Practise IB Psychology HL 2.2 by integrating cognitive models, reconstructive memory, bias and technology with critical research evaluation.
Evaluate one model or theory of one cognitive process.
Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "evaluate" requires candidates to make an appraisal by weighing up the strengths and limitations of one theory or model related to one cognitive process. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks. Candidates are not required to distinguish between a model and a theory.
Cognitive processes include, but are not limited to: memory, perception, language, or decision making.
A wide variety of models or theories may be presented which may include, but are not limited to:
- Working Memory Model (Baddeley and Hitch, 1974);
Levels of Processing (Craik and Lockhart, 1972);
The Multi-Store Model (Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968, 1971)
- Chomsky's LAD theory (1957, 1968);
Skinner's Learning Theory (1957);
Bruner's Language Acquisition Support System (1983) related to language acquisition
- Flashbulb Memory Theory (Brown \& Kulik, 1977)
- Gregory's Constructivist Theory (1972, 1980);
Gibson's Theory of Direct Perception (1966,1979) related to perception
- Schema theory relevant to cognitive processes such as memory or decision making (Bartlett, 1932;
Loftus, 1974).
Evaluation of the selected model or theory may include, but is not limited to:
- degree of empirical support
- methodological considerations
- contrary findings or explanations
- involvement of other factors (for example, social or biological)
- application to real life.
If a candidate evaluates more than one model or theory, credit should be given only to the first model or theory. However, a candidate may address other theories or models and be awarded marks for this as long as these theories or models are clearly used to evaluate the main theory addressed in the response.
If a candidate addresses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [ 5 marks] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2 marks] for criterion C, organization. Up to full marks may be awarded for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension.
Discuss one model of thinking and decision-making.
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 model of thinking and decision-making.
Models of thinking and decision making include but are not limited to:
- dual-processing model - explaining two systems of thinking, system 1 and system 2
- theory of reasoned action and theory of planned behaviour.
Relevant studies could include but are not limited to:
- Alter and Oppenheimer's (2007) study on legibility of font and thinking
- Tversky and Kahneman's (1974) studies on judgement under uncertainty
- Strack and Mussweiler (1997);
Englich and Mussweiler (2001) on anchoring bias and decision
making
- Kvaran et al.'s (2013) study on the effect of analytic and experiential modes of thought on moral judgment
- Albarracin et al.'s (2001) meta-analysis of theory of planned behavior as a model of condom use
- Bechara et al.'s (2000) study on the role of the vmPFC in decision-making.
Discussion may include but is not limited to:
- methodological and ethical considerations
- how the research findings have been interpreted and applied, for example in biases and heuristics
- implications of the research findings
- difficulties in studying cognitive processes such as thinking and decision-making - e.g. isolation of variables and measuring cognitive processes;
artificial nature of experimental research
- issues of reliability and validity
- generalizability of findings;
sampling biases
- supporting and/or contradictory evidence
- comparison with alternative theories
- individual differences in thinking and decision-making.
If a candidate addresses more than one model of thinking and decision-making, credit should be given only to the first one.
Evaluate schema theory.
Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "evaluate" requires candidates to make an appraisal by weighing up the strengths and limitations of schema theory. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.
Research may include, but is not limited to:
- Loftus and Palmer (1974) on schema processing as a consequence of leading questions
- Anderson and Pichert's (1978) study on the effect of schema processing on memory encoding and retrieval
- Wynn and Logie's (1998) study using real-life experiences in schema processing
- Brewer and Treyen's (1981) "office schema" study
- Piaget's studies on the reorganization of schema during child development
- studies on gender schemas (for example, Martin et al., 1995;
Bee, 1999)
- Bartlett's (1932) seminal study ("War of the Ghosts").
Evaluation of the theory may include, but is not limited to:
- the degree of empirical support
- biological support for the theory
- methodological considerations of research used to support the theory
- application to real life (for example, eye witness testimony, CBT)
- if the theory has practical relevance for understanding cognition and/or behaviour (for example, gender or cultural roles)
- Cohen's (1993) criticism of schema theory.
If a candidate addresses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [ 5 marks] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2 marks] for criterion C, organization. Up to full marks may be awarded for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension.