Category: Paper 1 Examinantion

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

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

Smart IB Psychology Short Answer Questions

1/11/2015

Helping IB Psychology students nail their three IB Psychology examination short answer response questions

Writing the 8 out of 8 IB Psychology SAQ response is challenging and opinions differ as to how it is best achieved. Though a standard introduction, conclusion or evaluation is not an absolute requirement the response does need to be focused.
Find below my personal list of handy hints that I share with my IB Psychology students:

Make sure you understand the command term and know the difference between explain or discuss or whatever you might be asked to demonstrate your understanding of the IB Psychology learning outcome
Define the keywords in the IB Psychology SAQ and integrate the definitions into a “In other words…” sentence.
Make sure you use the words from the question in your answer at least two or three times. If the IB Psychology SAQ is about physiology use this word rather than brain or body.
Use studies to support your explanations. Give a brief summary of the study and then explain why this is relevant.
Take every opportunity to evaluate the study but do not just outline every strength and limitation, only the relevant ones. For example there is no need to discuss ethical considerations with the Davidson meditation study from the BLOA but the small sample size is relevant as it makes generalising his finding that cognition can change brain physiology more limited.
Aim for a short introduction and conclusion. These can be just one sentence in length. If you are asked about two hormones or two studies or two neurotransmitters make sure you have two body paragraphs.

Of course, IB Psychology has taken all of the hard work and guesswork out of writing the perfect IB Psychology examination answers, both SAQs and ERQs. Have a look at our two key IB Psychology resources.

A perfect IB Psychology SAQ exam anser

Explain how emotion may affect one cognitive process

A flashbulb memory is a highly detailed, exceptionally vivid 'snapshot' of the moment and circumstances in which a piece of surprising and consequential (or emotionally arousing) news was heard. The ‘flashbulb’ terminology indicates the event will be registered like a photograph; i.e., it will be accurate in detail. The defining feature an FBM is not the memory of the event, but memory of its reception context – the circumstances of the news’ reception.

It is assumed that they are highly resistant to forgetting; i.e., the details of the memory will remain intact and accurate because of the emotional arousal at the moment of coding. For example, some individuals can report in exceptional exactly when and how they heard the news of the September 11 terrorist attacks on the USA in 2001, as well as exactly what they were doing at the time and their exact feeling and reactions in response to the news – i.e., an exceptionally detailed and vivid memory almost twenty years after the fact. There is a posited relationship between strong emotion at the time of encoding and the exceptional details of these memories.

Brown and Kulik (1977) – research on FBM

Aim: To investigate whether shocking events are recalled more vividly and accurately than other events.

Procedure: 80 US participants were asked questions about 10 events. Nine of the events were mostly assassinations or attempted assassinations of well-known American personalities (e.g., JF Kennedy, Martin Luther King). The tenth was a self-selected event of personal relevance and involving unexpected shock. Examples included the death of a friend or relative or a serious accident.
Participants were asked to recall the circumstances they found themselves in when they first heard the news about the 10 events. They were also asked to indicate how often they had rehearsed (overtly or covertly) information about each event.

Results and conclusion:

Participants had vivid memories of where they were, what they did, and what they felt when they first heard about a shocking public event
The participants also said they had FBMs of shocking personal events
The results indicated that FBM is more likely for unexpected and personally relevant events. This lead the researchers to suggest ‘the photographic nature of FBM’
Brown & Kulik suggest that FBM is caused by the physiological emotional arousal (e.g., activity in the amygdala).

Evaluation: The reliance on retrospective data questions the reliability of this study. People tend to interpret an event from their current perspective. Research indicates that although FBM is emotionally vivid it is not necessarily accurate in regard to details. Neisser is particularly critical towards the idea of FBMs, as certain memories are very vivid precisely because they are rehearsed and discussed after the event. Any piece of information that is repeatedly reviewed and rehearsed is going to be remembered in much better detail – which most models of memory predict.

