Edexcel A-Level Psychology AS Topic B Cognitive Psychology Questions

AO1 (4 marks)
Credit up to two marks for each accurate description.
For example:
Capacity
- Capacity involves how many items a memory store can
hold (1), in the STM the capacity is between 5 to 9 items
(1).
Duration
- The duration involves how long a memory will last (1) for
example, the STM can hold information from 0-30
seconds (1).
Look for other reasonable marking points.

(4)

AO3 (1 mark)
Credit one mark for an accurate justification.
For example:
- The phonological loop would have been overloaded from
the noise and auditory processing of words both
competing for capacity (1).
Look for other reasonable marking points.

(1)

\begin{tabular}[t]{|l|l|l|}
\hline

AO1 (2 marks)
Credit up to two marks for an accurate description.
For example:
- Reconstructive memory is an individual's perception of an
event is affected by their experiences and their
interpretation of the memory happens through schema
which store an individual's expectations (2).
- Reconstructive memory is when someone's experiences
effect their interpretation of the memory (1).
Look for other reasonable marking points.

(2)

AO1 (4 marks), AO2 (4 marks), AO3 (4 marks)
AO1
- Field experiments take place in a more natural
environment for the participants.
- In laboratory and field experiments, researchers
manipulate the independent variable.
- Field and laboratory experiments allow researchers to
measure a cause and effect relationship between the IV
and DV.
- Laboratory experiments take place in artificial, non-
natural setting.
AO2
- Damon conducted his experiment in a local school where
the children were in their familiar environment for
learning.
- Elisa's and Damon's independent variable was the number
of digits in each list.
- Elisa would find out if the change in digits had an effect
on recall of numbers from the list.
- The children would not be used to the university research
laboratory they were brought to for Elisa's investigation.
AO3
- A field experiment may be higher in ecological validity
than a laboratory experiment so more natural behaviour
is likely to be recorded.
- Manipulation of the independent variable can lead to
artificial tasks which reduces the validity of the results.
- Cause and effects relationships could be considered more
accurate from laboratory experiments as a result of the
controls so results are more reliable than a field
experiment.
- For certain participants like children, a laboratory
experiment may be a distressing and uncomfortable
environment making it less appropriate.
Look for other reasonable marking points.

(12)

\begin{tabular}[t]{|l|l|l|}
\hline Level

Mark

Descriptor

AO1 (4 marks), AO2 (4 marks), AO3 (4 marks)
Candidates must demonstrate an equal emphasis between knowledge and
understanding vs application vs evaluation/conclusion in their answer.

0

No rewardable material.

Level
1

\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
1-3

Marks
\end{tabular}

\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
Demonstrates isolated elements of knowledge and understanding. (AO1)

Provides little or no reference to relevant evidence from the context (scientific ideas, processes, techniques & procedures). (AO2)

A conclusion may be presented, but will be generic and the supporting evidence will be limited. Limited attempt to address the question. (AO3)
\end{tabular}

Level
2

\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
4-6

Marks
\end{tabular}

\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
Demonstrates mostly accurate knowledge and understanding. (AO1)

Line(s) of argument occasionally supported through the application of relevant evidence from the context (scientific ideas, processes, techniques & procedures). (AO2)

Candidates will produce statements with some development in the form of mostly accurate and relevant factual material, leading to a superficial conclusion being made. (AO3)
\end{tabular}

Level
3

\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
7-9

Marks
\end{tabular}

\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
Demonstrates accurate knowledge and understanding. (AO1)

Line(s) of argument supported by applying relevant evidence from the context (scientific ideas, processes, techniques & procedures). Might demonstrate the ability to integrate and synthesise relevant knowledge. (AO2)

Arguments developed using mostly coherent chains of reasoning leading to a conclusion being presented. Candidates will demonstrate a grasp of competing arguments but evaluation may be imbalanced. (AO3)
\end{tabular}

Level
4

10-12
Marks

\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
Demonstrates accurate and thorough knowledge and understanding. (AO1)

Line(s) of argument supported throughout by sustained application of relevant evidence from the context (scientific ideas, processes, techniques or procedures). Demonstrates the ability to integrate and synthesise relevant knowledge. (AO2)

Displays a well-developed and logical evaluation, containing logical chains of reasoning throughout. Demonstrates an awareness of competing arguments, presenting a balanced conclusion. (AO3)
\end{tabular}

\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
AO2 (2 mark)

Credit one mark for each accurate statement.

