
other studies.
• Ethical issues.
• Practical applications/implications of the research: e.g. development of
cognitive interview.
Credit other relevant evaluation points.
Q15.
4 13 – 16 Knowledge is accurate and generally well detailed.

Evidence is clear. Discussion / evaluation /
application is thorough and effective. The answer is
Page 29 of 60
Knowledge is evident. Evidence is presented. There

are occasional inaccuracies. Discussion / evaluation /
application is apparent and mostly effective. The
3 9 – 12
places.

description. Any discussion / evaluation / application
2 5–8 is only partly effective. The answer lacks clarity,

1 1–4 answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many
bulleted list.
AO1
Marks for accurate description of the model including information about the
characteristics (duration, capacity and coding) of each store; linear / information
processing model; related types of forgetting; transfer from sensory to STM via
attention; description of rehearsal loop. Some marks can be credited for the same
information conveyed by an accurately labelled diagram if there is no other
creditworthy information provided.
AO3
Marks for analysis which might include discussion of the issue of rehearsal as a
requirement for transfer of information to LTM; criticisms of aspects of the model by
comparison with other models, such as arguments that the STS and LTS are not
unitary stores; explanation of primacy and recency effects in serial position studies;
coding confusion in STM; discussion of the nature of deficits in case studies of
neurological damage. Credit evaluation of the methodology of studies only when
made relevant to the discussion of the model.
Credit use of evidence.
Likely studies include: Murdock (1962) Glanzer and Cunitz (1966), Peterson and
Peterson (1959), Craik and Watkins (1973), Conrad (1963 / 4), Baddeley (1966),
Milner et al (1978), Blakemore (1988), Craik and Tulving (1975), Hyde and Jenkins
(1973), and Working Memory studies such as Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan
(1975), Hoosain and Salili (1988).
Page 30 of 60
Q16.



description. Any Discussion / evaluation / application is

bulleted list
AO1
Most answers will focus on the cognitive interview technique but any method /
technique with a psychological basis should be credited (eg avoiding leading
questions). Likely content: the original cognitive interview – 4 features: restore
context; recall everything even trivial detail; recall in reverse order; recall from
another perspective. Credit also features of the enhanced cognitive interview eg
relax, speak slowly. Likely evidence: Geiselman (1985).
AO3
How / why recall is enhanced: eg role of context reinstatement; work on

reconstructive memory; use of context; makes the event more meaningful.
Limitations: eg usefulness of the cognitive interview with children; less useful when
there is increased time between event and recall.
Relative effectiveness of individual features of the cognitive interview; better for
Page 31 of 60
recall of peripheral detail than central detail.
Use of relevant evidence to support / refute argument.
Q17.




bulleted list
AO1
Atkinson and Shiffrin’s (1968) multi-store model of memory (MSM) makes a

distinction between the separate stores of sensory, short-term and long-term
memory.
Likely features include:
Structural nature.
SM STM and LTM are unitary stores.
Information passes from store to store in a linear way.
Page 32 of 60
Rehearsal is needed to pass information from STM to LTM.
Each store has its own characteristics in terms of encoding, capacity and duration.
Explanations of forgetting are different for each store.
Limited credit for diagram only.
AO3
Evaluation of the MSM in terms of strengths and weaknesses.

Use of research in support of the distinction between STM and LTM; in terms of
capacity, duration and encoding eg HM, Glanzer and Cunitz.
Likely weaknesses include an emphasis on rote rehearsal as a mechanism for

transfer from STM to LTM although this is not a very effective means of transfer, and
transfer often occurs with no rehearsal. Candidates may also refer to case studies
such as that of Clive Wearing who lost episodic but not procedural memory,
suggesting there may be more than one type of LTM.
Comparison / contrast with alternative models of memory.
Q18.




Page 33 of 60
bulleted list.
AO1
Candidates may describe the original 1974 version of the model or include later
additions such as the episodic buffer which was added in 2000.
The working memory model replaced the idea of a unitary STM. It suggests a
system involving active processing and short-term storage of information.
Key features include the central executive, the phonological loop (consisting of two
components, the phonological store and the articulatory control process), and the
visuospatial sketch pad or scratchpad.
Candidates should refer to components and processes.
Candidates may be credited for a diagram but description of the mechanisms
involved should also be present.
AO3
Candidates are likely to evaluate the WMM in terms of its strengths and
weaknesses. Likely strengths include use of research support such as dual task
studies and physiological evidence from brain scans. Candidates may offer a
comparison with the MSM and suggest WMM gives a better account of STM.
Likely weaknesses include the fact that little is known about how the central
executive works or evidence from brain studies suggesting the central executive is
not unitary. Stating that WM focuses too much on STM and not on LTM is not
creditworthy, although suggesting it isn’t a complete model of memory could be.
Genuine comparison / contrast with alternative models of memory is creditworthy,
but description eg of MSM is not.
Q19.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Knowledge of Lorenz’s and Harlow’s animal studies is

accurate and generally well detailed. Discussion is
thorough and effective. Minor detail and/or expansion
4 13-16
of argument is sometimes lacking. The answer is clear,
coherent and focused. Specialist terminology is used
effectively.

evident but there are occasional
3 9-12
appropriately.
2 5-8 Limited knowledge of Lorenz’s and Harlow’s animal
Page 34 of 60
studies is present. Focus is mainly on description. Any
discussion is of limited effectiveness. The answer lacks
OR Lorenz or Harlow only at Level 3/4.

very limited. Discussion is limited, poorly focused or
1 1-4
OR Lorenz or Harlow only at Level 1/2.
Possible content:
• Lorenz’s procedure and findings – goose eggs randomly divided; half hatched with
the mother present (in natural environment); half in an incubator with Lorenz
present; behaviour recorded; incubator group followed Lorenz, control group
followed the mother; concepts of imprinting and critical period
• Harlow’s procedure and findings – in a controlled environment, infant monkeys
reared with two mother surrogates; plain wire mother dispensing food, cloth-covered
mother with no food; time spent with each mother was recorded; details of fear
conditions; long-term effects recorded: sociability, relationship to offspring, etc;
preference for contact comfort over food; long-term effects on sociability and own
childrearing style
• credit also references to Lorenz’s work of sexual behaviour/imprinting.

