Practise IB Psychology HL extensions across culture, motivation and technology, linking theories and studies to health, development, relationships and cognition.
Evaluate one or more studies investigating the role of culture in the treatment of one or more disorders.
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "evaluate" requires candidates to make an appraisal by weighing up the strengths and limitations of one or more studies investigating the role of culture in the treatment of one or more disorders. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.
Relevant studies may include but are not limited to:
- Castillo's (1997) study on a client-centred approach acknowledging cultural factors in treatment
- Sue and Zane's (2009) study on the role of culture and cultural techniques in psychotherapy
- Marsala's (2012) study on cultural conceptions of mental health and therapy
- Nicholl and Thompson's (2004) study on culturally sensitive adaptations of CBT on post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in adult refugees
- Sharen and Sundar's (2015) study on cultural differences in treating eating disorders in young females
- Zhang et al.'s (2002) study on Chinese Taoist cognitive psychotherapy (CTCP) for Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD)
- Kinzie et al.'s (1987) study on compliance to antidepressant treatment in different cultures
- Leong and Kalbatseva's (2011) study on barriers that affect a group's willingness to seek treatment for mental illness.
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 refers only to studies investigating the role of culture on diagnosis or etiologies of one or more disorder without linking it to the role of culture in treatment then the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [2] for criterion C: use of research to support answer. All remaining criteria should be awarded marks according to the best fit approach.
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.
Candidates may evaluate one study to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may evaluate a larger number of studies to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.
Candidates may address one disorder to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may address a larger number of disorders to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.
In questions that ask for evaluation of studies, in criterion A the extent to which the response is focused on the question is assessed. Responses that are generic, lack a focus on the specific question and seem as pre-prepared essays of relevance to the general topic (but not to evaluation of one or more studies) should be awarded [0]. 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 gain [2].
Marks awarded for criterion B should refer to definitions of terms and concepts relating to research studies. Overall this could include some knowledge of topic but more specifically knowledge and understanding related to research methods and ethics of chosen studies.
Marks for criterion B should be awarded as follows:
- 1-2 General knowledge of topic (the role of culture in treatment)
- 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.
Compare and contrast two models of causes of burnout in sport.
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "compare and contrast" requires candidates to give an account of the similarities and differences between two models of causes of burnout in sport. Although a discussion of both the similarities and differences of models of burnout is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.
Burnout can be defined as psychological, emotional, and even physical withdrawal from an activity that previously was enjoyable. Models of the causes of burnout include the cognitive stress model and self-determination theory, but candidates can also discuss the roles of coaches, parents and peers in causing burnout, intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation, the role of injury, challenges to identity, perfectionism and other psychological and physical factors in burnout.
If a candidate compares and contrasts more than two models, credit should be given only to the first two comparisons and contrasts.
Discussion of models of burnout prevention should not be awarded marks, unless the discussion is directly related to the causes of burnout.
If a candidate discusses only similarities or only differences, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5 marks] for critical thinking and up to a maximum of [2 marks] for organization. Up to full marks may be awarded for knowledge and comprehension.
Analyse cultural variation in gender roles.
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "analyse" requires candidates to bring out (emphasize) the essential aspects of cultural variation in gender roles.
Responses may address how sociocultural factors such as media, stereotypes, ethnic and cultural experiences, peer, school and parental roles influence gender roles. It is appropriate to address cross-cultural differences in gender roles related to behaviour such as aggression, workplace roles/status, parenting behaviour, domestic work, and so on.
Relevant research may include, but is not limited to:
- Eagly's social role theory
- Bandura's social learning theory
- gender schema theory
- Money's theory on gender roles
- Mead's (1935) anthropological study
- Best et al.'s (1977) cross-cultural study on gender stereotypes
- Cuddy et al.'s (2010) study on how gender stereotypes are shaped in different cultures with participants attributing positive traits to men
- Smith and Lloyd's (1978) experiment on the perception of gender.
Examples of how candidates may show evidence of critical thinking may include, but are not limited to:
- evidence from studies concerning the existence of cultural variation in gender roles
- the methodological and/or ethical considerations of research
- whether sociocultural influences create gender differences or merely accentuate them
- whether differences between males and females are purely social constructs or a result of biological differences
- differences between collectivistic versus individualistic societies
- interaction between biological, cognitive and cultural factors.
Candidates may present one analysis of cultural variation in gender roles in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may present a number of analyses of cultural variation in gender roles in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.
Analyse the role that culture plays in the formation and maintenance of relationships.
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "analyse" requires candidates to bring out (emphasize) essential aspects of the role that culture plays in the formation and maintenance of relationships.
Candidates do not need to distinguish between the formation and maintenance of relationships, as the two are so closely linked.
Candidates may address different types of relationships, for example, romantic relationships, marriages, friendship, family relationships, workplace relationships.
Studies may include, but are not limited to:
- Yelsma and Athappilly's (1988) comparative study of arranged marriages and love marriages
- Buss et al.'s (1990) study of international preferences in selecting mates (a study of 37 cultures)
- Levine et al.'s (1995) study on the role of love in the establishment of marriage
- Buss's (1994) cross-cultural study of relationships
- Canary and Dainton's (2003) study of Korean relationships
- Ahmad and Reid's (2008) study of communication styles in arranged marriages
- Moghaddam et al.'s (1993) study on the influence of cultural dimensions, for example of individualism versus collectivism and the Western bias in research on relationships.
Evidence of critical thinking may be provided by candidates in the following ways:
- addressing the issue of universality (for example, equity is not a universal value in relationships)
- comparing and contrasting cultural similarities and differences in relationships (for example, do social norms affect how appropriate it is to express dissatisfaction with a marriage?)
- discussing the influence of biological factors
- evaluation of relevant research including analysis of the methodology and/or ethical considerations
- discussing evolutionary theory which suggests there are universal patterns in the formation and maintenance of relationships.