We may have always intuitively understood the mind-stomach connection. Anxious? - butterflies in the stomach. Terrified? - Bring my brown pants. Disgust? - sick to he bottom of my stomach, and so on and such forth. Now some rather startling science is shedding some light onto this connection. 

It's not how much you write in the IB Psychology exams, it's what you write

Students are always asking me how much they should be writing to answer a particular IB Psychology exam question. My response is always the same. Enough to meet the requirements of the particular IB Psychology command term (which I've covered in a previous post) and enough to provide sufficient information to answer the question ... but no more than that! Any unnecessary, extra time a student spends on one of their IB Psychology exam questions is time that she doesn't have to spend answering another examination question. And I have never met a student yet, in my long, long, long IB Psychology teaching career who has come out of an exam with that magical and elusive 7 saying that she had plenty of time to spare (therefore the exam paper doodling). 

To prove this point, take a look at two sample responses to short answer questions (SAQs) asked in past IB Psychology examinations (Paper 1, SL and HL). One response is an SAQ associated with the Cognitive Level of Analysis, the other, the Socio-Cultural Level of Analysis. You will see that full marks in SAQs can usually be gained with less than a page of writing, easily. 

The Cognitive Level of Analysis question: WITH REFERENCE TO ONE RESEARCH STUDY, EXPLAIN HOW ONE BIOLOGICAL FACTOR MAY AFFECT ONE COGNITIVE PROCESS

Biological factors, such as hormones, can affect the cognitive process of memory. Hormones are chemical messengers secreted by cell or gland. These messengers are sent out from one part of the body to affect cells in other parts of the body. Hormones are often released directly into the bloodstream.

One study done on this was by Newcomer. Newcomer wanted to test the role of glucocorticoids on memory. Glucocorticoids are chemicals that can stop inflammation. As Meany had found, exposure to high levels of glucocorticoids lead to a decrease in memory in rats and atrophy of the hippocampus. Newcomer wanted to see if this was also true in human beings. He wanted to test the effect of cortisol, a stress hormone secreted by the adrenal glands, on verbal declarative memory. The hippocampus plays the role of transferring declarative memories from STM to LTM. Cortisol appears to lead to hippocampal cell death.

Newcomer ran a double-blind test in which participants either were given a high dose of cortisol (similar to a high level of stress), a low dose of cortisol or a placebo over a period of four days. The participants were asked to read a piece of prose. After the four days, they were asked to recall the data from the prose. Newcomer found that those who had been given high levels of cortisol had the worst recall of the text. When they stopped taking the pills, their memory levels returned to normal. Newcomer concluded that cortisol has a negative effect on the transfer and retrieval of STM to LTM.

The Socio-Cultural Level of Analysis question: DESCRIBE ONE THEORY OF HOW STEREOTYPES ARE FORMED

One theory that explains how stereotypes are formed is through either experience or society and then confirmation bias. Stereotypes are schema that people have of other people. These usually form from experiencing a certain event multiple times or from what society tells you to think. One study on the formation of stereotypes was done by Rogers & Frantz. They aimed to see if the amount of time that somebody was in Rhodesia (today Zimbabwe) would affect their stereotypes of the locals. They studied European settlers in Rhodesia. They gave participants a test where multiple segregation and discrimination laws were listed, showing how much better the whites were treated in Rhodesia than the blacks. They then asked them how much they wanted things to either stay the same or change. The results were that the longer somebody had lived in Rhodesia, the less they wanted things to change and the more they liked the status quo. This shows that the longer someone had been living there, the higher amount of the stereotypes he had towards the locals.

Those that wanted the change the most were the ones that had been there the least amount of time. This indicates that stereotypes form over time. When new European settlers came to Rhodesia they had no idea what to think and had no stereotypes toward the Africans. Because of this, they looked to others to see what to think. This is called informational social influence. They conformed to the ideas and stereotypes already existing in the White European community. They did this in order to connect to their “in-group.” Once learning these stereotypes, they then experience confirmation bias. This is when they only see and remember things that fit into the stereotype or schema that they now had of the locals and ignored the things that went against these stereotypes. This is how their stereotypes got stronger. One theory of the formation of stereotypes is that people look to others they consider their in-group to see what to think. Then through confirmation bias these stereotypes increase in intensity. The more time the Europeans had been in Rhodesia, the more they felt ok with discrimination against the locals and the stronger their stereotypes were.

