Category: Model Answers

How to get a 7 in IB Psychology

3/3/2016

The best 5 tips from experienced IB Psychology teachers on how you can achieve that IB Psychology 7.

The scary fact is, only four percent of IB Psychology students manage to get a 7 in each examination session. In the video below we show you how to become one of the elite!

How to get a 7 in IB Psychology

Our video above covers these top 5 tips for achieving the IB Psychology 7:

You already know the questions that can be asked in all 3 of your IB Psychology examination papers! (Yes, really.)
The IB Psychology Paper 1 examination has three sections - DO NOT study for two of these! (Yes, really.)
Aim for maximum marks in your IB Psychology IA. (Almost goes without saying.)
Prepare and memorise model answers to ALL of the extended response questions you are going to target in IB Psychology exams. (But be smart about it!)
Don’t ignore Qualitative Research Methods, because your IB Psychology teacher almost certainly will! (You need lots of practice with actual stimulus material - i.e., qualitative research)

Author: Derek Burton - Passionate about IB Psychology

How to cut your IB Psychology revision time by 50%!

29/2/2016

We show you exactly what you can get away with when revising for your IB Psychology Paper 2 exams – the Options.

In the IB Psychology Paper 2 exam – the Options – there is much that you can leave out and still get maximum marks. The Paper 2 exam requires you to answer two extended response question (ERQs) if you are studying Higher Level IB Psychology, and one ERQ if you are studying Standard Level. Each ERQ is worth 22 marks and you should be targeting full marks in this exam. Paper 2 is the easiest exam in which to maximise your overall IB Psychology exam score. It’s the easiest exam for which to prepare model answers to exam questions and then practice these until you can regurgitate them perfectly and “wow!” your IB Psychology examiners.

Take a look at picture below left (click to enlarge). You will see that there are three questions associated with each option, of which you only need to answer one. You will know by now that each question asked in the IB Psychology examinations is straight out of the learning outcomes listed in the IB Psychology Guide (if not, please see one of most popular blog posts here).

Paper 2 exam questions

Remember, the IB Psychology LOs listed in the Guide, are your actual exam questions.

Abnormal Learning outcomes

Now if you have a look above right (click to enlarge), at the learning outcomes associated with one of the IB Psychology options – Abnormal Psychology, you might think that there is quite a bit of preparation and revision that you need to do. 12 learning outcomes would equate to preparing and memorising 12 model answers, just for this one option, right? Wrong! Let me explain …

Firstly, within each option you have three essay question (ERQ) choices. Secondly, there has never been, nor is there likely to ever be, an IB Psychology exam where all three questions come from within a single subsection such as “Concepts and Diagnosis” or “Psychological Disorders” in the Abnormal option. This means that you can eliminate one ERQ from each of these sections. Thirdly, IB Psychology examiners can’t set an ERQ exam question based on a lower level command terms such as “explain”, “analyse” or “describe”. Very occasionally you will see exam question twisted and contorted to mix a lower level question term and a higher level command term. It hardly ever happens, you have other questions to choose from, so go ahead, cross these LOs off your list too.

Take a look below (again, click to enlarge) at how many Human Relationship LOs you will need to prepare model answers and revise for if you follow this advice. Instead of revising for 13 LOs, you now only need prepare and revise for six! And because you are now only focussing on six ERQ questions, you can prepare perfect 22/22 answers, commit them to memory and regurgitate them as soon as the IB Psychology Paper 2 exam begins. Genius! (At least your IB Psychology examiner will think you are!)

FRom 13 → 6 Learning Outcomes!

Remember, wwwPsychologyIB.com has model ERQ answers for the two most popular IB Psychology options – Abnormal and Human Relationships, and we guarantee you will be awarded 22/22 marks if you can replicate them in your exams.

Author: Derek Burton - Passionate about IB Psychology

In IB Psychology exams, content is king

10/1/2016

How to get that elusive IB Psychology 7? Your Paper 1 and Paper 2 extended response answers must get very near to full marks in the IB Psychology examinations. To achieve full marks you need great content.

Each of the extended response question (ERQ) answers in your IB Psychology exams will be marked out of a total of 22 marks and judged against only three criteria, of which, knowledge and critical thinking are key (see below). You can be awarded 9 marks for each of these criteria in each of your IB Psychology ERQ answers, that's two ERQs for SL students and 3 for HL IB Psychology students. That's a massive 36 (SL) or 54 (HL) marks, and as such, your answers to these two or three questions will make or break your entire IB Psychology career. Mess one of these ERQs up, and there's no coming back - your glorious vision of the IB Psychology 7 will lie shattered on the floor. No pressure then! You absolutely need to have great content practiced, memorised and rehearsed. Fortunately, before you even set foot in the exam room, you already know exactly what will be in your IB Psychology exam (see previous post).

