Practise IB Psychology SL 1.1.4 by evaluating validity and reliability in psychological diagnosis and cognitive research.
Discuss the validity and/or 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/or reliability of diagnosis.
Examples of research that could be used include, but are not limited to:
- Nicholls et al.'s (2000) studies of inter-rater reliability
- Silverman et al.'s (2001) study on test-retest of anxiety symptoms and diagnosis
- Rosenhan's studies (eg 1973) of diagnostic validity in Schizophrenia
- Cwik et al.'s (2016) study on diagnostic accuracy and gender biases
- Lobbestael et al.'s (2011) study on the reliability of diagnosis
- Di Nardo et al.'s (1993) study on reliability in OCD and anxiety disorders using the DSM
- Cooper et al.'s (1972) study on cultural variation in diagnosis between the US and UK.
Discussion may include, but is not limited to:
- methodological and/or ethical considerations
- cultural and/or gender considerations
- biases related to diagnosis
- interpretation and application of the findings
- implications of the findings
- comparative analysis of validity and reliability
- operationalization of terms
- strengths and limitations of the use of classification systems.
Candidates may discuss either validity or reliability in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge or may discuss both validity and reliability in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.