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

Some nasty little surprises lying in wait to hook the unwary

Imagine writing what you think is the perfect response to a short answer question in your IB Psychology examination only to have a single sentence of your answer penalise you 50 per cent of the marks on offer. There are some very odd requirements that IB Psychology examiners must follow, and this can be infuriating for inexperienced IB Psychology teachers and unwary students.

A frequently posed exam question relates to the principles that govern each of the three levels of analysis: The Biological, Cognitive and Socio-Cultural levels of analysis. There are always three different principles that govern each of these levels of analysis. For example, in the Biological Level of Analysis the three principles are: (i) there are biological correlates of behaviour, (ii) animal research can provide insight into human behaviour, and (iii) human behaviour is, to some extent, genetically based. The exam question that is often asked will ask you to outline, describe or explain one or two of these principles (e.g., Outline two principles that govern the Biological Level of Analysis.). 

Now students being students, and human nature being human nature, we have a need to show our examiners how intelligent we are; exams are our time to showcase the knowledge we have accumulated over the last two years. So we begin our short answer responses ... "There are three principles that govern the Biological Level of Analysis, and these are (i) there are biological correlates of behaviour, (ii) animal research can provide insight into human behaviour, and (iii) human behaviour is, to some extent, genetically based. ... " before going on to outline the second and third of these stated principles. Here the examiner face palms herself. Literally. The IB Psychology examination board has decided in their infinite wisdom that the first two principles that are mentioned in a student responses are the ones they have to be graded on. Thus the student picks up zero marks for the first principle because she hasn't outlined it, and zero marks for the third principle as the examiners consider it superfluous - the examiner has to focus on the first two principles mentioned in the response. A response worthy of the full 8 marks gets hammered down to a 3 or a 4. Yes, very, very pedantic!

Below, we present a model short answer question (SAQ) response that will be awarded the full 8 marks.

IB Psychology: The Biological Level of analysis
A model short answer question (SAQ) response to the examination question: Outline principles that define the biological level of analysis.

SAQ: Outline principles that define the biological level of analysis
Biological psychology is a branch or type of psychology that brings together biology and psychology to understand behaviour and thought. Biological psychology looks at the link between biology and psychological events such as how information travels throughout our bodies (neural impulses, axons, dendrites, etc.), how different neurotransmitters effect behaviours. There are three principles that define the biological level of analysis which will each be covered, in turn.

Principle 1: There are biological correlates of behaviour. This means that there are physiological origins of behaviour such as neurotransmitters, hormones, specialised brain areas, and genes. The biological level of analysis is based on reductionism, which is the attempt to explain complex behaviour in terms of simple causes.

Principle 1 demonstrated in: Newcomer et al. (1999) performed an experiment on the role of the stress hormone cortisol on verbal declarative memory. Group 1 (high dose cortisol) had tablets containing 160 mg of cortisol for four days. Group 2 (low dose cortisol) had tablets with 40 mg of cortisol for four days. Group 3 (control) had placebo tablets. Participants listened to a prose paragraph and had to recall it as a test of verbal declarative memory. This memory system is often negatively affected by the increased level of cortisol under long-term stress. The results showed that group 1 showed the worst performance on the memory test compared to group 2 and 3. The experiment shows that an increase in cortisol over a period has a negative effect on memory.

Principle 2: Animal research can provide insight into human behaviour. This means that researchers use animals to study physiological processes because it is assumed that most biological processes in non-human animals are the same as in humans. One important reason for using animals is that there is a lot of research where humans cannot be used for ethical reasons.  

Principle 2 demonstrated in: Rosenzweig and Bennet (1972) performed an experiment to study the role of environmental factors on brain plasticity using rats as participants. Group 1 was placed in an enriched environment with lots of toys. Group 2 was placed in a deprived environment with no toys. The rats spent 30 or 60 days in their respective environments before being killed. The brains of the rats in group 1 showed a thicker layer of neurons in the cortex compared to the deprived group. The study shows that the brain grows more neurons if stimulated.

Principle 3: Human behaviour is, to some extent, genetically based. This means that behaviour can, to some extent, be explained by genetic inheritance, although this is rarely the full explanation since genetic inheritance should be seen as genetic predisposition which can be affected by environmental factors. 