IB Psychology ERQ examiner's marking criteria:
A. Knowledge and comprehension [9 marks]:The answer demonstrates detailed, accurate knowledge and understanding relevant to the question, and uses relevant psychological research effectively in support of the IB Psychology question response.
B. Evidence of critical thinking: application, analysis, synthesis, evaluation [9 marks]: The answer integrates relevant and explicit evidence of critical thinking in response to the IB Psychology exam question.
C. Organisation [4 marks]: The answer is well organised, well developed and focused on the IB Psychology exam question.

One of the (less than) four per cent!

Remember, we take all of the guess work and all of the hard work out of IB Psychology with our especially prepared model IB Psychology exam answers.

An often quoted and always scary fact is that less than four per cent of IB Psychology students manage to achieve a 7. It just does not come with luck. Any student aiming to achieve the IB Psychology 7 must start preparing and memorising model answers to each learning outcome preceded with a command term focusing the student on synthesis and evaluation for one of the Paper 1 topics and each option being studied. Concepts, knowledge, relevant research and critical thinking and evaluations need to be prepared and practiced. You don't have time in the IB Psychology to think your way through a question, and, because you know what the question will be, there's no need to think in the exam because all of your thinking has taken place prior to the exam.

Having great content in sufficient depth and breadth is the only way you will near full marks and gain the 7 in IB Psychology. Your answers need to be detailed, cover multiple research studies, define and explain key terms and discuss content in context. And, importantly, critical thinking should be planned for throughout each of your IB Psychology ERQs. It sounds like a lot, and it is, which is exactly why so few students manage lock in that IB Psychology 7.

Below, we have a model ERQ for the IB Psychology learning outcome in the socio-cultural level of analysis: Discuss two errors in attributions (for example, fundamental attribution error, illusory correlation, and self‑serving bias). You will see it covers a lot of content and that's good (as long as it's not repetitive), but you will also see that it leaves the IB Psychology examiner in no doubt as to whether or not she should be awarding full marks. And, as long as the hard work has been previously done by you, this response can easily be written in 60-70 minutes under exam conditions (notwithstanding your writer's cramp!).

IN The IB Psychology ERQ - Great content is required

Model IB Psychology ERQ answer

Discuss two errors in attributions (for example, fundamental attribution error, illusory correlation, and self‑serving bias)

This answer addresses what attributions are, and how people can make different types of attributions to explain their own and other people’s behaviour. This will be followed by an in-depth discussion, referencing relevant research, of two of the most common types of socio-cognitive errors people make in attributing the cause of behaviour to internal or external factors: the fundamental attribution error and the self-serving bias. Finally, the strengths and weaknesses of each theory will be addressed in the conclusion.

There are different types of explanations people can make to explain behaviour. When people go to parties, what determines the extent to which they will socialise with others? Is it the kind of people they are, or the situation they find themselves in? We make these attributions about the causes of behaviour in two distinct and important ways:

Dispositional causes: When attributing the cause of people’s behaviour to their internal characteristics (they are shy, they are outgoing), we are making a dispositional attribution. The term disposition refers to someone’s beliefs, attitudes and personality.
Situational causes: When we attribute people’s behaviour to external factors (they don’t know anyone there) such as the immediate rewards and punishments in a social setting or social pressure, we are making a situational attribution.

Now that we know what dispositional and situational attributions are, we can examine the first of our attribution errors to be discussed here.

The fundamental attribution error (FAE)
Laypeople, like some psychologists, favour explanations of behaviour in terms of dispositional, rather than situational, factors. So if people behave kindly towards us (i.e. they greet us with a smile) we conclude they have a kind personality. And if they behave in a way that seems impolite to us (i.e. they do not greet us at all) we tend to think of them as rude. Instead of acknowledging the role played by situational determinants, we assume that other people’s behaviours reflect their dispositions. To the extent that we do so, we commit the fundamental attribution error. This term refers to a bias to attribute other’s behaviour to stable internal causes rather than external circumstances.

An experiment by Jones & Harris (1967) demonstrates the FAE. The researchers asked their participants to rad essays written by fellow students. The essays were about Castro’s rule in Cuba and were either supportive or critical of Castro. The participants’ task was to guess what attitude the writers of the essay really held towards Castro and his government. Half the participants were told that the essayists were free to choose whether to take a negative or positive view about Castro in their essay (choice condition). The other half were told that the essayists did not have any choice: the experimenter had assigned them in the pro-Castro or anti-Castro role (no choice condition).
As expected, participants in the choice condition assumed that the essays reflected the genuine attitudes of their writers. However, participants’ ratings seemed to indicate those in the no choice condition also though the essays reflected the genuine views of the authors. So despite the fact that it was made clear, that the essayist’s behaviour was severely constrained by the situation, observers still opted for an internal attribution.

An experiment by Gilbert & Jones (1986) went further by demonstrating that participants would hold speakers responsible for the views they express even when it was the participants themselves who had determined which side of the argument the speakers were allowed to argue. The FAE has been demonstrated in many studies. Yet there is evidence to suggest that dispositional attributions are far from inevitable.