However, findings from this study are clearly consistent with Brown & Kulik’s theory. Additional support comes from a study by Conway et al. (1994) who studied FBMs of both UK and non-UK citizens of the unexpected resignation of a famous (or infamous) British Prime Minister – Margaret Thatcher. Data was collected at several points including a few days after the resignation and after 11 months. They found that 85% of UK citizens and considerably fewer non-UK citizens had an FBM at 11 months.

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

Bomb proof IB Psychology classroom experiments

1/10/2015

Classroom experiments so easy and fool-proof, they're child's play!

We all know that classroom Psychology experiments are win-win for everyone, as long as they work (i.e., produce the desired results). Students love being involved in demonstrations of their minds in action. Teachers love the way that experiments produce deep learning that is necessary to achieve the IB Psychology 7 come examinations. This IB Psychology classroom experiment is a very effective way to teach a concept that isn't necessarily the most intuitive to grasp - Craik and Lockhart's (1972) Levels of Processing model of memory. Best of all, it always works - money back guarantee! Use this classroom experiment to teach the Cognitive Level; of Analysis (CLOA) IB Psychology learning outcome: Evaluate two models or theories of one cognitive process [memory].

Craik and Lockhart's (1972) Level of Processing

There is nothing to this core IB Psychology CLOA experiment really.. Do the experiment in the first half of your IB Psychology class and before you introduce the learning outcome. Download the instruction sheet below and make enough copies for your class - half the class will receive the first student instruction sheet and the other half, the second student instruction sheet.

You read the script and have students record their answers. Next, you read the questions and have students answer on a separate piece of paper. Finally, you read the answers and have students mark their neighbour's responses. Record the results in a spreadsheet and use the data projector to display the results. Allow 30 minutes, including discussion time of the results.

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

Don't be tempted ...

28/4/2015

IB Psychology students spot study then cross their fingers and hope, pray to interventionist gods, bribe teachers ($10,000 minimum, please!), and so on and such forth. Every IB Psychology student has been through this, every IB Psychology teacher has tried to stop his or her students going through this.

Picture this, it’s the day of the first IB Psychology topic test of the year – the Cognitive Level of Analysis. Being a nice, kind IB Psychology teacher I have prepared a topic test which, very generously, allows the student a choice of answering one of three short answer questions (SAQs, 8 mark questions) and similarly, one of three extended response questions (ERQs, 22 mark questions). In the IB Psychology examination, there is no choice in the Paper 1 examination. Students file anxiously into the room, there is nervous chatter as they take their seats. I call for silence and distribute the test papers face down. I provide instructions and initiate the start of the test with my usual call to action … “Let’s rock and roll!”.

What follows next is a very hard lesson to learn, but it is so much better to learn it at the start of the IB Psychology course, than in the mocks (where predicted grades are often confirmed) or even worse, the final examination. Every single IB student is time poor, there are competing demands from other subjects, TOK, extended essays, CAS requirements, sports, clubs and, of course, friends and just a little bit of a social life. Revision time always has an opportunity cost.

I scan faces as my students turn their test papers over, in beautiful synchrony approximately one third of the class will raise their eyes skyward with a thankful little smile on their faces, another third will scrunch their eyes together and silently moan (perhaps a bolder one will bang her head on the desk – “Shhhh, silence!”), another third will take a deep breath, pause and dive in. One group has had their questions turn up, the other group hasn’t and the third group have studied all questions, but not memorised model answers. I could stop them right here, save

There is no choice in IB Psychology examinations

us all a lot of pain. The first group are the 7s, the second group will be very lucky to get 2s, and the third group are my 4s and 5s.

Most IB Psychology students spot study. The good ones will learn the lesson early, the not-so-good ones will continue to ride their luck or hope their luck will finally turn. They all know the questions that will be asked (there are no surprises in the IB Psychology exams, see previous post) and will learn and memorise model answers to as many of these as they have time for.

Your exams are upon you. Learn all of the model answers to one level of analysis (e.g., BLOA) in the Paper 1 exam and skip two at a maximum for each Paper 2 option (e.g., Abnormal and Human Relationships). Don’t be tempted to ride your luck or hope your luck will change – if the question you haven’t fully prepared for doesn't come up, you will completely wreck two years of hard (and interesting!) work … and, by the way, break your poor IB Psychology’s teacher’s heart in the process.