For example:

Independent variable
\begin{itemize}
\item[-] Practicing the computer game every day or not (1).
\end{itemize}

Dependent variable
\begin{itemize}
\item[-] Score achieved on the computer game played (1)
\end{itemize}

Look for other reasonable marking points.

Generic answers score 0 marks.
\end{tabular}

(2)

AO2 (2 marks)
Credit one mark for a partially operationalised null hypothesis.
Credit two marks for a fully operationalised null hypothesis.
For example:
- There will be no difference in the mood score for the participants
who have the anti-depressants and the participants who do not
have the anti-depressants (1).
- There will be no difference in the mood score from 1 (happy
mood) to 7 (low mood) between the participants who received the
anti-depressants for a month and those who had no anti-
depressants, and any difference will be due to chance (2).
Look for other reasonable marking points.
Answer must relate to the scenario.
Generic answers score 0 marks.

(2)

AO2 (2 marks)

Credit two marks for a fully operationalised non-directional
(two-tailed) hypothesis.
Credit one mark for a partially operationalised non-directional
(two-tailed) hypothesis.

For example:

• There will be a difference between the number of
words recalled by participants of different genders (1)
• There will be a difference between the number of
words recalled from a list of 50 by male and female
participants (2)

Look for other reasonable marking points.

(2)

AO2 (2 marks)
Credit up to two marks for an accurate description of
independent groups design in relation to scenario.
For example:
- Kaleb would have used independent measures to prevent
demand characteristics of participants guessing the aim of
the study from the leading questions they are asked (2).
- Kaleb used this to stop participants guessing the
experiment was on leading questions (1).
Look for other reasonable marking points.
Generic answers score 0 marks.

(2)

AO2 (2 marks)

Credit two marks for a full description of how variables were
operationalised.
Credit one mark for a partial description of how variables were
operationalised.

For example:

• The same groups rehearsed trigrams without
interference and again with interference through
counting backwards (1). The dependent variable was
the number of trigrams recalled out of 15 (1).

Answers must be relevant the cognitive practical.

Generic answers score 0 marks.

Look for other reasonable marking points.

(2)

AO2 (2 marks)
Credit up to two marks for an accurate description in
relation to the scenario.
For example:
- The first half of the participants on Philippa's list could
have learned and recalled in the quiet classroom
(Condition A) and then the noisy coffee shop
(Condition B) (1), the second half of the participants
could have learned and recalled in the noisy coffee
shop (Condition B) and then the quiet classroom
(Condition A) (1).
Generic answers score 0 marks.
Look for other reasonable marking points.

(2)

AO2 (1 mark), AO3 (1 mark)
Credit one mark for an accurate suggestion in relation to the
scenario (AO2)
Credit one mark for accurate justification (AO3)
For example:
- Manon needs to consider whether the participants have
played the game before (1), which would mean they have
previously practiced and confound the results (1).
Look for other reasonable marking points.
Generic answers score 0 marks.

(2)

AO2 (2 marks)
Credit one mark for each accurate reason given in relation to
scenario.
For example:
- Using standardised leading and non leading questions
would mean Kaleb was using the same questions for all
participants in each condition (1).
- Kaleb can retest his investigation using the same leading
and non leading questions to check his results (1).
Look for other reasonable marking points.
Generic answers score 0 marks.

(2)

\begin{tabular}[t]{l}
AO2 (1 marks)

Credit one mark for the correct level of measurement identified.
\begin{itemize}
\item[-] Nominal Data/Nominal
\end{itemize}

Reject all other answers.
\end{tabular}

(1)

AO1 (2 marks) AO3 (2 marks)
Credit up to two marks for accurate identification (AO1).
Credit up to two marks for justification/exemplification (AO3).
For example:
- HM had a functional STM but was unable to make new
long-term memories (1) which demonstrates that memory
has two distinct memory stores (1).
- He could recall events from before the operation on his
hippocampus but not any events that he experienced
afterwards (1) showing that memory stores may be
physically located in different regions of the brain (1).
Look for other reasonable marking points.