In a study by Fein et al. (1990), US students read an essay about a character called Rob Taylor. In one of the conditions participants were told that Rob had been assigned to write either in favour or against some view. In this condition, the expected FAE was obtained. In a second condition, participants were led to believe that Rob’s essays expressed very similar views to those held by his professor and which, therefore, would be found pleasing by his professor. In this condition, no FAE was demonstrated. Commenting on this and similar studies, Fein (2001) argues that we resist making dispositional attributions in situations where we suspect others may have ulterior motives for their behaviours.

The may be a cultural bias in the FAE, in that culture seems to be a determinant in attribution style. In collectivist cultures (Japan and China for example) the emphasis is on the primary social relationships of an individual, e.g. family, social role, cultural activities. Whereas, in individualistic cultures (the US and the UK for example), the emphasis is on the individual as the primary cause of success and failure. Norenzayan et al. (2002) tested whether information given to Korean and American participants would influence their attributions. Wen participants only received information about individuals, both groups made dispositional attributions. When situational information was also provided, the Koreans tended to include this information in their explanations much more than the Americans did. This indicates that there may be universal feature in the FAE and that available information influences attributions, at least in some cultures.

In their explanation of the FAE, Gilbert & Malone (1995) argue that it involves a two-step attribution process. When we observe some behaviour, we draw an inference, based on largely automatic and unconscious processing, that the behaviour has been caused by some disposition. The second step is based on more controlled and conscious processing. During this step, we enquire into whether or not situational factors may have had an influence on the behaviour. We make the FAE as often as we do, Gilbert & Malone explain, for a simple reason: the first step always forms part of the attribution process, but we proceed only occasionally to the second step. In effect, the FAE happens either because we are involved in other tasks (not enough cognitive resources to think deeply about how best to explain some behaviour) or because we believe that for the behaviour under consideration the initial automatic step alone can result in the right explanation. Gilbert & Malone’s two-step explanation has received considerable experimental support.
The second attribution error that individuals make is termed the self-serving bias, and again, it is based on a distinct pattern of attributions people make on the basis of situational and dispositional causes; this time in relation to self and others.

The self-serving bias
Our attributions exhibit the self-serving bias (SSB) when we explain our successes on the basis of internal, dispositional factors and blame our failures to external, situational factors. Such biased attributions are viewed by many as serving the interests of preserving or increasing self-esteem.
Consider professional sport. As Lau & Russell (1980) sowed, professional athletes and coaches attribute 80% of their wins to internal factors (e.g. ability, skill, professionalism). Losses are far more likely to be attributed to external factors (e.g. bad luck, unfair refereeing). Studies with students have obtained very similar findings. Bernstein et al. (1979) found that students attributed their good grades to their intelligence and hard work, whereas bad grades tended to be attributed to bad teaching or bad luck.

Johnson et al. (1964) provide a good example of the SSB. In this study, participants (psychology students) taught two children how to multiply numbers by 10 and by 20. The teaching was done in two phases via a one-way intercom. The first phase involved teaching the children how to multiply by 10; the second phase, how to multiply by 20. After each phase, the children’s worksheets were made available to the participants to assess the learning progress of the children.
In fact, the worksheets had been marked in such a way that in both conditions, Pupil A gave the right answers to all the questions on both worksheets. Depending on condition, Pupil B either did badly on both tasks, or did badly on the first worksheet but improved on the second. The participants, therefore, had either failed or succeeded in teaching Pupil B the two tasks. What Johnson et al. found was that in the condition where Pupil B’s performance improved, participants explained the improvement as a success on their abilities as teachers. When Pupil B failed to improve, they attributed this to the pupil’s lack of ability.

Although SSB is widespread, there are exceptions. We are more likely to rely on self-serving attributions when we fail in a domain in which we cannot improve. However, as Duval & Silvia (2002) demonstrated, we are more likely to attribute our failure to internal causes if we believe we can do something to improve the situation in the future.

The emotional state we are in also affects our reliance on SSB: being in a bad mood may reverse the attributional pattern that characterises self-serving attributions. Furthermore, Abrahamson et al. (1989) demonstrated that depressed people often rely on an attributional pattern style that attributes success to external, and failure to internal, causes.

How can the attributional style that defines the SSB be explained? Zuckerman (1979) reviewed a number of studies of SSB and confirmed that the effect depends on a desire to maintain self-esteem. Evidence from cross-cultural studies is consistent with this interpretation. Heine et al. (1999), for example found that members of collectivist cultures (e.g. Japan) are far less likely to strive for positive self-esteem than individuals from individualistic cultures (e.g. USA). Consequently, the Japanese are found to be less likely to make self-serving attributions than Americans.

Further cultural considerations in the SSB have been found. Culture-specific attributional styles may be a natural part of enculturation and socialisation. Some argue that the SSB is primarily linked to individualistic cultures, but others believe it can be found in both individualistic and collectivist cultures. Kashima & Triandis (1986) showed slides from unfamiliar countries to American and Japanese students asked them to remember details. When the students were asked to explain their performance, the Americans explained their own success with internal factors, such as ability, and failure to external factors (i.e. the classic the SSB effect). The Japanese tended to explain their failure with lack of ability. This is called the ‘modesty bias’ and is a cultural variation of the SSB. Bond et al. (1982) argued that a possible explanation for the modesty bias in collectivist cultures could be a cultural norm in Chinese societies to maintain harmonious personal relationships. A person who makes self-effacing attributions could be expected to be better liked.

