IB Psychology SL 2.1 Biological Approach Question Bank

Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "discuss" requires candidates to offer a considered review of the use of one or more brain imaging technologies in investigating the relationship between biological factors and behaviour.

Brain imaging technologies could include, but are not limited to:
- CT (computerized tomography)
- PET (positron emission tomography)
- MRI (magnetic resonance imaging)
- fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging)
- EEG (electroencephalography).

Candidates may refer to studies such as:
- Corkin (1997) using MRI to investigate the effect of damage to HM's medial temporal lobes and the effect on memory formation.
- Brefczynski-Lewis et al.'s (2007) study to investigate the effect of meditation on the brain using fMRI.
- Maguire et al.'s (2000) study using MRI scans to investigate spatial ability and neuroplasticity in taxi drivers.
- Ogden's (2005) study using CT scans to investigate the effect of brain damage on hemineglect.

Discussion may include, but is not limited to:
- how brain imaging technologies have changed and furthered the study of behaviour
- differences in why and how different technologies are used
- evaluation of the techniques (for example, cost/benefit analysis, reductionism)
- ethical and methodological considerations in the use of the technology.

The focus of the response must be on how brain imaging technology is used to understand the relationship between biological factors and behaviour. Although an understanding of how the technology functions may be included, it is not required for top marks to be awarded.

Candidates may discuss one brain imaging technology in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may discuss more than one brain imaging technology in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

Candidates may address one biological factor, or more than one. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

when awarding marks.
The command term "describe" requires candidates to give a detailed account of one effect of one hormone on behaviour, with reference to one relevant study.

Any aspect of human behaviour (eg, aggression, attachment, sexual behaviour) is acceptable as long as the response focuses on how one hormone affects a particular behaviour.

Although hormones may act as neurotransmitters by activating receptor sites within the synapse, it is the origin of the chemical that classifies it as a hormone. Responses that address the effect of neurotransmitters such as dopamine, serotonin, GABA and acetylcholine on behaviour should not be awarded marks.

Relevant studies may include, but are not limited to:
- Radke et al.'s (2015) study investigating the effect of testosterone on women's responses to angry faces
- McGaugh and Cahill's (1995) study on the effect of adrenaline in memories linked to emotional arousal
- Newcomer et al.'s (1999) study on cortisol and memory
- Baumgartner et al.'s (2008) study on the effect of oxytocin on trust in economic behaviour.

If a candidate describes more than one effect on more than one hormone, credit should be given only to the first effect or the first hormone described.

If a candidate refers to more than one study credit should be given only to the first study.
If a candidate describes the effect of one hormone without making reference to a study, up to a maximum of [5] should be awarded.

If a candidate only describes a relevant study without describing the effect of the hormone, up to a maximum of [4] should be awarded.

Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "discuss" requires candidates to offer a considered review of the relationship between genetics and behaviour.

Candidates may address one behaviour to demonstrate depth of knowledge or may address more than one behaviour to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

Relevant behaviours that may be used to discuss the relationship may include, but are not limited to:
- intelligence
- sexual orientation
- mental health, e.g. depression, PTSD, addiction
- aggression
- mate selection/mating behaviour.

Relevant studies may include, but are not limited to:
- Bouchard et al.'s (1990) reports on the "Minnesota Twin Studies"
- Kendler et al.'s (2006) twin study on genetics and depression
- Caspi et al.'s (2003) study on genes and depression
- Weissman et al.'s (2005) longitudinal family study on depression
- Caspi et al.'s (2002) study on the "warrior" gene and aggressive behaviours
- Bailey and Pillard's (1990) research into genetics and sexuality.

Discussion may include, but is not limited to:
- methodological and ethical considerations
- how the research findings have been interpreted and applied
- implications of the research findings
- assumptions and biases
- areas of uncertainty e.g., the role of the environment in gene expression, and the diathesis-stress model
- supporting and/or contradictory evidence
- alternative explanations/factors