Best of luck for your IB Psychology exams (although we all know we make our own luck).

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

Remember, we've taken the hard work out of your IB Psychology exams by preparing complete sets of model answers across both Paper 1 and Paper 2 exams.

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

I have a gut feeling about this one ...

31/1/2015

Feeling a little distressed? Socially anxious? 'Yogurt therapy' highlights the incredible link between your gut flora and mood.

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.

We have previously looked at the dreaded swim test, every lab rat's worst nightmare. Here it is used again to shed some light on a few different questions posed in the IB Psychology syllabus, both in the biological Level of Analysis and the Abnormal Psychology option.

The IB Psychology Biological Level of Analysis (BLOA) learning outcome: Discuss how and why particular research methods are used at the biological level of analysis (for example, experiments, observations, correlational studies). With the focus being a good experimental study. We can can also use it to address the IB Psychology Biological Level of Analysis (BLOA) learning outcome: Discuss two effects of the environment on physiological processes.

The hypothesis, good bacteria, in the right balance in the gut, will have positive effects on mental health - reducing stress and anxiety. To test this experimentally. Take two experimental groups of lab rats and manipulate an independent variable. One group is fed probiotics in their diet and the other a broth (a broth is cooked and thus has no bacteria, good or bad, present).

Choose the dependent variable, how long rats will keep swimming in a standard water maze (safe haven platform removed!) before giving up and going into a 'dead float'. Now this isn't actually the rats dying, they're just giving up on finding a way out of their stressful environment. No rats were harmed in the making of this experiment.

The results? Rats with a digestive system loaded with good bacteria did not give up. They continued to explore their environment looking for a way out until the experimenters took pity on them, lifted them out and gave them a fluffy towel and a quick blow dry. Those rats with less healthy gut flora gave up, en masse, within about two minutes. This is a classic sign of depression, less exploration and stress avoidance escape behaviour.

The conclusion, the good gut bacteria were somehow altering brain function in a positive way. Further experiments, this time with the unfortunate effects of euthanising the participants, pin pointed the vagus nerve - the vagus nerve is one of 12 cranial nerves, extending from the brain stem to the abdomen. When this was surgically severed, the probiotics conferred no such protective effects in stress avoidance or blood cortisol levels.

Use this study, embedded below, to address the IB Psychology Abnormal Psychology option learning outcome: Analyse etiologies of one disorder (major depression). As well as IB Psychology Abnormal Psychology option learning outcome: Evaluate the use of biomedical, individual and group approaches to the treatment of one disorder (again, major depression).

Feeling sad? Anxious about that party you are attending on the weekend? Simple answer ... get stuck into a big tub of healthy (and delicious) of natural yogurt. Yum yum!

A really funny, insightful and illuminating 15 minutes of Radiolab. Listening to this is guaranteed to send you straight out to your local supermarket to stock up on yogurt.

Of course, if you don't have time to prepare your own model IB Psychology exam questions, you can borrow ours! All answers to the IB Psychology extended response questions have been prepared for you. Full marks guaranteed!

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

<<Previous

How to get a 7 in IB Psychology

How to get a 7 in IB Psychology

In IB Psychology exams, content is king

IN The IB Psychology ERQ - Great content is required

Placebos and Nocebos

Smart IB Psychology Short Answer Questions

A perfect IB Psychology SAQ exam anser

Bomb proof IB Psychology classroom experiments

Craik and Lockhart's (1972) Level of Processing

Go with the flow ...

Can you keep a secret?

Don't be tempted ...

The IB Psychology 7 - 5 Best tips

I have a gut feeling about this one ...

IB DipLOMA PsychologY:

Archives

Categories

How to get a 7 in IB Psychology​

IN The IB Psychology ERQ - Great content is required

A perfect IB Psychology SAQ exam anser

Craik and Lockhart's (1972) Level of Processing

IB DipLOMA Psycho﻿logY:

Archives

Categories

How to get a 7 in IB Psychology

IB DipLOMA PsychologY: