2. Content

An animal model uses a non-human organism to study a biological process or disorder with the aim of learning something relevant to humans.

Models can allow controlled manipulation, repeated measurement and access to mechanisms that are difficult to study directly. Their value depends on construct validity: the model must share the relevant process, not merely show a similar outward behaviour.

A stress manipulation in rodents may test a pathway involved in depression, but species-specific behaviour, dose and context limit the inference. Human clinical evidence is still needed for treatment claims.

An animal result is not automatically generalisable or unethical. Evaluate welfare, model fit and the exact claim being transferred.

Evaluate animal ethics with replacement, reduction and refinement: replace animals with non-animal methods where the question can be answered adequately; reduce numbers while preserving a valid design; and refine housing, procedures and endpoints to minimize pain, distress and lasting harm. A harm-benefit review should consider species needs, scientific necessity, model validity, expected knowledge, trained care and whether less harmful alternatives exist. Weak transfer to humans reduces the ethical justification because animals would bear costs for evidence that cannot support the intended claim.

Biological reductionism explains behaviour by reducing it to genes, brain structures or chemical processes. Holistic explanations include interactions across biological, cognitive, social and cultural levels.

Reductionism can produce testable mechanisms and targeted treatments, but a mechanism at one level may not explain onset, meaning or response differences. A drug effect supports a pathway hypothesis, not a complete account of a disorder.

An antidepressant that changes serotonin signalling may reduce symptoms for some patients. Therapy, stress exposure and social support can still influence whether the change is sustained.

Biological does not mean deterministic, and holistic does not mean untestable. State what the chosen level explains and what it leaves out.

Brain-imaging methods measure structure or activity indirectly—for example, changes in volume, blood flow or metabolic signal—so researchers can compare patterns across tasks or groups.

Imaging can localise activity and track development, but resolution, reverse inference and correlational design limit what it proves. A region active during a task may support it without being the only cause.

If adolescents show different activation during inhibition, the result may indicate developmental change; it does not by itself show that maturation caused a later behaviour or that one region controls it alone.

A colourful scan is not a diagnosis or causal map. Identify the method, comparison, inference and uncertainty.

Neurotransmitters carry signals across synapses, while hormones travel through the bloodstream; both can influence behaviour by changing how neural systems respond.

A chemical explanation asks how release, receptor binding, reuptake or degradation changes a circuit. The same messenger can have different effects in different pathways, and measured levels may not equal activity at a specific synapse.

A drug that blocks reuptake may increase a messenger's availability, but symptom change depends on receptor adaptation, network effects and the person's context—not only the concentration in blood.

One neurotransmitter is not a single “happiness” or “aggression” chemical. Keep mechanism, measurement and behavioural claim separate.

The diathesis–stress model proposes that a predisposition (diathesis) combines with environmental stress to increase the probability of a disorder or outcome.

A vulnerability may be biological, psychological or social; stress can be acute or chronic. The model predicts variation: the same stressor need not produce the same outcome, and protective support can change the pathway.

Two people may experience the same workload, but only one develops persistent symptoms because prior vulnerability, sleep and social support differ. The observation supports an interaction hypothesis, not a single cause.

Diathesis is not destiny and stress is not always visible. Measure both components and avoid blaming the person or environment alone.

Genetic inheritance can contribute to vulnerability through many variants and biological pathways. A heritable tendency describes variation in a population, not a guaranteed outcome for one person.

Twin or family evidence can estimate similarity, but shared environments and gene–environment interaction complicate interpretation. A risk variant may matter only under particular developmental or social conditions.

If identical twins show different depression outcomes, genetic influence is compatible with the result: genes may alter sensitivity while stress, support and learning change exposure and expression.

Heritability is not the percentage of an individual's disorder caused by genes. Avoid deterministic or stigmatizing conclusions.

Localisation of function proposes that particular brain regions contribute more to some functions than others. Modern evidence often shows networks and interaction rather than one isolated “centre”.

Evidence can come from lesions, stimulation, imaging or task comparisons. Strong interpretation requires a clear contrast and awareness that damage can cause reorganisation or broader network disruption.

If a lesion is followed by impaired language production, it supports a contribution of the damaged network; it does not prove that every language process is stored in one spot.

Activation is not the same as exclusive control. Separate localisation, lateralisation and network-level explanation.

Neuroplasticity is the nervous system's capacity to change connections, representation or recruitment in response to development, learning or injury.

Change can involve synaptic strengthening, pruning or functional reorganisation. Sensitive periods may make some learning easier, but adult brains remain capable of adaptation; plasticity can also reinforce unhelpful patterns.