• problems of generalising findings from animal studies to humans – argument that, of
the two, Harlow’s study (mammalian species) may be more relevant to human
experience
• implications of imprinting/critical period for human attachment (Lorenz) – ‘window of
opportunity’ in which attachments must be formed otherwise this may lead to
negative long-term consequences (credit reference to Bowlby’s work in this context,
eg maternal deprivation)
• implications of early neglect (Harlow) – long-term consequences of poor attachment
in childhood for future relationships, eg with own children (again, credit reference to
Bowlby in this context – internal working model)
• argument that the critical period may be more of a ‘sensitive period’ in humans as
studies have demonstrated how children have been able to recover from early
deprivation, eg Romanian orphan studies
• practical value of research, eg for social work, identifying risk factors in vulnerable
children
• implications for theories of attachment, eg Harlow’s suggestion that contact
comfort/sensitive responsiveness is more important than food contradicts learning
theory
• support from human studies, eg Schaffer and Emerson Glasgow study supports the
idea that responsiveness may be more important than food.
Only credit ethical issues if made relevant to discussion of human attachment.

[16]
Page 35 of 60
Q20.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Knowledge of research into caregiver-infant

interactions is accurate and generally well detailed.
4 13-16

interactions is evident but there are occasional
3 9-12
appropriately.
Limited knowledge of research into caregiver-infant

interactions is present. Focus is mainly on description.
Any discussion is of limited effectiveness. The answer
2 5-8
occasions.

interactions is very limited. Discussion is limited, poorly
1 1-4
has many inaccuracies and is poorly organised.
Possible content:
• description of features of caregiver-infant interaction in humans: reciprocity – two-
way interaction between caregiver and child/turn-taking/mirroring; interactional
synchrony – simultaneous co-ordinated sequence of movements, communication,
emotions
• accept other relevant features, eg imitation; baby talk register/‘motherese’
• examples of features
• description of evidence of features, eg Isabella et al; Murray and Trevarthan;
Condon and Sander; Meltzoff and Moore.
Note: that the term ‘research’ may include theories/explanations and/or studies.
• use of evidence to support or contradict features
• use of controlled observations to capture micro-sequences
• infant’s intention is difficult to determine
• the purpose of synchrony and reciprocity in attachment is difficult to discern
• research is socially sensitive – impact on working mothers.
Page 36 of 60
Material from other parts of the specification can only be credited if there is a
specific focus on caregiver-infant interactions in humans.
[16]
Q21.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Knowledge of research into the influence of early

attachment on childhood and/or adult relationships is
accurate and generally well detailed. Discussion is
4 13-16 thorough and effective. Minor detail and/or expansion
of argument is sometimes lacking. The answer is clear,
coherent and focused. Specialist terminology is used
effectively.

evident but there are occasional
3 9-12 inaccuracies/omissions. Discussion is mostly effective.
appropriately.
Limited knowledge of research into the influence of

early attachment on childhood and/or adult
relationships is present. Focus is mainly on description.
2 5-8 Any discussion is of limited effectiveness. The answer
occasions.

very limited. Discussion is limited, poorly focused or
1 1-4
Possible content:
• Bowlby’s internal working model (IWM) − early attachment provides

blueprint/prototype for later attachment; formation of mental representation/schema
of first attachment relationship; affects later relationships during childhood and
adulthood
• Material on maternal deprivation is creditworthy if made relevant to the question
• attachment type associated with quality of peer relationships in childhood − studies
of friendship patterns, bullying, etc.
Page 37 of 60
• relationship between early attachment type and later romantic relationships − the
‘love quiz’ (Hazan and Shaver)
• relationship between early attachment type and parenting style
• adult attachment interview (Main et al) continuity between early attachment type and
adult classification/behaviours − credit knowledge of procedure and coding system
(insecure-dismissing, autonomous-secure, insecure-preoccupied, unresolved)
• knowledge of relevant studies, e.g. Kerns; Myron-Wilson and Smith; Zimmerman;
Hazan and Shaver; Quinton; Harlow; Freud and Dann; Koluchova; Clarke and
Clarke.
Note: that the term ‘research’ may include theories/explanations and/or studies.
• use of evidence in discussion

• discussion of theory, e.g. Bowlby’s IWM and issue of determinism; negative
implications of assumption that the relationship is cause and effect
• discussion of underpinning evidence regarding measuring adult attachment type,
e.g. difficulty of establishing cause and effect between early attachment history and
later relationships
• discussion of use of self-report techniques to assess quality of childhood/adult
relationships − subjectivity, social desirability, etc. − as well as retrospective
assessment of early attachment patterns
• difficulty of measuring the IWM − hypothetical concept
• counter-evidence, e.g. to suggest that children can recover from
deprivation/privation and form effective adult relationships
• ethical issues, e.g. anxiety associated with use of adult attachment interview
• discussion of use of findings from animal studies in this area, e.g. Harlow and
difficulty of generalising across species.