• Researchers interested in the genetic origin of behaviour often use twins so that they can compare one twin with the other on a variable such as intelligence, depression or anorexia nervosa. 
• Identical twins (monozygotic twins – MZ) are 100% genetically identical as they have developed from the same egg. They therefore act as a control for each other. Fraternal twins (dizygotic twins – DZ) have developed from two different eggs. They share around 50% of their genes so they are no more similar than siblings.
• Twin research never shows a 100% concordance rate so it is believed that genes are a predisposing factor rather than the cause of behaviour. Therefore it is also important to consider what environmental factors could influence the expression of the genetic predisposition.
  

Principle 3 demonstrated in: Bouchard et al. (1990) performed the Minnesota twin study, a longitudinal study investigating the relative role of genes in IQ. The participants were MZ reared apart (MZA) and MZ reared together (MZT). The researchers found that MZT had a concordance rate of IQ of 86% compared to MZA with a concordance rate of IQ of 76%. This shows a link between genetic inheritance and intelligence but it does not rule out the role of the environment.

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

What a 22 marks out of 22 marks ERQ answer looks like ...

DISCUSS ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS RELATED TO RESEARCH STUDIES AT THE BIOLOGICAL LEVEL OF ANALYSIS.

This essay will offer a balanced review of ethical considerations related to research studies at the biological level of analysis (BLOA). The BLOA is based on mental processes such as perception, attention, language, memory, and thinking. The essay will then apply these ethical considerations to two specific research studies at the BLOA where ethical concerns have been raised – Schachter & Singer (1962) and the Case study of HM (Curtis, 1981).

Ethics is the moral correctness of a specified conduct – in this case, the moral correctness of animal and human research at the CLOA. In cognitive psychology research, ethics must be considered to ensure participants (humans and animals) are not harmed and that research conducted is ethically valid. Researchers should always conduct research in an ethical manner and studies should always be critically evaluated for ethical issues. 

Ethical standards formulated by the American Psychology Association (APA, a scientific and professional organisation that represents psychologists) states that all research done in psychology, including that at the BLOA, must abide by six specific ethical guidelines, these include:

1. The protection of participants - Participants should be protected from physical and mental harm and distress (humiliation, stress, injury, etc.) and that participants should not be forced to reveal personal information.

2. Consent - Participants should be informed of the true aims and nature of research before giving consent. However, sometimes it is not possible to give full information about research. This is especially true if participant bias could be expected; i.e., knowing the true aims of a study may affect participants’ behaviour and thus the results of a study. For example, knowing beforehand that a study is researching how an emotion (e.g., anger) is related to physiology (e.g., adrenaline – a neurotransmitter and hormone) could lead to participants responding more cautiously and thoughtfully to the experimental conditions than they otherwise would (Schachter & Singer, 1962). It is also considered acceptable not to give full informed consent if no harm is expected (e.g., using MRI scans to examine changes in the structure of the hippocampus of London taxi drivers as a result of intense learning  – Maguire et al., 2000).

A guardian or family member should also give consent to the study if the participants are children (under the age of 18) or unable to give consent (e.g., a participant severely affected by Alzheimer’s disease).

3. Right to withdraw - Participants should be informed of their right to withdraw their participation and data at any time in the study (even at the end) without penalty. This is important because individual differences means that researchers can never be certain if a particular participant will be experiencing stress and discomfort or not.

4. Confidentiality - Data collected in a study should remain confidential and anonymous because it is important to protect participants from possible consequences that may result from their data (e.g., some health insurance companies insist that any cognitive degenerative disease diagnosis such as AD be made available to them). Identifying information and individual responses will not be shared with anyone who is not involved in the study.

5.     Deception should be avoided, however slight deception is considered acceptable if: 

• Participant bias would result from participants knowing the true aims of the study 
  
• The research has potential significant contribution 
  
• It is unavoidable 
  
• The deception does not cause any distress to the participant, including upon being informed of the deception.
  

6.  Debriefing - Any deception must be revealed and justified and participants should leave the study without undue stress. Findings of the research should be made available to participants as soon as possible.

Ethical guidelines for animal research (APA) have also been formulated:

Animal research should try to avoid harm to animals. Any harm caused to animal should be carefully weighed against the research’s potential to provide significant benefit to the health or welfare of humans or other animals, or if it is unavoidable (e.g., electrodes that monitor individual neuronal hippocampal activity in memory tasks). If the procedure would cause pain to humans, it should be assumed that it will cause pain to animals. Animal welfare should be monitored and animals should be euthanised as soon as possible if research causes long term/serious harm and/or affects their ability to live normally and pain-free.

Research studies such as Curtis (1981) and Schachter and Singer (1962) raise significant ethical considerations.