After repeated practice, a skill may recruit more efficient pathways. After injury, nearby regions may support a lost function, but recovery depends on damage, timing and rehabilitation.

Plasticity does not mean unlimited repair or that every change is beneficial. Identify the mechanism and the evidence for transfer to behaviour.

Neurotransmission is communication between neurons: an electrical signal triggers chemical release, receptors respond, and the signal is terminated by reuptake or breakdown.

A neurochemical explanation of a disorder proposes that altered signalling contributes to symptoms. Evidence from medication response, receptor studies or imaging can support a pathway, but treatment effects are not a direct measurement of the original cause.

If a reuptake inhibitor improves mood for some patients, it is consistent with serotonin involvement; it does not show that low serotonin alone caused every case or that the drug works through one mechanism only.

Do not turn a group-level association into an individual diagnosis. Separate synaptic mechanism, clinical outcome and alternative explanations.

Anchoring bias occurs when an initial number or reference point influences a later judgement, even when the anchor is not relevant to the answer.

The mechanism is selective adjustment: people start from the anchor and move away from it insufficiently. Expertise, time pressure, knowledge and the salience of the anchor can change the effect.

A suggested price of $900 can make a$700 product feel cheap, even if comparable products suggest $500. Asking for an independent estimate first can reduce the pull.

Anchoring is a systematic tendency, not proof that every estimate is wrong. Identify the starting value and compare with an unbiased reference.

In classical conditioning, a previously neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus after repeated pairing with an unconditioned stimulus, so it elicits a conditioned response.

Acquisition depends on timing and contingency. Extinction reduces the conditioned response when the cue is no longer paired, but spontaneous recovery or generalisation can show that learning has not simply vanished.

If a tone repeatedly precedes an unpleasant event, the tone may later trigger anxiety. Presenting the tone safely can weaken the response, while a similar tone may still generalise it.

Conditioning is not just repetition. Name the stimulus roles and the pairing that changes the prediction.

Cognitive load is the amount of processing demand placed on working memory. Intrinsic load comes from task complexity, extraneous load from poor presentation, and germane effort from building useful schemas.

Working memory is limited, so instructions should reduce avoidable search and split attention. Prior knowledge changes effective load: a novice may need worked steps that an expert can compress.

A diagram with labels beside the relevant parts can reduce the need to hold two distant sources in mind. Adding decorative text may increase extraneous load without teaching the mechanism.

More information is not automatically better learning. Diagnose which load is consuming capacity and whether the learner is forming a transferable schema.

The working-memory model describes limited short-term processing through interacting components: a central executive directs attention, while specialised systems handle verbal and visuospatial information; an episodic buffer integrates them.

The model predicts dual-task effects and explains why similar codes can interfere while different modalities may be combined. Evidence supports useful distinctions but does not make the components literal brain regions.

Repeating a phone number while reading another number competes for verbal resources. Reading a route while holding a visual map may be less disruptive because the demands differ, though the executive still coordinates them.

Working memory is not the same as permanent storage and the central executive is not an unlimited homunculus. Link each prediction to the component and task.

Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek, interpret or remember information in ways that support an existing belief while discounting conflicting evidence.

It can operate through search, attention, interpretation and memory. Strong prior commitment, identity relevance and ambiguous evidence can increase it; preregistered tests and deliberate consideration of alternatives can reduce it.

A researcher expecting a treatment to work may notice supportive cases first and explain away null results. A blind analysis and explicit stopping rule make that mechanism harder to operate.

Disagreement is not automatically confirmation bias. Identify the prior belief and the systematic way evidence is being filtered.

Dual-process models distinguish fast, automatic, associative processing from slower, effortful and rule-based reasoning. Both can be useful; the context determines which is reliable.

Fast processing is efficient when patterns are familiar and feedback has trained accuracy. Slow processing is valuable when a problem is novel, high-stakes or designed to trigger a misleading intuition.

Recognising a familiar word uses little effort. Checking whether a discount really beats the original price requires deliberate calculation because the display can invite a quick but wrong comparison.

System 1 is not always irrational and System 2 is not always correct. Explain the trigger, expertise and opportunity for checking.

Operant conditioning changes behaviour through its consequences. Reinforcement increases a behaviour; punishment decreases it. Positive means adding a consequence and negative means removing one—not good and bad.

The consequence must follow the behaviour and matter to the learner. Timing, consistency and reinforcement schedule affect acquisition and maintenance; avoidance can be reinforced even when the person experiences relief rather than reward.

If checking a phone removes boredom, checking may become more frequent: the boredom is removed, so this is negative reinforcement, not punishment.

Negative does not mean harmful and positive does not mean beneficial. Classify by direction of behaviour change and what is added or removed.