[16]
Q22.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Knowledge of the effects of institutionalisation is accurate

effective. There is appropriate reference to studies of the
Romanian orphans and clear links are made between
4 13 – 16
these and the effects of institutionalisation. The answer is
clear, coherent and focused. Specialist terminology is used
effectively. Minor detail and/or expansion of argument
sometimes lacking.
3 9 – 12 Knowledge of the effects of institutionalisation is evident.

occasional inaccuracies. There is appropriate reference to
Romanian orphan studies although links to the effects are
Page 38 of 60
not always well explained. The answer is mostly clear and
organised. Specialist terminology mostly used effectively.
Lacks focus in places.
Knowledge of the effects is present but may be vague or

inaccurate in places. Focus is mainly on description. Any
discussion is only partly effective. Reference to Romanian
2 5–8
orphan research may be partial or absent. The answer
Knowledge of the effects is limited, for instance, may be

‘listed’ rather than explained. Discussion is limited, poorly
1 1–4 focused or absent. The answer as a whole lacks clarity,
has many inaccuracies and is poorly organised. Specialist
AO1 Content
Knowledge of studies and/or theory into the effects of institutionalisation, including
reference to the Romanian orphan studies
• Likely effects include: effects identified by Bowlby (1946): e.g. affectionless
psychopathy, delinquency, low IQ.
• Effects identified in privation studies: e.g. Harlow’s findings of delinquency,
affectionless behaviour.
• ERA findings of quasi-autistic symptoms in Romanian orphans, impaired
language and social skills; disinhibited attachment; attention seeking,
clinginess; lower frequency of pretend play and reduced empathy (Kreppner et
al 1999); more likely to be classified as disorganised attachment type (Zeanah
et al 2005).
• The effects of levels of privation in institutions (Gunnar 2000).
• Credit links to theory – reactive attachment disorder; lack of internal working
model.
AO3 Discussion points

Discussion/analysis/use of evidence:
• Research enhanced understanding of negative effects – establishment of key
workers in institutions.
• Evidence that adverse effects of institutionalisation can be overcome with
adequate substitute care: e.g. Rutter (1998); Hodges and Tizard (1989).
• Importance of age of adoption and quality/stability of aftercare.
• Problems of generalising from Romanian studies as standards of care were
particularly poor.
• Adoption vs control groups were not randomly assigned in ERA studies – more
sociable children may have been selected.
• Other studies, e.g. Bucharest Early Intervention Project, did randomly allocate
but ethical issues with this.
• Long-term effects on Romanian orphans are not yet clear.
• Early studies of institutionalisation were poorly controlled or effects
extrapolated from animal studies.
• Credit use of evidence.
Page 39 of 60
Credit other relevant evaluation points.
Q23.




bulleted list.
AO1
Candidates may refer to one study in reasonable detail, or more than one in less
detail. They may cover methodology, findings and / or conclusions.
Much of the research has used the strange situation. Van Ijzendoorn and
Kroonenberg’s meta-analysis found secure attachment was the most common in all
cultures studied. The lowest % of secure attachment was shown in China, and the
highest in Great Britain. Avoidant attachment was more common in West Germany
but rare in Israel and Japan. Variation within cultures was 1.5 times greater than the
variation between cultures. Candidates may also refer to Takahashi who found high
levels of resistant attachment in Japanese infants. Research relating to infants
raised on Israeli Kibbutzim is also creditworthy.
In the unlikely event that candidates refer to theories / models, answers should be
marked on their merits.
Page 40 of 60
AO3
Candidates may refer to ethical issues because the strange situation may have
been stressful for the infant. The validity of research using the strange situation can
be questioned.
Children who have been in day care may appear to be insecurely avoidant because
they are used to being separated from their mother. The strange situation was
developed in America and may have limitations in studying attachment types in
different cultures. Candidates may refer to positive aspects of the strange situation
such as replication of the controlled conditions.
The Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s meta-analysis can be criticised because of
the limited number of studies in some countries. Also the problems of over-
generalising from a limited sample could be relevant.
Q24.



inappropriately on occasions

bulleted list
AO1
Page 41 of 60
Studies of institutional care such as Hodges and Tizard’s longitudinal study of 65
British children from early life to adolescence. Rutter’s study of Romanian orphans
adopted by British families.
Czech twins,Genie or Bowlby’s research. Other research such as Skodak & Skeels
or Spitz & Wolf may also be cited to illustrate effects.
Animal research, such as that of Harlow’s monkeys, is creditworthy as long as it
refers to the effects of failure to form attachment.
Credit reference to effects on adult relationships
AO3
Students may evaluate research into effects in terms of methodology, eg strengths &
weaknesses of case studies or longitudinal research. Commentary may refer to the
fact that the effects may depend on a number of factors including age of the child
and quality of later care. Practical implications such as how this research has
influenced child care practice would also be relevant.
Students who refer to animal research may consider how far the findings can be
generalised to humans.
Q25.




Page 42 of 60
bulleted list
AO1
Work on early attachment styles and their link to adult relationships eg Hazan &
Shaver, Bowlby's internal working model and critical period. Note that 'adolescence'
is acceptable as part of childhood.
AO3
Findings discussed in the context of the question, eg whether they support or

contradict the influence of childhood on adult relationships
Discussion may also refer to the complex nature and range of relationships that
adults may have; the in/consistency of attachment styles over time or gender and
cultural aspects.
The general implications of findings e.g. in relation to child rearing practices and
later relationships.
Q26.




Page 43 of 60
bulleted list.
AO1
Marks for description of Ainsworth's work (research and / or theory). Credit

knowledge of: The Strange Situation as a method – stage sequence, controlled
observation; Ainsworth's category system of three types (secure, anxious avoidant,
anxious resistant / ambivalent); characteristics of each type; Ainsworth's conclusions
that type of attachment is related to sensitive responsiveness. Any other relevant
descriptive material.
AO3
Marks for evaluation of Ainsworth's work and use of work of another researcher as
part of the evaluation. Likely content: discussion of reliability; replication (De Woolf &
van Ijzendoorn (1988); other cross-cultural research eg Takahaski (1990), Miyake
(1985)); validity of dependent variables; need to consider other variables not just
parental sensitivity eg temperament (Belsky 1984, Kagan 1984); Fraley & Spieker's
(2003) alternative two dimensional system; Main & Solomon's 4th type (1990);
alternative ways of measuring attachment eg AAI (1985); Attachment Q-sort (1995).
Credit use of relevant evidence.
Credit ethical issues only as part of reasoned argument.
Q27.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Knowledge of biological explanation(s) is accurate and

generally well detailed. Comparison with the family
systems explanation is thorough and effective. Minor
4 13-16
detail and/or expansion of argument is sometimes
Knowledge of biological explanation(s) is evident but

there are occasional inaccuracies/omissions.
Comparison with the family systems explanation is
3 9-12
Limited knowledge of biological explanation(s) is

present. Focus is mainly on description. Any
comparison with the family systems explanation is of
2 5-8
limited effectiveness. The answer lacks clarity,
Page 44 of 60
Knowledge of biological explanation(s) is very limited.
Comparison is limited, poorly focused or absent. The
1 1-4 answer as a whole lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies
and is poorly organised. Specialist terminology is either
Possible content:
• genetic transmission – anorexia is heritable through transmission of DNA/genes;
familial link; twin studies/family studies/concordance rates/genome studies;
polygenic; candidate genes, eg OPRD1, HTR1D, EPHX2
• reduced serotonin activity as demonstrated in lower levels of 5-HIAA in urine
• role of dopamine is controversial – levels can be lower/higher/same as controls:
increased dopamine in AN as demonstrated by higher levels of homovanillic acid;
recovering AN patients have increased D2 activity
• other transmitters – noradrenaline and GABA
• low levels of leptin which controls satiety
• other biological correlates – AN associated with birth complications and premature
birth, poor maternal nutrition, season of birth, dysfunctional neural circuitry in the
insula region.
Possible comparisons:
• role of the family – biological explanations implicate family passively through
heritability whereas the family systems explanation sees family as actively
responsible through their behaviour, eg high levels of control, enmeshment, over-
protectiveness, rigidity, conflict avoidance etc
• family systems theory might better explain gender differences in incidence of AN –
more prevalent in females – girls may be allowed less autonomy
• family systems theory might better explain increase in incidence of AN over time –
increased pressures of modern family life might mean families are more critical/less
supportive/more dysfunctional
• societal attitudes will differ – if the family is seen as the ‘cause’ then such families
might be stigmatised
• implications for treatment – biological explanation is consistent with a biological
approach to treatment, eg medication, whereas the family systems explanation
would indicate that family therapy is important
• both explanations are deterministic – but different types of determinism
• neither explanation can establish causality: in both cases the presumed cause might
actually be a consequence, eg family might become dysfunctional as a result;
altered neurotransmitter levels might be an effect
• comparison of evidence for each explanation, eg in terms of reliability/validity.

[16]
Q28.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
4 13-16 Knowledge of the behaviourist approach is accurate
Page 45 of 60
and generally well detailed. Comparison with the
biological approach is thorough and effective. Minor
detail and / or expansion of argument is sometimes
Knowledge of the behaviourist approach is evident but

there are occasional inaccuracies / omissions.
Comparison with the biological approach is mostly
3 9-12
effective. The answer is mostly clear and organised but
appropriately.
Limited knowledge of the behaviourist approach is

present. Focus is mainly on description. Any
comparison with the biological approach is of limited
2 5-8
effectiveness. The answer lacks clarity, accuracy and
organisation in places. Specialist terminology is used
Knowledge of the behaviourist approach is very limited.

Comparison with the biological approach is limited,
poorly focused or absent. The answer as a whole lacks
1 1-4
clarity, has many inaccuracies and is poorly organised.
Possible content - outline:
• basic assumptions of the behaviourist approach

• the concept / theory of classical conditioning
• Pavlov’s research
• the concept / theory of operant conditioning
• Skinner’s research.
Possible comparisons:
• focus on environmental causes and experience vs focus on internal influences

(nature vs nurture). Discussion of the interactionist approach
• approaches to treatment (e.g. flooding vs drug therapy)
• use of scientific methods
• the issue of determinism
• the issue of reductionism
• use of animal experiments and extrapolation
• contrasting implications (e.g. blame, responsibility and social stigma).
Note - Use of topic examples to illustrate and elaborate on comparison points should be
credited.
Credit other relevant information.

[16]
Page 46 of 60
Q29.
[AO1 = 6 AO2 = 4 AO3 = 6]
Knowledge of the humanistic approach is accurate and

generally well detailed. Application is effective. Evaluation
of the humanistic approach is thorough and effective. Minor
4 13 – 16
detail and/or expansion of the argument is sometimes
Knowledge of the humanistic approach is evident but there

are occasional inaccuracies/omissions.
Application/evaluation of the humanistic approach is mostly
3 9 – 12
effective. The answer is mostly clear and organised but
appropriately.
Limited knowledge of the humanistic approach is present.

Focus is mainly on description. Any application is of limited
effectiveness. Any evaluation is of limited effectiveness.
2 5–8
The answer lacks clarity, accuracy and organisation in
places. Specialist terminology is used inappropriately on
occasions.
Knowledge of the humanistic approach is very limited.