Miller & Ross (1975) proposed that several uses of self-serving attributions are rational and not based on the need to enhance self-esteem. They argue that what seems to be self-serving biases often arise because effort often changes with success but not with failure. If trying harder does not improve performance, then it is reasonable to conclude that something about the task is the obstacle. However, if trying harder does improve performance, then success is logically attributable to your trying.

In conclusion, each of these attribution theories are well supported by empirical research and each has considerable explanatory power in explaining the different types of attribution patterns that are commonly observed when people are attributing cause for the own and others behaviours. The strengths of the FAE are that the theory has promoted understanding of common errors in explanations of what happens in the world. Further, it has proven to be very robust and has been supported by many research studies. However, it has its limitations too. Firstly, it is culturally biased with too much focus on individualism. Secondly, research on the theory has been conducted in laboratories and with heavy emphasis on student samples – this leads to problems in generalising findings. The great strength of the SSB is that this theory can explain why some people (mostly from individualistic cultures) explain their failures as being caused by situation factors. However, its major limitation is that it is also culturally biased, in that it cannot explain why some cultures emphasis a self-effacing attribution – the modesty bias.

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

Placebos and Nocebos

30/11/2015

Any IB Psychology taking the Abnormal option knows about placebos, do you also know about nocebos?

Placebos are weird (do you know that branded placebos work better than unbranded ones?), nocebos are weirder. Take for example the man who was on a clinical trial for a depression medication. He presented to Accident and Emergency one night after swallowing a whole bottle of the meds he had been prescribed exhibiting all of the signs and symptoms of an overdose of antidepressants. It was serious, he was hyperventilating, his blood pressure plummeted and he collapsed at reception. No trace of the drug could be found in his system and it was only hours later that another doctor arrived and was able to inform everyone that the man was overdosing on sugar pills - he had been assigned to the placebo condition on the clinical trial. His recovery was swift! Welcome to the strange world of the nocebo.

A nocebo (Latin for "I will harm") is something that should be ineffective but which causes symptoms of ill health. A nocebo effect is an ill effect caused by the suggestion or belief that something is harmful. Examples include:

More than two thirds of college students who were told that a nonexistent electrical current passing between two electrodes on their head would cause headaches, subsequently reported a headache.
Japanese researchers tested boys who reported being allergic to a particular plant. One arm of each boy was brushed with the allergenic plant and boys were informed that it was an innocuous plant. Simultaneously, the other arm wa brushed with an innocuous plant and the boys were informed that it was the allergenic plant. Within minutes, the arms brushed with the innocuous plant (which the boys believed they were allergic to) developed rashes and blisters,
In one of the largest and most prestigious longitudinal studies, women who believed that they were at risk of developing heart trouble were up to four times as likely to die of a heart attack then women with matched risk factors, but who didn't believe they were at risk.
Could it also account for those individuals who believe they are wifi sensitive or report that wind turbines, that nobody hear, are causing health problems?; i.e., if you think you are being negatively by something, then your brain makes sure that you are!

Remember, we take the hard work out of IB Psychology - with complete sets of model examination answers!

"Okay Mr Burton, all very interesting I guess, but how do we use it in our IB Psychology exams?", I hear you ask. Well, apart from the fact that that it makes a fascinating topic to explore in the IB Psychology extended essay, it also fits in very well with the IB Psychology Abnormal option in at least three learning outcomes:

Describe symptoms and prevalence of one disorder

Analyse etiologies of one disorder
Examine biomedical, individual and group approaches to treatment.

It could also wow your IB Psychology examiner in your IB Psychology Paper 1 examination - when you are answering the Biological Level of Analysis (BLOA) ERQ: "Using one or more examples, explain effects of neurotransmission on human behaviour." Here, when you discuss the placebo effect in relation to the neurotransmitter serotonin, why not amaze you marker with your knowledge of how the mysterious human brain works and use the nocebo effect as additional support for your argument (just keep it short!).

We could imagine it going something like this: "... Just as the placebo effect is said to account for much of the efficacy of serotonin reuptake inhibitors in many patients, so too could the nocebo effect cause the drug not to work in certain individuals. For example, if a patient prescribed an antidepressant such as Prozac believed that they did not really work and that that they had lots of harmful side effects, then that belief itself, would cause a detriment to the individual - the nocebo effect."

There is no examiner in the history of IB Psychology who wouldn't stop and read those few sentences twice and think to themselves that this student not only knows her stuff, but is a top notch critical thinker too.

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

Highlighting Critical Thinking in ERQs

31/8/2015

Critical thinking is the hardest part to master in answering the IB Psychology extended response questions.

Getting the critical thinking component right in your IB Psychology exams is usually the final piece of the puzzle that needs to fall into place before full marks can be awarded.

