Build precise IB Psychology HL reasoning by applying ethics, bias, causality, measurement and perspective to shared-core and HL research questions across the course.
The stimulus material below describes a study on the psychological effects of colour. The aim was to investigate whether the colours in indoor spaces have an effect on mood. Colours can be grouped into warm or cool. Warm colours include red, orange, and yellow. Cool colours include blue and green. Previous research into the effect of colour on people’s moods found that cool colours are calming and that warm colours are energizing. This study took place in the students’ centre on a university campus. The centre is used for studying, eating, and meeting up with friends. The different indoor areas all have their own colour schemes. The main colour in the library is blue. The colours in the spaces used for socializing are reds and yellows. The cafeteria is mainly white. The researcher handed out a sheet of paper with questions on it to people in the different indoor areas of the students’ centre. A cover page was attached to each question sheet. The cover page informed people that the questions were part of a study into the psychological effects of colours. It also stated that by filling out and returning their responses within 48 hours, the participants were giving their consent. The cover page included instructions for completing the questions. The instructions asked people not to give their names or any other identifying information in their responses. The researcher’s contact information was also included on the cover page. The researcher visited the centre at different times of the day and approached people to ask if they were available to take part. An attempt was made to hand out a similar number of question sheets in each of the indoor areas. Of the 490 participants who answered and returned their responses, 254 were male and 236 were female. The mean age of the participants was 21.6 years. The answers to the questions were analysed by the researcher, and several outcomes were identified, for example:
• Participants felt that their excitement levels increased when they entered the red and yellow socializing areas.
• The cafeteria was the area in the centre where participants felt the most bored.
• Most participants felt that the colour of their favourite areas positively affected their mood. The researcher concluded that the colours of the indoor areas in the students’ centre have a psychological effect on the mood of the people who use them.
– 3 – 8824 – 9462
Discuss how the researcher in the study could avoid bias.
Refer to the paper 3 markbands when awarding marks.
Marks should be awarded according to the descriptors in the markbands. A best-fit approach is used to ascertain which particular mark to use from the possible range for each level descriptor.
The command term "discuss" requires candidates to offer a considered and balanced review of how a researcher could avoid bias.
Biases in research may originate from the design, the researchers, as well as the participants.
Candidates may refer to measures that were taken in the study or suggest measures that could have been taken, or a combination of the two. Each of these approaches are equally acceptable.
Possible ways for the researcher to avoid bias in this study could include but are not limited to:
- Researchers could reduce bias by having a well-designed research protocol that explicitly outlines how data is collected and analysed in this study.
- The researcher could conduct a pilot study in order to test things like the suitability of the questions and the clarity of the instructions/cover page. However, a pilot study may not be possible due to time restraints or lack of resources.
- Sampling bias (selection bias) is a danger when participants in a sample are not selected randomly. However, a random sample may not be possible due to time restraints or lack of resources. The researcher did visit the centre at different times of the day and attempted to hand out a similar number of question sheets in each area. This may have helped to reduce sampling bias.
- Nonresponse bias could occur if the people who did not want to take part in the study, or who took the questions but did not return them, were systematically different from those who did participate. Common causes of nonresponse, such as poor survey design, confusing/long questions or difficulties in returning question sheets, can be discovered by carrying out a pilot study. The researcher could also consider offering incentives for returning the question sheet - such as course credits - but this may also result in bias.
- To prevent researcher bias, the researcher should be aware of personal biases when formulating the questions and analysing the answers and should use reflexivity / critical self-awareness with regard to areas such as personal interests.
- The researcher could try to avoid confirmation bias during analysis of the answers by having other researchers participate in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data (researcher triangulation). This is important with regard to the generalization of results.
- Leading questions can introduce bias when participants answer in a certain way because the wording of the question encourages them to do so. The questions (and answers if there are closed questions) need to be phrased in a way that is specific and clear.
- Question order and the tendency to give positive answers (acquiescence bias) can also occur. These types of issues can be discovered by carrying out a pilot study.
- Investigator effects would be reduced if the researcher does not need to be present while the participant completes the questions. This could be achieved if the surveys are able to be returned by post or to a drop in point (such as a box in the library).
- Social desirability is the participants' tendency to respond in a way that they think will make them liked or accepted. This could be an issue if they are answering the questions with their friends around them. Ways to address this may be asking people to complete it on their own and return it later or providing a private space for completing the questions.
Discuss one or more effects of the environment on one or more physiological processes.
Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "discuss" requires candidates to offer a considered review of one or more effects of the environment on one or more physiological processes.
Examples of how the environment may affect physiological processes include, but are not limited to the effects of:
- daylight hours on levels of melatonin
- poverty on neuroplasticity
- environmental stressors on physiological stress response
- interaction with the environment and brain development.
Examples of studies include, but are not limited to:
- Maguire et al.'s (2000) study on neuroplasticity in the hippocampus of taxi drivers
- Marmot et al.'s (1997) Whitehall study on perceived control of workplace stress and cardiovascular health
- Meaney's (1988) study on how environmental stressors lead to hippocampal cell loss in rats
- Rosenzweig and Bennett's (1972) study on stimulating environments and dendritic branching
- Bremner et al.'s (2003) study on environmental stressors and the reduction of hippocampal volume.
Discussion of the effects may include, but is not limited to:
- methodological and/or ethical issues
- supporting and contrary findings
- application of the findings
- contributing factors other than the environment affecting physiological processes.
Candidates may discuss one effect of the environment or one physiological process in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may discuss a larger number of effects of the environment or physiological processes in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.
Discuss validity and reliability of diagnosis.
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "discuss" requires candidates to offer a considered review that addresses various aspects of validity and reliability of diagnosis. Although a discussion of both validity and reliability is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.
Relevant classification systems in the discussion of validity and reliability of diagnosis include, but are not limited to:
- Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM)
- Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders (CCMD)
- International Classification of Diseases (ICD).
Examples of research that could be used include, but are not limited to:
- Nicholls et al.'s (2000) studies of inter-rater reliability
- Seeman's (2007) literature review on the reliability of diagnosis
- Wakefield et al.'s (2007) study on the validity of diagnosis
- Silverman et al.'s (2001) study on test-retest of anxiety symptoms and diagnosis
- Rosenhan's studies of diagnostic validity.
If a candidate discusses only validity or only reliability, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [3] for criterion B: knowledge and understanding. All remaining criteria should be awarded marks according to the markbands independently, and could achieve up to full marks.
Evaluate the biopsychosocial model of health and well-being.
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "evaluate" requires candidates to make an appraisal by weighing up strengths and limitations of the biopsychosocial model of health and well-being. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.
Relevant research may include, but is not limited to:
- Engel's (1977) biopsychosocial model of health
- Buckner et al.'s (2013) study in the use of the biopsychosocial model to treat addiction
- Wallace's (1990) biopsychosocial disease model of alcoholism
- Nguyen et al.'s (2016) review of biopsychosocial treatment for obesity
- Jack's (2013) study on biopsychosocial factors affecting female metabolism in type 1 diabetes
- Cohen et al.'s (2003) study on the treatment of nicotine dependence
- Steptoe and Marmot's (2003) study on stress
- Farooqi and O'Rahilly's (2006) study on gene-environment interaction in obesity.
Evaluation may include, but is not limited to:
- advantages and disadvantages of the model
- the importance of considering a holistic approach to health
- methodological and ethical considerations
- cultural and/or gender considerations
- supporting and/or contradictory empirical evidence
- alternative explanations
- accuracy and clarity of the concepts
- practical applications of the research findings
- real world implications.
If the candidate addresses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [3] for criterion D: critical thinking. All remaining criteria should be awarded marks according to the best fit approach.