Application is limited, poorly focused or absent. Evaluation
is limited, poorly focused or absent. The answer as a whole
1 1–4
lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies and is poorly
organised. Specialist terminology is either absent or
Possible content:
• Maslow’s hierarchy of needs – motivation to achieve progression through the levels
• Rogers’ focus on the concept of self and self-acceptance
• Incongruence between self-concept and ideal self leading to negative feelings of
self-worth
• person-centred approach to therapy – client led
• self-actualisation – fulfilling one’s potential
• unconditional positive regard rather than setting conditions of worth.
Possible application:
• hierarchy of needs: Tatiana requires her mobile phone to meet her safety needs,
‘feel safe’, love and belonging needs, ‘socially isolated without her phone’, ‘feels
good about herself when she receives messages or comments on social media’,
self-esteem needs, ‘low self-esteem’/ ‘feels good about herself when she receives
messages or comments’
• self-actualisation – ‘achievement at school’
• conditions of worth linked to feeling the need to text friends and use social media for
Page 47 of 60
acceptance and friendship
• incongruence and negative feelings of self-worth applied to ‘low self-esteem’/ ‘feels
good about herself when she receives messages or comments’ and/or anxiety.
Possible evaluation:
• limited application of the humanistic approach due to its abstract concepts
• the humanistic approach is not reductionist which may improve validity
• humanistic approach lacks empirical evidence to support its claims
• consideration of influence eg. counselling, theoretical influence etc.
• discussion regarding whether behaviour is due to free will or environmental factors
• credit use of evidence to discuss the different explanations when made relevant to
the stem
• comparison with alternative approaches in terms of evaluation and/or application.
Q30.
[AO1 = 6 AO3 = 10]
Knowledge of contribution / s is accurate and generally well

detailed. Discussion is thorough and effective. Answer is
clear, coherent and focused on contributions to
4 13 – 16
understanding human behaviour. Specialist terminology is
Knowledge of contribution / s is evident and there is some

reference to the understanding of human behaviour. There
are occasional inaccuracies. Discussion is apparent and
3 9 – 12
mostly effective. The answer is mostly clear and organised.
Specialist terminology mostly used effectively. Lacks focus
in places.
Knowledge of contribution / s is present. Focus is mainly on

description. Any discussion is only partly effective. The
2 5–8
answer lacks clarity, accuracy and organisation in places.
Knowledge of contribution / s is limited. Discussion is

limited, poorly focused or absent. The answer as a whole
1 1–4 lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies and is poorly
organised. Specialist terminology either absent or
Content, possible contributions:
• gave appreciation of how behaviour is learnt and environmentally determined
Page 48 of 60
• large scale data gathering and generalisation allowed for development of laws
and principles
• gave us theories of learning and laws of learning – classical and operant
conditioning theories
• emphasised importance of consequences, ie behaviour that is rewarded likely
to be repeated
• emphasised role of reinforcement and punishment – strengthens or weakens
learning
• insistence on objectivity and study of overt behaviour – raising psychology’s
scientific status.
Credit other relevant contributions.
Discussion of possible contributions:
• strict scientific methods, objectivity, controlled research, verifiable findings led

to raised status of psychology but meant that many aspects of human
behaviour could not be studied
• implications, eg development of laws and principles enabled prediction and
control of behaviour and how these apply to human behaviour
• usefulness for aspects of human behaviour, eg therapy, classroom
management etc
• reductionist approach focusing on lower level of explanation, eg S-R links /
associations therefore lacks meaning when it comes to complex human
behaviours
• focus just on behaviour neglected the whole person, eg in treatment using
conditioning only
• strongly deterministic – human behaviour is environmentally determined –
what of free will?
• research mainly with animals therefore generalisation to human behaviour
could be limited
• discussion about the balance between reliability and validity in behaviourist
research
• ethical issues, eg as applied to control of human behaviour
• comparison with what other approaches offer in explanations of human
behaviour.
Credit other relevant strengths and limitations.
Q31.

3 9 – 12 Knowledge is evident. There are occasional inaccuracies.
Page 49 of 60


bulleted list.
AO1
Marks for accurate description of features of psychodynamic approach: the role of

the unconscious; psychosexual stages; the structure of personality; defence
mechanisms; the role of conflict; the procedures used in psychoanalysis. Credit
description of features provided by neo Freudians such as Erikson.
AO3
Marks for discussion of strengths and limitations of the psychodynamic approach.

Likely strengths: focus on emotional development that occurs in early childhood and
affects adult behaviours and personality; recognition of the lack of rationality in much
behaviour and how stated intentions do not always match actual actions;
development of a therapy for the treatment of anxiety disorders laying the foundation
for psychotherapy in modern psychiatry.
Likely limitations: not testable as concepts such as the unconscious are not easy to
operationalise; not falsifiable as the theory is one in which the explanation uses post
hoc reasoning, stating that adult disorder is a result of conflict in an early
psychosexual stage but the theory often cannot predict how a particular conflict in
childhood will affect adult behaviour; key concepts are not directly observable and
have to be inferred from indirect procedures such as dream analysis; problems of
generalisability due to lack of evidence in particular and reliance on individual case
studies; general lack of scientific rigour because of interpretation of information and
retrospective nature of psychoanalysis, limited evidence using the scientific method
and reliance of case studies; general pessimism of the approach in which the
individual always has to overcome repressed memories and overuse of defence
mechanisms; emphasis on sexual instincts seems out of date in modern society,
especially the imbalance in explanation for male and female development.
Credit comparison with other approaches only if the comparison makes clear the
Page 50 of 60
way in which the value of the psychodynamic approach is evident or how the
psychodynamic approach is weakened by such comparison.
Credit use of evidence.
Q32.