Let us show you how it's done ...

The following IB Psychology essay is an exemplar of how critical thinking can be used in an essay for the Paper II IB Psychology examination. It answers the question: Discuss the role of communication in the maintenance of relationships, an ERQ related to the Human Relationships option in the IB Psychology course.

All of the text in dark blue font is an example of critical thinking in IB Psychology (you will need to see the embedded PDF, or download it). The flags and the corresponding comments are clarifications of why this is a good example of critical thinking.

Notice in the IB Psychology ERQ that three pieces of research (studies and/or theories) are used to make the argument - but then there are two paragraphs that take a holistic approach to the question. This is the "discussion" which is what the command term is asking the student to develop in the essay response.

Discuss the role of communication in the maintenance of relationships.

Communication plays a key role in all aspects of human relationships. It plays a role in our attraction to others, the way we solve problems and how much we trust one another. Marriage counsellors often focus on communication as a way to improve a relationship, but often problems in a relationship are complex. Communication may be a symptom, rather than a cause of the end of a relationship.

Research by Bradbury & Fincham found that couples engage in "relationship enhancing strategies" - that is, when a partner attributes good things to the disposition of their partner, and bad things to situational factors. This helps to maintain the relationship because it can enhance the sense of self-esteem of the partner. Couples in crisis tend to use distress-maintaining patterns - that is, they attribute good things to situational factors and bad things to disposition - meaning that the partner is unlikely to change. Although Bradbury & Fincham have documented this trend in relationships, it is difficult to determine if this is a cause or a symptom of the health of a relationship.

Gottman argues that it is not what we say, but how we say it. Our facial expressions communicate how we really feel about our partners. Gottman has couples come into his lab and then he codes their facial expressions under two conditions – discussing a non-threatening topic and discussing a controversial topic. Gottman argues that there are four “horses of the apocalypse” that help to predict if a relationship will end: criticism, defensiveness, contempt and stonewalling. Gottman argues that if a partner shows contempt during a discussion, this is a sign that the relationship is heading for divorce. One of the problems with this research, however, is that when Gottman tells couples that they are expressing these emotions, it may lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy. In addition, most of the couples that come to him for help are already in severe crisis. This may mean that the high predictive validity of his research has more to do with the fact that at least one of the partners may have already decided to end the relationship.

A final way that we use communication in relationships is disclosure – or the sharing of personal information with a partner. This is the basis of Social Penetration theory. This builds trust. Research has shown that we like people who disclose personal information. Although this seems logical, it is difficult to determine a cause and effect relationship between disclosure and the health of a relationship. It may be more likely that disclosure is the result of a healthy relationship than the cause of one.

There are many concerns about the study of the role of communication in relationships. First, how does a psychologists “observe” communication in a relationship? Often self-reported measures are used – such as a questionnaire – to determine what the normal communication patterns are. This is difficult because the actual communications cannot be verified, so it is up to the perception of the person filling out the questionnaire. The information is open to distortion, especially if there is anger between the two partners. It can also be open to distortion if questions are asked about the history of the relationship. The peak-end rule argues that we tend to remember the most recent part of our relationship (the end) and specific events that stand out as rather exceptional (the peak). So, if the relationship is in bad shape, then the partners may only think about recent communication and this may distort their perception of the way that they have communicated throughout the relationship.

Another question is who is actually studied. A lot of the research done on communication is done on couples that are struggling with their relationship. Although some prospective research is now being done, traditionally it has been done with couples in counselling. Research should be done that looks at couples from the beginning of their relationship to truly measure how communication affects relationships long-term. It is also possible that although it is usually done with couples having problems, that the sample is also biased in other ways. A lot of the research is done on Western couples. In addition, the couples seek counselling, which may indicate a certain level of education or socioeconomic status. Finally, there is the problem of bidirectional ambiguity – that is, we cannot tell if the communication style leads to the quality of the relationship, or vice versa. It could be that there is a correlation, but no causation in either direction. Most importantly, the way we communicate is only one facet of a relationship. It is a reductionist approach to assess the health of a relationship only on communication styles.

The study of communication has led to successful strategies in marriage counselling that have helped people save their marriage by becoming more aware of how and what they say. However, labs like Gottman’s may communicate information to a couple – such as, she actually finds him disgusting – that may help to end the relationship. In this sense, the psychologist may validate one or both partners’ perceptions of the state of the relationship and decide to get divorced. Clearly more research is necessary.

IB Psychology ERQ Model answer:
Discuss the role of communication in the maintenance of relationships.

Model Answer Download

Take the hard work out of preparing your IB Psychology model ERQs

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

The solution to social anxiety?

31/7/2015

... and a nice way to add some critical thinking to your IB Psychology Abnormal ERQ!

