M16/3/PSYCH/BP1/ENG/TZ1/XX/M

Markscheme

May 2016

Psychology

Higher level and standard level

Paper 1

10 pages
 –2– M16/3/PSYCH/BP1/ENG/TZ1/XX/M

This markscheme is confidential and for the exclusive use

of examiners in this examination session.

It is the property of the International Baccalaureate and

must not be reproduced or distributed to any other person
without the authorization of the IB Assessment Centre.
 –3– M16/3/PSYCH/BP1/ENG/TZ1/XX/M

Section A

Biological level of analysis

1. Describe the function of one hormone in human behaviour. [8]

Refer to the paper 1 section A markbands below when awarding marks.

The command term “describe” requires candidates to give a detailed account of the
function of one hormone in human behaviour.

A hormone is defined as a chemical messenger of the endocrine system and is

transported by blood to distal target cells. Although hormones may act as
neurotransmitters by activating receptor sites within the synapse, it is the origin of the
chemical that classifies it as a hormone. Hormones include:
• adrenaline/epinephrine (McGaugh and Cahill, 1995)
• estrogen (Sherwin, 1994)
• glucocorticoids/cortisol (Newcomer, 1999)
• melatonin (Rosenthal, 1987)
• neuropeptide Y (Morgan et al., 2000)
• oxytocin (Baumgartner, 2008)
• testosterone (Booth, 1998)
• vasopressin (Winslow, 1993).

Any aspect of human behaviour (eg aggression, depression, stress, sexual interest) is
acceptable as long as the response focuses on how the hormone influences the particular
behaviour.

Responses that address the influence of neurotransmitters such as dopamine, serotonin,

GABA and acetylcholine should not be awarded marks.

If a candidate describes a study using animals but does not explicitly link the study to
human behaviour, up to a maximum of [3] should be awarded.

If a candidate describes the function of more than one hormone, credit should be given
only to the description of the first hormone.

Section A markbands

Marks Level descriptor

0 The answer does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1 to 3 There is an attempt to answer the question, but knowledge and understanding

is limited, often inaccurate, or of marginal relevance to the question.

4 to 6 The question is partially answered. Knowledge and understanding is accurate

but limited. Either the command term is not effectively addressed or the
response is not sufficiently explicit in answering the question.

7 to 8 The question is answered in a focused and effective manner and meets the
demands of the command term. The response is supported by appropriate
and accurate knowledge and understanding of research.
 –4– M16/3/PSYCH/BP1/ENG/TZ1/XX/M

Cognitive level of analysis

2. Explain how one principle that defines the cognitive level of analysis may be demonstrated
in one example of research (theory or study). [8]

Refer to the paper 1 section A markbands on the next page when awarding marks.

The command term “explain” requires candidates to give a detailed account of how one
principle that defines the cognitive level of analysis is clearly demonstrated in one relevant
theory or study.

Acceptable principles include, but are not limited to:

• mental processes can be scientifically investigated
• internal processes are important mediators between stimuli and responses
• mental representations guide behaviour
• mental processing can be compared to computer function
• cognitive processes are influenced by social and/or cultural factors
• biological factors may affect cognitive processes.

If the principle used is that sociocultural or biological factors can affect cognitive
processes the focus of the research should be on the cognitive principle – that is, if a
study or theory that is more typically linked to the biological level of analysis or the
sociocultural level of analysis is used, the answer must focus on the cognitive aspects of
the research. For example, if using the HM study, candidates should focus on memory
aspects not physiological ones.

After briefly outlining the principle and giving a brief summary of one study or theory,
candidates should make an explicit link between the research and the principle. If a
relevant principle and research are identified but are not explicitly linked, then apply the
markbands up to a maximum of [6].

If a candidate explains a principle without making reference to research, apply the

markbands up to a maximum of [4].

If a candidate only describes a study or theory relevant to the cognitive level of analysis
without addressing a principle at the cognitive level of analysis, apply the markbands up to
a maximum of [3].

If a candidate explains more than one principle and/or uses more than one example of
research, credit should be given only to the first explanation of the first principle and to the
first example demonstrating that principle.

Section A markbands

Marks Level descriptor

0 The answer does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1 to 3 There is an attempt to answer the question, but knowledge and understanding

is limited, often inaccurate, or of marginal relevance to the question.