Comparison is thorough and effective. The answer is
4 13 – 16 clear, coherent and focused. Specialist terminology is

Comparison is apparent and mostly effective. The
3 9 – 12 answer is mostly clear and organised. Specialist
places.

description. Any comparison is only partly effective. The
2 5–8 answer lacks clarity, accuracy and organisation in places.
occasions.
Knowledge is limited. Comparison is limited, poorly

1 1–4 has many inaccuracies and is poorly organised.
Specialist terminology either absent or inappropriately
used.
bulleted list.
AO1
Marks for knowledge and understanding of key features / assumptions of the

cognitive approach. Likely content: thought, both conscious and unconscious can
influence behaviour; thought mediates between stimulus and response; information
processing approach; mind works similarly to a computer; use of models; mental
processes can be scientifically studied; the human mind actively processes
information.
AO3
Page 51 of 60
Marks for comparing the cognitive approach with the psychodynamic approach.
Possible comparison points: cognitive – people as conscious logical thinkers vs

psychodynamic – focus on unconscious thought (though conscious level is
acknowledged); cognitive – stages of intellectual / cognitive development including
moral development in early years through to teenage years vs psychodynamic –
stages of personality development, also early years through to teenage years;
cognitive – information processing approach and little focus on emotions vs
psychodynamic – focus on emotional life and childhood experience; cognitive –
damage to brain and mental processes as explanation of atypical behaviour vs
psychodynamic – repression and unconscious conflict; cognitive – people as rational
conscious thinkers vs psychodynamic – irrational; cognitive – explanations involve
active processing and an element of free will / soft determinism vs psychodynamic –
individual is passive and behaviour is determined. Accept comparisons based on
therapies and research methods, application to all topic areas and to all the debates.
Q33.

effective. Other approach used effectively. The answer is
4 13 – 16

mostly effective. Some use of other approach. The
3 9 – 12
places.


Page 52 of 60
bulleted list.
AO1
Marks for relevant knowledge of assumptions of the humanistic approach and

concepts. Most likely assumptions and concepts will focus on: concern with
individual’s subjective view and experience of the world and conscious experience;
focus on person-centred approach and uniqueness of the individual; holistic
approach; the individual has free will; the individual striving for self-actualisation;
scientific methods are inappropriate for the study of human minds; aim of
psychology is to help people reach their full potential; concept of self; conditions of
worth; unconditional positive regard; client-centred therapy; Q-sort / POI.
AO3
Marks for analysis, comparisons with other approaches, evaluation of the approach
including its contributions and application of knowledge.
Discussion may focus on comparison with one other approach, though students may
well broaden their discussion to include more than one. All approaches are
acceptable though the behaviourist approach, with its focus on objectivity,
determinism, reductionism and scientific and mechanistic approach, is likely.
Students may be stimulated to respond to the claim that the approach has little to
offer psychology as part of their discussion. Strengths may cover: promotes a
positive image of human beings; optimistic view – person can grow and change
throughout life; focus on subjective experience makes a valuable contribution to
understanding the individual – more sensitive than scientific methods; persons in
control of their lives – largely ignored by other approaches; contributes to
psychological theories eg mood disorders; effective in some treatments eg
counselling for stressful events – insight and control, milieu therapy. Limitations may
include: opposition to scientific approach and implications; use of qualitative
techniques; focus on individual, and problem of formulating general laws of
behaviour / idiographic approach; vagueness of terms – implications for testing; lack
of comprehensiveness; culture-bound values.
Q34.

3 9 – 12 Knowledge is evident. There are occasional inaccuracies.

Page 53 of 60

Knowledge is limited. Discussion / valuation / application

is limited, poorly focused or absent. The answer as a
1 1–4 whole lacks clarity, has many inaccuracies and is poorly
organised. Specialist terminology either absent or
bulleted list.
AO1
Marks for knowledge in detail of features and / or assumptions of the cognitive

approach. These might include: the requirement that cognitive processes must be
studied if human behaviour is to be understood; mental processes mediate between
the stimulus and response; human information processing is analogous to the way a
computer works – input, storage and retrieval systems, hardware and software; the
use of models to explain internal / mental processes; propose stage-based
processing; human behaviour should be studied scientifically.
Credit description of models to illustrate features.
AO3
Marks for evaluation of the strengths and limitations of methods used by cognitive
psychologists. Candidates are likely to refer to the use of laboratory-based
experiments. Credit evaluation of use of models and evaluation of methods used in
cognitive neuroscience.
Likely strengths which might be expanded by discussion: there is a high degree of
control over variables which means that a cause and effect relationship can be
established; variables are operationalised to make measurements accurate and
objective; standardisation of procedures means research can be replicated to
enhance reliability; as participants are usually aware they are participating there is a
measure of ethical treatment; participants are usually human rather than animal
research. Credit reference to field experiments and the inclusion of observation as
part of the research method in some instances with resulting increased ecological
validity. Credit reference to the use of case studies and their impact on theory and
the suggestion that these may be more scientific in cognitive psychology than in
psychodynamic.
Likely limitations which might be expanded by discussion: artificiality of the situation
impacts on ecological validity; ecological validity often affected by narrowness of
dependent variables so that sight is lost of behaviour as a whole; use of artificial
stimuli – eg nonsense words / ambiguous figures affect generalisability; awareness
of participation means people taking part may exhibit demand characteristics which
Page 54 of 60
could affect reliability and / or validity of the research. Credit contrast with methods
used in other approaches where the relevance to strength or limitation is made
clear.
Credit use of evidence to illustrate discussion of strengths and limitations of the
research methods used in the cognitive approach.
Q35.