We wouldn't recommend it, but you may find your IB Psychology teacher approaching the Abnormal Psychology option by teaching you about anxiety disorders, rather than affective or eating disorders. Anxiety disorders can be fun to study (e.g., look at these funny phobias) but research and theory can be difficult to discuss in depth and detail. However, IB Psychology students, if you find yourself in a classroom where anxiety disorders are the focus of the Abnormal Option, then we have a great way to incorporate that all important critical thinking into your extended response answers (i.e., that 22 mark essay question you are required to answer in your IB Psychology Paper 2 exam).

Anxiety disorders are the most prevalent of mental disorders in the United States. Social Anxiety Disorder (social phobia) is a subset of anxiety disorders. A whopping 15 million individuals in the US, or 6.8 per cent of the total population suffer from social anxiety. It's equally prevalent between men and women, and individual onset is typically around 13 years of age. Lots of people live with it for a long time before seeking help. 36 per cent of those with social anxiety disorder live with the disorder for over 10 years before seeking help.

What social anxiety feels like

The IB Psychology learning outcomes, which we all know by now are the examination questions, right? (see previous post), in the Abnormal option will ask students to learn and answer the following examination questions:

Examine biomedical, individual and group approaches to treatment.
Evaluate the use of biological, individual and group approaches to the treatment of one disorder.
Discuss the use of eclectic approaches to treatment.
Discuss the relationship between etiology and therapeutic approach in relation to one disorder.

Now we're not going to run you through the model answers to each of these four IB Psychology exam questions here. Our model answers focus on the affective disorders (depression). But we are going to show you how to incorporate that all important critical thinking and craft a perfect response, yourself.

The majority of the content you will need to discuss and evaluate in the treatment of anxiety disorders will be psychotherapy and drugs. You will likely look at cognitive behavioural therapy.

The complete set of model answers to ALL of the IB Psychology ERQs

Of course, you will need to be able to fully discuss and evaluate concepts, theories, models and studies relevant to anxiety treatments. But also, a great way to show the IB Psychology examiner that you are able to engage in and demonstrate your ability to think critically around this topic is to incorporate the study below into your answer.

TRew and Alden (2015)

Unsurprisingly, socially anxious people often avoid social interactions. They will go out of their way to limit their opportunities to engage in social interactions ("Sorry, I'm washing my hair that night, thanks.") and reduce the number of social interactions they engage in, such as the number of people they will interact with at a party they haven't been able to get out of.

These two researchers found that people who were socially anxious were able to mingle more easily with other people in social situations if they busied themselves with acts of kindness. They split their participants into three groups. One group was asked to perform three acts of kindness for two days each week. THis could be mowing a neighbours lawns, giving to charity or cooking dinner for friends. Another was asked to engage in a social interaction three times for days each week. The final group was just asked to record what they had done each day.

I know what you're thinking (and please make it clear to the IB Psychology examiner!), getting people to do acts of kindness forces those with social anxiety to go out there and interact with the people they're performing kind acts for.

TRew and Alden (2015)

Social anxiety PDF

However, these socially anxious participants in the study could perform their acts of kindness - mowing lawns, giving to charity without engaging in any social interactions whatsoever and still experience the same positive effects. In fact, the same positive effects have been found by doing something as simple as feeding coins into the expiring parking meters of strangers.

Traditional cognitive behavioural therapy works by the therapist asking her patient to imagine social situations while practicing mental relaxation techniques, to the point where they no longer feel intimidated by the thought of social interactions. This is then followed by a set of baby steps towards small scale social interaction (asking someone for the time, talking about the weather at the water cooler, etc.) while practicing the same relaxation techniques. Continuing on until the patient is comfortable in larger social situations like an office party or joining a club.

The acts of kindness study shows how cognitive behaviour therapy can be effectively and quickly modified. Social anxiety, by and large, is the result of individuals thinking about themselves too much. When they are in social situations they are monitoring their behaviour and constantly judging themselves as to how they might be being perceived by others they're interacting with. Stressful stuff. The Trew and Alden study shows that the best cognitive therapy is to get them doing nice things for others. This stops them thinking about themselves by forcing them to think of others instead. Once they're thinking about themselves less, they become naturally more relaxed in the presence of others. Boom! everyone's a winner ... the anxiety sufferers, the people receiving these acts of kindness, even you, as you receive full marks for critical thinking in your IB Psychology exam!

Do something nice for someone before you go to your next party

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

Go with the flow ...

29/6/2015

IB Psychology examiners love clear and accurate flow charts. Just make sure you refer to them in your answers!

A good, logical flowchart in IB Psychology is worth a thousand words. Admittedly, the following statement is contentious, but essentially all human behaviour and cognition is predicated on a cause and effect relationship, and as such, a flow chart can set this relationship out clearly for your IB Psychology examiners. Remember (and pity!) that the typical IB Psychology examiner, by the time they reach your exam script answer, has likely waded through multitudes of poorly organised, difficult to decipher, grammatically poor, off the point, and horribly incorrect answers. They will also have come across some stunners - why don't you show them you are in the same league and as deserving of that IB Psychology 7? The added bonus is that organising IB Psychology theory and biological, cognitive and behaviorual processes and models into a coherent series of steps, not only wows the examiner, but makes the concept yu are explaining that much easier to remember and reproduce in your IB Psychology exams.