4 to 6 The question is partially answered. Knowledge and understanding is accurate

but limited. Either the command term is not effectively addressed or the
response is not sufficiently explicit in answering the question.
 –5– M16/3/PSYCH/BP1/ENG/TZ1/XX/M

7 to 8 The question is answered in a focused and effective manner and meets the
demands of the command term. The response is supported by appropriate
and accurate knowledge and understanding of research.
 –6– M16/3/PSYCH/BP1/ENG/TZ1/XX/M

Sociocultural level of analysis

3. Describe the role of situational and dispositional factors in explaining behaviour. [8]

Refer to the paper 1 section A markbands below when awarding marks.

The command term “describe” requires candidates to give a detailed account of how
situational and dispositional factors may explain human behaviour. Although a description
of the role of both factors is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high
marks. However, both situational and dispositional factors should be clearly linked to a
study for the award of high marks.

Answers may clarify that dispositional factors are internal factors (such as personality,
intelligence and attitude) and situational factors are external factors (such as group
pressure, social norms, weather and culture).

Candidates may make reference to attribution theory, self-serving bias or modesty bias or
other relevant research to help describe situational and dispositional factors, and this is
appropriate as long as the focus of the answer is on the description of the factors. It would
also be appropriate to refer to studies such as Milgram or Zimbardo.

If a candidate describes a relevant study with no link made to dispositional and situational
factors, apply the markbands up to a maximum of [3].

If a candidate describes only situational factors or only dispositional factors, apply the
markbands up to a maximum of [4].

Section A markbands

Marks Level descriptor

0 The answer does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1 to 3 There is an attempt to answer the question, but knowledge and understanding

is limited, often inaccurate, or of marginal relevance to the question.

4 to 6 The question is partially answered. Knowledge and understanding is accurate

but limited. Either the command term is not effectively addressed or the
response is not sufficiently explicit in answering the question.

7 to 8 The question is answered in a focused and effective manner and meets the
demands of the command term. The response is supported by appropriate
and accurate knowledge and understanding of research.
 –7– M16/3/PSYCH/BP1/ENG/TZ1/XX/M

Section B assessment criteria

A — Knowledge and comprehension

Marks Level descriptor

0 The answer does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1 to 3 The answer demonstrates limited knowledge and understanding that is of

marginal relevance to the question. Little or no psychological research is used in
the response.

4 to 6 The answer demonstrates limited knowledge and understanding relevant to the

question or uses relevant psychological research to limited effect in the response.

7 to 9 The answer demonstrates detailed, accurate knowledge and understanding

relevant to the question, and uses relevant psychological research effectively in
support of the response.

B — Evidence of critical thinking: application, analysis, synthesis, evaluation

Marks Level descriptor

0 The answer does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1 to 3 The answer goes beyond description but evidence of critical thinking is not linked
to the requirements of the question.

4 to 6 The answer offers appropriate but limited evidence of critical thinking or offers
evidence of critical thinking that is only implicitly linked to the requirements of the
question.

7 to 9 The answer integrates relevant and explicit evidence of critical thinking in

response to the question.

C — Organization

Marks Level descriptor

0 The answer does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1 to 2 The answer is organized or focused on the question. However, this is not

sustained throughout the response.

3 to 4 The answer is well organized, well developed and focused on the question.
 –8– M16/3/PSYCH/BP1/ENG/TZ1/XX/M

Section B
4. Discuss one interaction between cognition and physiology in terms of behaviour. [22]

Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.

The command term “discuss” requires candidates to offer a considered and balanced
review, supported by appropriate evidence, of one way in which cognition and
physiological processes interact to affect behaviour.

In discussing interaction, examples may be either uni-directional (that is, one factor
influences the other factor) or bi-directional (that is, looking at the true interdependence of
both factors), but candidates are not required to make the distinction. The focus of the
response, however, must be on the interaction between the cognitive and physiological
factors.

Uni-directional interactions include, but are not limited to:

• the role of acetylcholine or beta-amyloid proteins in Alzheimer’s disease (for example,
Lorenzo et al. 2000)
• the effect of meditation on physiological processes (for example, Davidson, 2004;
Luders et al. 2009)
• the role of the hippocampus in memory (for example, Maguire et al. 2000; Milner,
1957).