(4)

(4 marks), AO3 (4 marks)
Darling et al. (2007)
AO1
•
The sample consisted of 44 females and 28 males from a non-
student volunteer participation panel at the University of Aberdeen.
•
Darling et al (2007) randomly allocated their 72 participants into one
of six possible combinations of memory task and interference task.
•
Darling’s study only measured one category of visual information
from a black screen with white squares and a P positioned on it.
•
Each trial was standardised, so all participants experienced the same
presentation to the location and font of the ‘P’ in the visual display.
AO3
•
The volunteer sample may not represent a range of individuals as
not everyone would have time to volunteer in research studies so the
findings may not reflect the memory skills of a wider population.
•
Random allocation is an objective way of allocating participants to
their memory tasks therefore avoiding any experimenter bias
increasing reliability.
•
Visual memory in humans deals with lots of visual stimuli therefore
this task was not a valid measurement of everyday visual
processing.
•
Controlling the trials give the findings about visuo-spatial processing
internal validity as Darling et al. (2007) can be more certain that the
task was the only impact on memory accuracy.
Sacchi et al. (2007)
AO1
•
Sacchi’s task involved using doctored photographs of two famous
events, the Tiananmen Square protest in Beijing and the peaceful
protest near the Coliseum, in Rome.
•
The sample consisted of 187 undergraduates, of which 31 were male
and 156 were female with an age range of 19 to 39 years.
•
Participants viewed one of four possible combinations of the
photographs for the Beijing event and the Rome event which were
counterbalanced and randomised when presented.
•
The photographs and three sets of multiple-choice questions were
presented in a printed questionnaire that participants completed in
classroom settings.
AO3
•
The photographs were of real events that happened in society
therefore increasing task validity as people are often presented with
visual images of events in the media.
•
The sample is unrepresentative of males so findings about memory
reconstruction lack population validity.
•
Random allocation is an objective way of allocating the photograph
combinations to participants therefore avoiding experimenter bias
and increasing reliability.
•
The ratings of the photographs may have been biased as self-report
questionnaires are prone to social desirability so participants may
give socially appropriate attitude scores reducing internal validity.
Look for other reasonable marking points.
(8)

Level
Mark
Descriptor
AO1 (4 marks), AO3 (4 marks)
Candidates must demonstrate an equal emphasis between knowledge and
understanding vs evaluation/conclusion in their answer.
0
No rewardable material.
Level 1
1-2
Marks
Demonstrates isolated elements of knowledge and understanding. (AO1)
A conclusion may be presented, but will be generic and the supporting
evidence will be limited. Limited attempt to address the question. (AO3)
Level 2
3-4
Marks
Demonstrates mostly accurate knowledge and understanding. (AO1)
Candidates will produce statements with some development in the form
of mostly accurate and relevant factual material, leading to a superficial
conclusion being made. (AO3)
Level 3
5-6
Marks
Demonstrates accurate knowledge and understanding. (AO1)
Arguments developed using mostly coherent chains of reasoning leading
to a conclusion being presented. Candidates will demonstrate a grasp of
competing arguments but evaluation may be imbalanced. (AO3)
Level 4
7-8
Marks
Demonstrates accurate and thorough knowledge and understanding.
(AO1)
Displays a well-developed and logical evaluation, containing logical
chains of reasoning throughout. Demonstrates an awareness of
competing arguments, presenting a balanced conclusion. (AO3)

SECTION C

AO3 (2 marks)

Credit one mark for each accurate conclusion.

For example:

• Recall is higher without interference and decreases
with interference (1).
• There is no difference between male and female recall
of trigrams (1).

Answers must be relevant the cognitive practical.

Generic answers score 0 marks.

Look for other reasonable marking points.

(2)