bulleted list.
AO1
Marks for description of the features of the humanistic approach. Features could
include how each person is unique and / or good. The subjective experiences,
feelings and thoughts of a person should be of importance to psychologists
(phenomenology). Focus on the importance of self and congruence. Self-
actualisation – every person has an innate tendency to reach his or her full potential.
Hierarchy of Needs. Concept of free will – able to choose and determine own
actions. Conditions of worth. Unconditional positive regard – the unconditional love
is essential to the development of a well-adjusted adult. Client- centred therapy –
Page 55 of 60
client at the centre of their own therapy in solving their own problems. The
idiographic approach – emphasis on understanding the uniqueness of a person.
Concept of holism. Research methods used eg the Q-sort technique.
AO3
Marks for evaluation: The humanistic approach has been criticised for its rejection of
the scientific approach and its failure to use experiments to understand and predict
human behaviour. There is little objective evidence to support the assumptions
made by humanistic psychologists. Students may evaluate the approach in relation
to other approaches, eg the behaviourist approach which views humans as
passively responding to stimuli in the environment. Humanistic psychologists state
that humans are active agents – able to change and determine their own
development. However, this may be seen as idealistic. Students may contrast the
concept of free will with the deterministic features of other approaches, eg the
biological approach. The value of a person-centred approach may be compared to
the psychodynamic approach. Practical applications of the approach, eg motivation
in business world and client centred therapy. Credit other relevant points.
Q36.
Please note that the AOs for the new AQA Specification (Sept 2015 onwards) have
changed. Under the new Specification the following system of AOs applies:
• AO1 knowledge and understanding

• AO2 application (of psychological knowledge)
• AO3 evaluation, analysis, interpretation.
Although the essential content for this mark scheme remains the same, mark schemes for
the new AQA Specification (Sept 2015 onwards) take a different format as follows:
• A single set of numbered levels (formerly bands) to cover all skills

• Content appears as a bulleted list
• No IDA expectation in A Level essays, however, credit for references to issues,
debates and approaches where relevant.
[AO1 = 4, AO2 = 8]
AO1
Up to four marks for knowledge and understanding of key defining features of the
psychodynamic approach. Likely content: the role of the unconscious mind in
motivating behaviour; instinctual drives; psychodynamic conflict; the importance of
childhood experiences; the psychosexual / psychosocial stages of development; the
structure of personality.
Credit reference to methodology and therapies.
Credit description of relevant evidence up to one mark.
AO2
Up to eight marks for the discussion including analysis, evaluation and application of
knowledge.
Discussions should focus on the uniqueness of the psychodynamic approach and
Page 56 of 60
comparisons with other approaches should be made in this context. Possible
discussion points in relation to other approaches: focus on power of the unconscious
mind vs. humanistic approach (focus on conscious subjective experience), SLT and
cognitive approach (internal conscious mediating processes); psychosexual stages
of development vs. behaviourism and biological approach (development as
continual process); conflict ridden person vs. humanistic approach (free individual
with potential for growth and fulfilment).
Credit relevant references to topic areas.
Discussions could include overlap and similarities with other approaches as well as
the defining differences such as: biological approach (inheritance of instincts and
evolution of behaviour); behaviourism (role of early experience); humanistic (person
centred and considers the individual); cognitive (study of the mind).
Maximum of 7 marks if there is no reference to other approaches
Mark bands
10 – 12 Very good answers

marks The answer is clearly focused on the uniqueness of the psychodynamic
approach in psychology and shows sound knowledge and understanding of
the approach. Discussion is full and includes thoughtful analysis. Most
references to other approaches are well developed and presented in the
context of the discussion as a whole. The answer is well organised and
mostly relevant with little, if any, misunderstanding.
The candidate expresses most ideas clearly and fluently, with effective use
of psychological terminology. Arguments are well structured, and coherent
with appropriate use of sentences and paragraphs. There are few, if any,
minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling. The overall quality of
language is such that the meaning is rarely, if ever, obscured.
7 – 9 marks Good answers

Answer shows knowledge and understanding of the psychodynamic
approach. Discussion is evident and the answer is mostly focused on the
issue of uniqueness although there may be some irrelevance and / or
misunderstanding. References to other approaches are apparent at the
middle and top of the band though these perhaps are not linked so clearly
to the discussion as for the top band. The candidate expresses most ideas
clearly and makes some appropriate use of psychological terminology. The
answer is organised, using sentences and paragraphs. Errors of grammar,
punctuation and spelling may be present but are mostly minor, such that
they obscure meaning only occasionally.
4 – 6 marks Average to weak answers

Answer shows some knowledge and understanding of the psychodynamic
approach. There must be some discussion for 5 / 6 marks. Answers in this
band may be mostly descriptive. There may be considerable irrelevance
and / or inaccuracy. Answers constituting reasonable relevant information
but without proper focus on the question are likely to be in this band.
The candidate expresses basic ideas clearly but there may be some
ambiguity. The candidate uses key psychological terminology
inappropriately on some occasions. The answer may lack structure,
although there is some evidence of use of sentences and paragraphs.
Page 57 of 60
There are occasional intrusive errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling
which obscure meaning.
1 – 3 marks Poor answers

Answer shows very limited knowledge and understanding but must contain
some relevant information in relation to the question. There may be
substantial confusion, inaccuracy and / or irrelevance.
The candidate shows deficiencies in expression of ideas resulting in
frequent confusion and / or ambiguity. Answers lack structure, consisting of
a series of unconnected ideas. Psychological terminology is used
occasionally, although not always appropriately. Errors of grammar,
punctuation and spelling are frequent, intrusive and often obscure meaning.
0 marks No relevant content
Q37.

effective. Effective comparison with at least one other
4 13 – 16
approach. The answer is clear, coherent and focused.