Bi-directional interactions include, but are not limited to:

• models of emotions (for example, LeDoux, Schachter and Singer)
• Ramachandran and Hirstein (1998) on perception and pain in phantom limb syndrome
• stress and immune function (for example, Kiecolt-Glaser et al. 1984)
• cognitive appraisal and biological reactions (for example, Lazarus and Folkman, 1975;
Speisman, 1964).

Discussion may include, but is not limited to:

• methodological considerations
• the relevance of animal studies
• the issue of reductionism
• supporting and/or contradicting evidence
• ethical considerations
• application of empirical findings.

If a candidate discusses more than one interaction between cognition and physiology in
terms of behaviour, credit should be given only to the discussion of the first interaction.
 –9– M16/3/PSYCH/BP1/ENG/TZ1/XX/M

5. Evaluate one model or theory of one cognitive process. [22]

Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.

The command term “evaluate” requires candidates to make an appraisal by weighing up

the strengths and limitations of one model/theory related to one cognitive process.
Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be
evenly balanced to gain high marks. Candidates are not required to distinguish between a
model and a theory.

Cognitive processes include, but are not limited to: memory, perception, language, or
decision making.

A wide variety of models/theories may be presented which may include, but are not
limited to:
• Working Memory Model (Baddeley and Hitch, 1974); Levels of Processing (Craik and
Lockhart, 1972); The Multi-Store Model (Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968, 1971)
• Chomsky’s LAD theory (1957, 1968); Bruner’s Language Acquisition Support System
(1983) related to language acquisition
• Flashbulb Memory Theory (Brown and Kulik, 1977)
• Gregory’s Constructivist Theory (1972, 1980); Gibson’s Theory of Direct Perception
(1966, 1979) related to perception
• Schema theory relevant to cognitive processes such as memory or decision making
(Bartlett, 1932; Loftus, 1974)
• Appraisal theory (Lazarus, 1975).

Evaluation of the selected model/theory may include, but is not limited to:
• methodological considerations
• cultural and gender considerations
• the accuracy and clarity of the concepts
• contrary findings or explanations
• the productivity of the theory in generating psychological research
• the applications of the empirical findings.

If a candidate evaluates more than one model/theory, credit should be given only to the
evaluation of the first model/theory. However, a candidate may address other
models/theories and be awarded marks as long as these models/theories are clearly used
to evaluate the main theory addressed in the response.

If a candidate addresses more than one cognitive process, credit should be given only to
the discussion of the first cognitive process.

If a candidate addresses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be

awarded up to a maximum of [5] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of
[2] for criterion C, organization. Up to full marks may be awarded for criterion A,
knowledge and comprehension.
 – 10 – M16/3/PSYCH/BP1/ENG/TZ1/XX/M

6. Discuss two or more factors influencing conformity. [22]

Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.

The command term “discuss” requires candidates to offer a considered and balanced
review of factors influencing conformity.

Appropriate factors influencing conformity may include but are not limited to: culture,
minority influence, group size, unanimity, confidence, self-esteem, intellectual competence
and leadership ability. Candidates may refer to normative and informational conformity.

Candidates may refer to a large number of studies that may include but are not limited to:
• Asch’s (1951, 1952, 1956) studies on the influence of group size, unanimity and the
difficulty of the task
• Crutchfield’s (1955) study on intellectual competence, ego strength, leadership ability
and authoritarian personality
• Perrin and Spencer’s (1988) study on confidence
• Clark and Maass’s (1988, 1989) studies or Moscovici et al.’s (1969, 1976, 1985)
studies on the influence of a minority
• Berry’s (1967) study or Bond and Smith’s study (1996) on cultural differences.

In order to respond to the command term “discuss”, candidates may refer to:
• empirical support and contrary findings
• application of empirical findings
• methodological considerations
• gender and cultural considerations
• ethical considerations.

Candidates may discuss two factors influencing conformity in order to demonstrate depth
of knowledge, or may discuss a larger number of factors in order to demonstrate breadth
of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

If a candidate discusses only one factor influencing conformity, the response should be
awarded up to a maximum of [5] for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension, up to a
maximum of [4] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2] for criterion C,
organization.

If factors influencing obedience or compliance, rather than conformity, are discussed, no

marks should be awarded for this discussion. Marks should only be awarded for a
discussion of the Stanford Prison Study if the response focuses on relevant factors
influencing conformity, for example referent informational influence.