A schema is an organised framework that guides attention, interpretation and retrieval. It allows people to fill gaps and act efficiently, but can also introduce consistent distortions.

Schema effects are strongest when information is ambiguous or incomplete. New details may be assimilated to an existing framework, while surprising details may be remembered less or force revision.

A person recalling a hospital visit may insert expected doctor equipment that was never seen. The error reveals a reconstruction mechanism, not proof that all details were invented.

A schema is not a conscious stereotype in every case. Specify the prior knowledge, the task and the evidence for its effect.

Cognitive dissonance is the uncomfortable tension that arises when a person's beliefs, actions or self-image do not fit together. The tension matters when the inconsistency is important, chosen or difficult to ignore.

People may reduce it by changing the behaviour, changing the belief, adding a justification or avoiding the conflicting information. The response is a motivated attempt to restore coherence, not a guarantee that the original belief was false.

Someone keeps paying for a course they no longer attend. They might cancel, start attending again, or tell themselves that keeping access is valuable; each response reduces the same mismatch in a different way.

A change of opinion is not automatically dissonance. Identify the two inconsistent cognitions, explain why the mismatch creates discomfort, and state which route the person uses to reduce it.

A compliance technique changes behaviour by shaping a person's response to a request. Commitment works by obtaining an earlier agreement or intention that makes a consistent later action feel more likely.

The first step needs willing participation, and the later request must be recognisably connected. Commitment can support prosocial behaviour, but an intention is not the same as verified behaviour; timing, pressure and context still matter.

In the Dickerson water-conservation study, signing a conservation poster and answering a water-use questionnaire was followed by shorter showers than in the control condition. The example illustrates a mechanism, not a universal effect size.

Commitment is not subliminal control and it does not remove agency. Ask what the person agreed to, how freely they agreed, and whether the later behaviour actually matches the commitment.

Conformity is a change in behaviour, judgement or expressed attitude toward a group standard. It is often called majority influence, although a minority can also influence a group under different conditions.

Normative social influence is driven by acceptance and fear of rejection; informational social influence is driven by uncertainty and the belief that others know what to do. The same outward answer can arise from different motives.

In Asch-style line judgements, some participants gave an obviously wrong answer after several confederates agreed. The result demonstrates majority pressure in that task, not that people always abandon private beliefs.

Conformity is not obedience and it is not proof of internal belief change. Look for the group standard, the uncertainty or acceptance motive, and whether the person later returns to the original view.

A cultural dimension is a broad contrast used to compare patterns of values or behaviour across cultural settings. Individualism emphasises personal autonomy; collectivism gives more weight to group harmony and interdependence.

The lens can generate a prediction about conformity or group decisions, but a country is not a single culture and a group average does not determine an individual's response. History, situation and within-group variation remain relevant.

A cross-cultural meta-analysis may find higher average conformity in some collectivist samples than in some individualist samples. Unequal numbers of studies and different local meanings can weaken the comparison even when the pattern is interesting.

Individualist does not mean selfish and collectivist does not mean automatically conformist. Treat the dimension as a measured tendency with sampling and construct-validity limits, not a fixed national personality.

An emic approach studies behaviour using concepts and meanings developed within the culture being studied. It asks what an action means to local participants rather than imposing an outside category from the start.

Local language, measures and explanatory categories can reveal diversity that a universal instrument misses. The trade-off is time, translation, comparability and the risk that an outsider still misinterprets the local account.

A measure of secure attachment designed around independence may misread close caregiver contact in another cultural setting. An emic project would first investigate what healthy caregiving means locally before scoring it.

Emic does not mean that every local explanation is automatically valid or that comparison is impossible. State whose meanings define the construct and how the researchers checked interpretation.

Enculturation is the usually gradual process of learning and internalising a culture's norms, practices, attitudes and rituals. Much of it becomes familiar without the person consciously deciding to be taught.

Transmission can be vertical from parents, horizontal from peers and siblings, or oblique from teachers, media, institutions and other adults. These routes shape identity and behaviour, but people can reinterpret or resist what they learn.

Basu and colleagues used interviews with adolescents and parents in Delhi and Shanghai to explore gender socialisation. The themes illustrate transmission and power, while the small, local samples cannot represent every family in either city.

Enculturation is not genetic programming and it is not identical to acculturation. Ask who transmitted the norm, through which relationship, and what evidence shows that it was internalised rather than merely performed.

An etic approach begins with concepts or measures chosen by the researcher and tests whether they apply across cultural settings. It is useful for seeking possible universals, but it can impose meanings that are unfamiliar locally.