Some comparison with at least one other approach.
3 9 – 12


Page 58 of 60
bulleted list.
AO1
Marks for relevant knowledge and understanding of social learning theory. This most
likely will focus on the key assumptions of the approach: learning in a social context;
observational learning; imitation; identification; role of models, characteristics of
models; consequences of behaviour for models; vicarious reinforcement /
punishment, distinction between learning and performance; cognitive factors in
learning (for example attention, retention). Credit reference to methodology and use
of appropriate terminology eg reciprocal determinism, personal agency, self-efficacy,
etc.
AO3
Marks for analysis, comparisons with other approaches, evaluation of the approach
including its contributions and application of knowledge.
Discussion may focus on comparison with one other approach – though candidates
may well broaden their discussion to include more than one. All approaches are
acceptable but most likely will be the behaviourist approach. Strengths may cover:
the role of cognition in learning; the learning of complex social behaviours; the use
of the experimental method and focus on humans in research; applications to health
psychology, sport psychology and therapies requiring increase in self-efficacy.
Limitations may include: neglects the role of biology / heredity / maturation;
methodological aspects of research where linked to social learning theory; does not
explain the learning of abstract ideas.
Q38.

Discussion / evaluation / application / reference to
differences is thorough and effective. The answer is
4 13 – 16

Discussion / evaluation / application / reference to
3 9 – 12 differences is apparent and mostly effective. The answer
is mostly clear and organised. Specialist terminology is
mostly used effectively. Lacks focus in places.

Page 59 of 60
bulleted list.
AO1
Features of the humanistic approach in psychology could include the concept of free
will; focus on self and self-concept; personal growth; (un)conditional positive regard;
each person is unique and should be treated as such; study of subjective
experience; client related therapy; Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs; self-actualisation.
Credit reference to Rogers; Credit reference to research methods used e.g.open-
ended interviews.
AO3
Discussion should focus on differences between the humanistic approach and the
psychodynamic approach. Likely differences: The humanistic approach focuses on
the present / future versus the retrospective accounts of the psychodynamic
approach; humanistic psychologists are more positive in their outlook of human
behaviour versus the negative views of the psychodynamic approach; humanistic
psychologists focus on the person’s conscious mind whereas the psychodynamic
approach focuses on the unconscious mind; humanistic psychologists focus on eg
Maslow’s drive for self-actualisation versus the psychodynamic view of motivational /
underlying physiological forces; the humanistic approach is based on free-will
versus the psychodynamic focus on determinism; different approaches to therapy
(directive versus client-centred).
Page 60 of 60

ALL 16 Marks SI Attach Mem Approach 2024

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ALL 16 Marks SI Attach Mem Approach 2024

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Name: ________________________

ALL 16 markers from SI,

Time: 760 minutes

Marks: 608 marks

You may use this space to plan your answer.

Two psychology students were discussing the topic of social influence.

Discuss two explanations of resistance to social influence. As part of your discussion,

Jeff’s explanation was different: ‘To be honest, everyone else

You may use this space to plan your answer.

You may use this space to plan your answer.

You may use this space to plan your answer.

You may use this space to plan your answer.

Evaluate the research methods used by cognitive psychologists.

Level Marks Description

Knowledge of minority influence research is accurate

Knowledge of minority influence research is evident but

Limited knowledge of minority influence research is

Knowledge of minority influence research is very

Note that ‘research’ refers to theories and/or studies of minority influence.

Accept other valid points.

Accept other valid points.

Level Marks Description

Knowledge of how situational variables affect

Knowledge of how situational variables affect

Limited knowledge of how situational variables affect

Knowledge of how situational variables affect

Credit other relevant material.

Level Mark Description

Knowledge of reasons why we conform is accurate and

Knowledge of why we conform is evident but there are

Limited knowledge of why we conform is present.

Knowledge of why we conform is very limited. Any

Knowledge of reasons why we conform.

Possible discussion points:

Discussion of reasons why we conform.

[AO1 = 6 AO2 = 4 AO3 = 6]

Level Marks Description

4 13 – 16 Knowledge of two explanations is accurate and generally

Knowledge of two explanations is evident. Discussion is

Knowledge of two explanations is present but is vague /

Knowledge of explanation(s) is limited. Discussion is

Knowledge / description of two explanations of resistance to social influence (usually

Credit other acceptable explanations of disobedience / defiance and non-conformity,

• being in an autonomous state; previous experience; gender; culture; high level

AO2 Possible application:

AO3 Possible discussion points:

• commentary on two explanations of resistance to social influence

Credit other relevant discussion points.

Level Marks Description

Knowledge of explanations for conformity is accurate and

3 9 – 12 Knowledge of explanations for conformity is evident.

Knowledge of explanations of conformity is present but is

Knowledge of research into explanation(s) of conformity is

Normative social influence

• This relates to a desire for social approval/acceptance/avoidance of rejection.

• Change in attitude/behaviour is temporary.

Informational social influence

• When public behaviour and private opinion match (internalisation).

• Conformity is driven by the need to be right/have accurate perception of reality.

• Change in attitude/behaviour is likely to be more permanent.

• Use of evidence to evaluate/discuss the explanations.

• Normative social influence can explain the results of conformity studies in

• Informational influence can explain conformity in ambiguous situations in which both