The case study of HM (Curtis, 1981)
HM was man who lost the ability to remember information after a brain operation. The operation was clearly a disaster for HM, although he probably never understood that because he could never learn what happened to him or if he did he would forget it within a couple of minutes. This was a tragedy for HM but an opportunity for any psychologists who became aware of the case. They queued up to study HM’s memory, assessing it with all kinds of tests and checking out a wide range of hypotheses concerning the theoretical distinctions between long-term and short-term memory, and between explicit and implicit memory. They used all sorts of stimuli, including electric shocks and white noise (see review: Corkin, 1984). He has probably had more words written about him than any other case in neurological or psychological history (Ogden & Corkin, 1991).

There were a set of ethical issues with most of the studies performed on HM, which include:

1. Participant Protection – HM was protected from harm during most studies, but obviously not when electric shocks were used. He may have experienced mental distress from dramatic changes in environments, carers and different researchers coming and going.

2.  Consent – HM could not be fully informed or give consent to these studies due to his general cognitive functioning. He would not understand the nature and aims of the study and therefore, it was not possible to gain fully informed consent. 
3.     Withdrawal – HM would not have been able to express any desires to withdraw from the studies as it was likely, his poor memory would mean that he was not aware that he was participating in an experiment after a short period of time had passed. 
4.  Confidentiality – His identity was kept anonymous as best as possible as 'HM' is just his initials. His real name was in the end revealed, and his case was exposed to the world of psychology and HM was readily identifiable in video footage. 
5.  Deception and debriefing – HM was not debriefed in most studies study. However, as he did not know that he was being studied, he would not desire a debriefing. 

In conclusion, most of the memory studies in which HM participated would not meet the ethical requirements necessary for research into the BLOA and would not be approved by the ethics boards of universities today. The ethical procedures surrounding case study patients today are much more prescribed and regulated.

Schachter and Singer (1962) 
Schachter and Singer aimed to test whether cognition (the interpretation of a state of arousal) was needed to interpret and transform ambiguous physiological states into specific emotions. To do this they recruited volunteers to receive a vitamin injection and informed them that they would be participating in vision experiments. None of the participants received a vitamin injection. Three of the four experimental groups received an adrenalin injection (a potent hormone associated with fight or flight response), and the control group a saline injection. In addition to this deception, one of the experimental groups was provided with misinformation about the side effects of the ‘vitamin’ injection (the actual side effects of adrenaline). The next experimental condition saw half of the participants being manipulated into an emotional state of anger (the half into a state of ‘euphoria’ or happiness).

There were a set of ethical issues in this study, which include:

Deception – Participants were deceived about the aims and nature of the study. Participants were told the study aimed to test the effects of the supposed vitamin injection on vision. But it was actually testing the two factor theory of emotion - emotion arises from a combination of cognition and arousal - using adrenaline. All participants were deceived about the injection they were receiving, and were actually administered adrenaline or a placebo (saline solution). Furthermore, some participants were given false side effects of the adrenaline injection that they were given – headache, numbness, itchiness in the feet 

However, deception was used because participant bias would result from participants knowing the true nature of the study and the research has potential significant contribution to understanding the causes of emotion. 

Consent – Participants were not informed of the true nature and aims of the study before giving consent. They did not know that the study aimed to investigate the two factor theory of emotion. They did not know that they would be receiving adrenaline or placebo injections. Some participants did not know the true effects of the adrenaline injection they were given, they were either given false effects or no effects.

Again, however, being fully informed of the true nature and aims of the study probably would have resulted in participant bias.

Participant protection – Researchers did not protect participants. Participants may have had a harmful reaction to the adrenaline and researchers did not ensure that participants would not experience harm from the injection.

Debriefing – Participants were adequately debriefed and the deception was revealed and justified.

In conclusion, this study does not meet the ethical requirements necessary for research into the BLOA and would not be approved by the ethics boards of universities today. The of the use of a potent hormone adrenaline being administered while simultaneously attempting to induce anger in the participants raises ethical concerns about the protection of participants, as does the significant levels of deception involved. These factors are not likely to be outweighed by the significance of research argument.

General conclusion:
Most modern day research into the BLOA is seriously considered in terms of its ethics by both the researchers themselves and by governing oversight by the governors of ethics boards. If deception is to be involved it is required to be slight and protection of participants paramount. We have seen that some previous research into the BLOA has not always met the requirements of the ethical guidelines now required in this field. 

Author: Derek Burton - Passionate about IB Psychology