Just beware, diagrams and illustrations that you use in your IB Psychology answers need to be referred to in the text you write (i.e., "... as can be seen in figure 1., the ..."). Those marking the IB Psychology exams are not required to search backwards and forwards through your written response and guess when, where and how the perfectly good flowchart they see before them, ties in with the answer you have provided. So, signpost it.

A model short answer response to the IB Psychology Socio-cultural Level of Analysis learning outcome: Explain Social Learning Theory, is provided below. This model IB Psychology examination answer incorporates the correct use of a flowchart.

IB Psychology SAQ exam question: Explain Social Learning Theory

Bandura (1977) suggested social learning theory (SLT) as an extension of existing learning theories (classical and operant conditioning). SLT is based on the assumption that people learn behaviours, attitudes, emotional reactions and norms through direct experiences but also through observing other humans (models).

We learn consequences of behaviour from watching what happens to other humans (vicarious reinforcement). Once such information is stored in memory it serves to guide further actions. People are more likely to imitate behaviour that has positive consequences. Social learning can be direct via instructions (e.g., role models and no direct instructions).

Figure 1 below, outlines the important factors that facilitate social learning.

Figure 1. Important factors in social learning

Relevant study – Bandura and Ross (1961): Experimental investigation on learning aggression from a model.

Aim: To see if children would imitate the aggression of an adult model and whether they would imitate same-sex models more than opposite-sex models.

Procedure:

Participants were 36 boys and 36 girls from the Stanford University nursery school (mean age 4.4) who were divided into three groups matched on levels of aggressiveness before the experiment.
One group saw the adult model behave aggressively towards bobo doll, one group saw the model assemble toys, and the last group served as the control.
The children were further divided onto groups so that some saw same sex models and some saw opposite sex models.
The laboratory was set up as a play room with toys and a bobo doll. The model either played with the toys or behaved aggressively towards the bobo doll. After seeing this, the children were brought into a room with toys and told not to play with them in order to frustrate them. They were the taken into a room with toys and a bobo doll where they were observed for 20 minutes through a one-way mirror.

Results:

Children who had seen an aggressive model were significantly more aggressive (physically and verbally) towards the bobo doll. They imitated the aggressive behaviour of the model but also showed other forms of aggression.
Children were also more likely to imitate same-sex models. Boys were more aggressive overall than girls.
Conclusions:
This key study supports social learning theory. Aggressive behaviour can be learned through observational learning.
It is not possible to conclude that children always become aggressive when they watch violent models (e.g., on television or at home). Generally, research supports that children tend to imitate same-sex models more and this is also the case for adults.

Evaluation:

The laboratory experiment is low on ecological validity. The aggression here is artificial and there may be demand characteristics. The children were very young and it has been criticised for ethical reasons.

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

Can you keep a secret?

30/5/2015

The best IB Psychology lessons involve students in classroom experiments, and here is one of my favourite all time lessons.

I am lucky at the school I teach at, having a small classroom enables me to set up this fiendishly delightful experiment. Those of you whom are overly concerned with the ethics of experimentation may like to peruse another IB Psychology blog post around about now. This experiment involves deception, subjection to social influence and some more deception ... all in the name of science and learning.

This IB Psychology classroom experiment takes some forward planning. Firstly, you need one class where a single student is absent, and this absent student should be one you know has reasonable self-esteem and is reasonably well balanced (yeah, I know, good luck Mr Burton with your crazy lot!). Suggest to the class that that you have a great in-class experiment that all can do around social influence and conformity, but you will need the help of the whole class and to be successful, it will need the entire class to be able to keep it secret from our absent student. They always answer "Yes, of course Mr Burton, and of course we can keep a secret". Surprisingly enough, in all my years of running this, there has not yet been a case of loose lips sinking this particular ship.

I then run them through the scenario and this PowerPoint embedded below. Essentially this PowerPoint is a series of 10 Maths questions, and for each the actual answer is always 2.5 million. Students are instructed that they will need to provide an answer below 2.5 million for the odd numbered questions and above 2.5 million for each even numbered question, to see what effect this will have on the answers given by our naive test subject. Will social influence cause some degree of conformity?

To set up the 'twist' on the day of the experiment, I begin by handing out one of each of the 'male body odour' and 'female cyber bulling' questions to each student and ask them to complete their answers independently. Once complete we run through the Maths questions. Each student gives their answer aloud, sequentially and the order is determined so the test subject gives her answer near last. I make a great pretense of recording everyone's answer, but only actually record the answers of interest, that of our test subject.

Only now do we reveal the true purposes of the experiment to our test subject, and in one single nod to ethical considerations, ask her if it is okay to share her results with the class. Always mentioning that if we had performed this experiment with anyone else in the class, their results would be exactly the same and very likely subject to social influence as well. No one, as yet, has declined permission. The results are robust, odd answers are invariably below 2.5 million and even answers above this number.

