OCR Psychology For A Level Book 1 sample

Exam preparation: Questions, answers and comments 1. In the study by Bandura et al. into transmission of aggression, all participants were taken individually into a second room and subjected to mild aggression arousal. a) Describe how the children’s aggression was aroused in this room. [2] b) Explain why the researchers felt that this was necessary. [2] David’s answer a) All the children were taken individually to a second room where there were really attractive toys like a re engine. They had these toys taken away after 2 minutes. b) It was necessary to give a common basis of arousal for all the children. In this way the researcher could control for aggression because all the children were angry before going into the third room. Katharine’s answer a) Participants had really attractive toys taken off them. This would have made the child angry. b) So that there is a control on the aggression. Some children watched the non-aggressive model and they might be inhibited from behaving aggressively because of what they had observed. Teacher’s comments David, this is an excellent answer. In (a) you have named one of the attractive toys and also said how long the child was allowed to play, giving some detail. In (b) you have explained well the reason for arousing the children. Katharine, you are quite right in (a) about the attractive toys being taken away. However, for full marks here you need to provide some detail – describe some of the toys or tell us the researchers said the toys were for ‘other children’. Your answer to (b) is excellent. This is one of the speci c reasons Bandura et al. gave for the arousal in the second room. Well done! David (4 out of 4 marks) Katharine (3 out of 4 marks) 2. In what way is the Funhaler study by Chaney et al. more ethical than that of Bandura et al . on transmission of aggression? [3] David’s answer Ethics are the rules governing research. Chaney is more ethical than Bandura because we can be sure the parents are giving consent for their children to be part of the study. We do not know that they did in the Bandura study. Katharine’s answer One ethical issue under the heading of respect is that of protection of research participants, so that they should not be harmed. In the Bandura study some of the children witnessing the aggressive model could be said to be harmed because they had seen a stranger behaving violently and this could be quite frightening to them. However, in the Chaney study there was no harm to them as the point was to increase their taking of medication, which is good for them. Teacher’s comments David, you have identi ed an ethical issue but not de ned it explicitly. It is reasonable to assume that the parents gave consent in the Chaney study but can we be certain that this did happen in the study by Bandura et al. ? I do not feel this is enough for 2 (or more) marks. Katharine, this is an excellent response. You have clearly outlined the ethical issue and applied it in detail to both studies. Well done! David (1 out of 3 marks) Katharine (3 out of 3 marks) 3. Describe the sample in the Lee et al . study of evaluations of lying and truth telling. [3] David’s answer They were 120 Chinese children aged from 7 to 11 and a similar number of Canadian children of the same age range, mostly from middle-class homes. Katharine’s answer It was a sample of 75 boys from America aged 10 and above that were followed for a number of years. There were also boys from Mexico, Great Britain, Taiwan and Turkey used for comparison. Teacher’s comments David, this is a little brief for full marks. You have identi ed the samples but they lack detail. The actual number of Canadian children was 108. It would be helpful to detail how many there were in each age group (7-, 9- and 11-year-olds). Katharine, oh dear! You have got completely confused and given an excellent description of the children in the Kohlberg study. What a shame! David (2 out of 3 marks) Katharine (0 out of 3 marks) Mark scheme 3 marks A clear, accurate and detailed description of both samples. 2 marks A good description of both samples but lacks detail or clarity. 1 mark Vague or partial answer or only one sample described. 0 marks No creditworthy response. Mark scheme 3 marks Relevant ethical issue(s) clearly defined and applied to both studies. 2 marks Relevant ethical issue(s) clearly defined and applied to one study OR relevant ethical issue(s) identified and applied to both studies. 1 mark Relevant ethical issue outlined but not clearly applied to either study. 0 marks No creditworthy response. Mark scheme (a) 2 marks A clear, accurate, and detailed description with reference to specific toys e.g. dolls set with wardrobe and crib, fire engine, jet fighter plane. 1 mark Partial or vague answer, e.g. children had toys taken away from them. 0 marks No creditworthy response. Mark scheme (b) 2 marks A clear, detailed explanation, e.g. because observing aggressive behaviour may reduce the probability of behaving aggressively, so without provocation, those who had observed the aggressive model may have been less likely to behave aggressively. 1 mark Partial or vague answer, e.g. as a control for aggression. 0 marks No creditworthy response. The mark schemes and teacher comments provided here are the authors’ interpretations of OCR’s speci cation assessment material. Chapter 4: Developmental psychology 218 AS & A level