The key risk is an imposed etic: a measure may look standardised while quietly treating one culture's assumptions as the norm. Translation, construct equivalence and local participation are needed before comparing scores.

Applying the same attachment categories to German and Japanese infants may label culturally different caregiver contact as the same psychological style. A cross-cultural comparison is informative only if the construct means comparable things.

Etic does not mean careless or automatically biased, and emic does not mean bias-free. Explain the research question, whose categories were used, and what evidence supports equivalence.

Acculturation is the process of adapting when people encounter a culture different from the one in which they were raised. It can involve maintaining parts of the original culture while participating in the new one.

Common strategy labels include integration, assimilation, separation and marginalisation, but real lives can shift across settings and time. Acculturation is bidirectional: migrants change while also influencing the receiving culture.

A student may keep a home language and religious practice while joining a new school's friendships and routines. The combination is not evidence that one culture has disappeared; stress may arise if participation is forced or unsupported.

Integration is not automatically the best outcome for every person, and acculturation is not the same as enculturation. Describe the choices, constraints and social response before inferring wellbeing or identity.

Social identity theory explains part of the self-concept through group memberships. People categorise social worlds, identify with some groups and compare groups, which can produce a desire for positive distinctiveness.

Ingroup preference can appear even when groups are created with minimal information, because the category itself supplies an us–them comparison. The effect is shaped by context and does not remove personal agency or other identities.

In Tajfel's minimal-groups paradigm, boys allocated to supposedly different art-preference groups distributed rewards more favourably to the ingroup, despite not meeting its members. The task shows a mechanism, not all real group conflict.

Categorisation is not the same as prejudice, and ingroup preference is not inevitable discrimination. Identify the category, comparison standard and evidence that the group membership caused the decision.

Social learning theory proposes that people can learn behaviour by observing models in a social setting. Imitation is more likely when the model is salient and the behaviour appears rewarded, useful or socially valued.

The observer is not a passive copy machine: attention, retention, reproduction and motivation mediate whether learning becomes performance. Vicarious reinforcement can change expectations even when the observer has not yet been rewarded.

A child notices an older sibling praised for helping, remembers the sequence and later reproduces it when able. The observation can support learning before the behaviour appears; culture and the local model shape what is noticed and valued.

Observed behaviour is not guaranteed to be imitated, and learning is not identical to immediate performance. State which ARRM process failed or succeeded before claiming that a model caused the action.

Credibility is the trustworthiness of a qualitative account: whether its interpretation is believable given the data, method and researcher. Transferability asks whether the richly described insight can inform another context, not whether it statistically represents a population.

Transparency about sampling, procedure, analysis and limitations lets a reader judge fit. Triangulation can compare datasets or researchers, while reflexivity makes the researcher's influence visible rather than pretending interpretation is neutral.

An interview study of refugee experiences may be credible when the coding process and participant context are explicit, yet not transferable to every migration setting. The boundary is about fit and detail, not a simple pass/fail label.

Credibility is not the same as replicability, and transferability is not automatic generalisability. State which claim is being made and which evidence supports it.

Research methods are the planned ways psychologists collect and analyse evidence, such as experiments, interviews, observations, surveys and case studies. The method must operationalise the variables and fit the kind of claim being made.

Experiments can support causal inference when manipulation, comparison and control are credible. Interviews and observations can reveal meaning and behaviour in context, but researcher influence, sampling and interpretation become central validity questions.

To study whether sleep changes reaction time, an experiment can manipulate sleep opportunity and measure a defined response. To understand how students experience sleep loss, a semi-structured interview may be more informative but cannot alone establish causation.

No method is automatically superior. Identify the research question, the evidence needed, and the trade-off between control, ecological validity, ethics and transferability before judging the design.

Different methods answer different questions: experiments manipulate an independent variable for causal inference; observations record behaviour in a setting; surveys collect standardized self-report; interviews explore accounts in depth; correlational studies measure relationships without manipulation; case studies integrate multiple sources around one bounded case. Selection must fit the claim and access conditions, while ethics, demand characteristics, researcher effects, confounds and external variables limit what can be concluded.

A sample is selected from a target population so that a study can collect evidence within practical limits. Opportunity and volunteer samples are convenient; random and stratified methods aim for better representation; snowball sampling reaches hidden populations.

Choose the method from the research aim and access conditions. A random draw can still be unbalanced by chance, while a stratified design matches selected population proportions only for characteristics that were measured and used.

A study of an uncommon group may begin with one trusted participant and use referrals, gaining access but narrowing the network. A campus volunteer advert is faster but can overrepresent people who are willing and interested in the topic.

A large sample is not automatically representative. State who could be selected, who was actually selected, and how that route limits generalisation and introduces bias.