In terms of the IB Psychology learning outcome in the Socio-cultural Level of Analysis: Discuss factors influencing conformity, this appears to be strong support for how social influence can influence conformity to a group norm ... or is it?!

Now I collect and analyse the results to the four questions above, superficially looking like a stereotypical male/female question, however, what I am really interested in is the numbers that precede each question: 5% or 90%. Why? Well we will soon revisit the IB Psychology - Cognitive Level of Analysis learning outcome: With reference to relevant research studies, to what extent is one cognitive process reliable (for example, reconstructive memory, perception/visual illusions, decision‑making/heuristics)? And look at heuristics, specifically the anchoring bias. Without fail, my students estimates to questions anchored by 90% are hugely higher than those estimates anchored by 5%.

Obviously, in terms of social influence, this begs the question: Was it social influence that was affecting the estimates given by our target participant, or was it just the anchoring bias influencing results? Was it a social process or was it cognitive process, and can the two really be separated?

This is powerful critical thinking, something the IB Psychology examiner is always looking for in the IB Psychology ERQs, and having set the lesson up this way, when we come to look at Sherif's autokinetic effect experiment (a classic in the study of conformity), it is easy to understand, apply and remember.

Lesson. Nailed.

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

The IB Psychology 7 - 5 Best tips

1/3/2015

Comments

5 simple strategies for sure success in your IB Psychology course.
Here, I am sharing with you the best five strategies I have for achieving that very, very elusive IB Psychology 7. Remember, just three per cent of all Higher Level IB Psychology students achieve the maximum mark of 7.

TOP TIP ONE
The IB Psychology Paper 1 examination has three sections - DO NO study for two of these!
Choose one of either the IB Psychology Biological Level of Analysis, The Cognitive Level of Analysis or the Socio-Cultural Level of Analysis. Focus your study and preparation here and get really good at this one section. This section will bring you 30 marks out of a total 46.

Our advice? Choose the IB Psychology Level of Analysis that your teacher begins with. This will maximise the amount of time you can spend learning this section.

TOP TIP TWO
Prepare and memorise model answers to ALL of the extended response questions.
The extended response questions are the the IB Pychology examination essay questions - i.e., the big 22 mark answers. Prepare perfect 22 mark answers across one of the Levels of Analysis, and across each of the IB Psychology options (e.g., Abnormal and Human Relationships).

In each option you will need to answer a single question. So for HL you will need to answer two 22 mark questions, one from each option. IN SL, just one 22 mark question from the single IB Psychology option you have studied. Aim for maximum marks here. So that's 44/44 or 22/22.

TOP TIP THREE
Aim for maximum marks in your IB Psychology IA.
Essentially, any additional mark you gain in the internal assessment component of the course, is an additional total mark you can add to your final IB Psychology score. Start early. Put lots of effort in. Listen to your teacher. Ask your teacher to read over lots of sections before submitting the final draft. Get lots of feedback so your final draft is as good as most students' final submissions.

TOP TIP FOUR
Do NOT ignore the Qualitative Research Methods component of the course, because your IB Psychology teacher almost certainly WILL!
It has long been identified that teachers neither spend enough time or go into this topic in enough depth. The majority of students do very poorly here, and as a result the grade boundaries in the HL Paper 3 examination are set incredibly low. Learn the content and learn to apply it to sample stimulus material.

TOP TIP FIVE
Forget about any of the short answer learning outcomes in the Options section of the IB Psychology course.
Examiners can twist exam questions to fit these, but they usually don't. There are always straightforward back-up questions to fall back on. Save your time for memorising your model answers.

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

IB Psychology has a range of resources specifically dedicated to helping the IB Psychology student achieve maximum marks in the course. Find them all on our products page.

Comments

Quality Not Quantity

28/12/2014

Comments

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.

Download the Model Answers here to share with your students or use for your IB Psychology examination revision.

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

Comments

<<Previous

How to get a 7 in IB Psychology

How to get a 7 in IB Psychology

How to cut your IB Psychology revision time by 50%!

Paper 2 exam questions

Abnormal Learning outcomes

FRom 13 → 6 Learning Outcomes!

In IB Psychology exams, content is king

IN The IB Psychology ERQ - Great content is required

Placebos and Nocebos

Highlighting Critical Thinking in ERQs

Discuss the role of communication in the maintenance of relationships.

The solution to social anxiety?

TRew and Alden (2015)

TRew and Alden (2015)

Go with the flow ...

Can you keep a secret?

The IB Psychology 7 - 5 Best tips

Quality Not Quantity

IB DipLOMA PsychologY:

Archives

Categories

How to get a 7 in IB Psychology​

Paper 2 exam questions

Abnormal Learning outcomes

FRom 13 → 6 Learning Outcomes!

IN The IB Psychology ERQ - Great content is required

Discuss the role of communication in the maintenance of relationships.

TRew and Alden (2015)

TRew and Alden (2015)

IB DipLOMA Psycho﻿logY:

Archives

Categories

How to get a 7 in IB Psychology

IB DipLOMA PsychologY: