IB Psychology HL 3.3.9 Communication Question Bank

Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "evaluate" requires the candidate to make an appraisal of one or more studies regarding the role of communication in personal relationships by weighing up the strengths and limitations of the selected studies. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.

Candidates may address specific types of personal relationships (e.g. romantic, peer, parent

adolescent) or personal relationships in general. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

Candidates may evaluate one study in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge or may consider a larger number of studies in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

Relevant studies may include, but are not limited to:
- Fincham's (2004) study of the role of communication in marital satisfaction
- Gottman and Levenson's (1986) study on the role of communication of emotions in relationships
- Burgoon et al.'s (2000) study of the use of mindfulness and interpersonal communication
- Ying et al.'s (2015) study on parent-adolescent communication to build trust
- Levenson and Gottman's (1983; 1985) studies on the relationship between marital dissatisfaction and negative affect
- Stratton's (2003) study on attributional style in families that attended therapy
- Sheldon's (2009) study on self-disclosure on Facebook.

Evaluation of the selected studies may include but is not limited to:
- methodological and ethical considerations
- gender considerations
- contrary findings
- practical applications of the empirical findings
- how the findings of research have been interpreted
- implications of the findings
- validity and reliability.

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.

In questions that ask for evaluation of studies, in criterion A we assess to what extent is the response focused on the question. Responses that are generic, lack a focus on the specific question and seem as pre-prepared essays of relevance to the general topic of communication in personal relationships (but not to evaluation of one or more studies) should be awarded [0] for this criterion. If the response identifies which studies will be evaluated but there is also extra information that is not relevant or necessary for the specific question then [1] should be awarded. Responses that are clearly focused on evaluating one or more studies should be awarded [2].

Marks awarded for criterion B should refer to definitions of terms and concepts. Overall this could include some knowledge of topic but more specifically knowledge and understanding related to research methods and/or ethics of chosen studies.

Marks for criterion B should be awarded as follows:
- 1-2 General knowledge of topic (the role of communication in personal relationships)
- 3-4 Knowledge of general research terms and concepts is provided but lacks detail. Some minor errors might be present
- 5-6 Relevant knowledge of specific research methods material is utilized and concepts are defined within the context of the specific study.

Marks awarded for criterion C assess the quality of the description of as study/studies and assess how well the student linked the findings of the study to the question - this doesn't have to be very sophisticated or long for these questions but still the aim or the conclusion should be linked to the topic of the specific question.