Practise IB Psychology SL 3.2 by explaining cognitive, social, emotional and biological development across the lifespan with evaluated studies.
Examine how one or more biological factors influence human development.
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "examine" requires candidates to consider how biological factors affect human development in a way that uncovers the interrelationships of this issue.
Responses may refer to biological factors including, but not limited to:
- the effects of maturation of the nervous system and cognitive development
- Waber's (2007) MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) studies of normal brain development
- the role of neuroplasticity in brain development
- the role of stress hormones on faulty development
- the role of sex hormones
- Bowlby's theory that attachment is innate.
Evidence of critical thinking may be provided by candidates in the following ways:
- discussing the issue of reductionism
- asserting that human development is the result of complex interactions between biological, sociocultural and cognitive factors
- evaluation of empirical research
- methodological and ethical considerations.
Although the focus of the answer should be on biological factors, candidates may discuss how cognitive and sociocultural factors interact with biological factors. Biology and experience are assumed to act together to produce the normal course of development (eg when examining the influence of gender on human development, candidates could assert the presence of an interaction between sociocultural and biological factors).
Candidates may address one biological factor in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may address more than one biological factor in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.
Explain cultural variation in gender roles.
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "explain" requires candidates to give a detailed account, including reasons for, or causes of, cultural variation in gender roles.
Responses may address how sociocultural factors such as the media, stereotypes and parental role influence gender roles in relation to aggression, working behaviour, parenting behaviour, domestic work, and so on.
Examples of how candidates may show evidence of critical thinking could include:
- using evidence from studies that support or disconfirm the existence of cultural variation in gender roles.
- analysis of the methodology 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
- analyzing differences between collectivistic versus individualistic societies
- analysis of the interaction between biological, cognitive and cultural factors.
Relevant theories may include, but are not limited to:
- Eagly's social role theory
- Bandura's social learning theory
- Money's theory on gender roles
- gender schema theory.
Relevant studies may include, but are not limited to:
- Mead's (1935) anthropological study
- Best et al.'s (1977) cross-cultural study on gender stereotypes
- Smith and Lloyd's (1978) experiment on the perception of gender
- Cuddy et al.'s (2010) study on how gender stereotypes are shaped in different cultures with participants attributing positive traits to men.
Candidates may present one or a number of explanations of cultural variation in gender roles. Both approaches are equally valid.
Evaluate one theory of cognitive development.
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 theory of cognitive development. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.
Relevant theories may include, but are not limited to:
- Piaget’s theory of cognitive development
- Vygotsky’s theory of cognitive development
- Kohlberg's cognitive theory of moral judgement
- information-processing approach to cognitive development
- Bruner's theory of cognitive development
- neurobiological theories of cognitive development.
Evaluation of the selected theory may include, but is not limited to:
- methodological, cultural and gender considerations
- controversies related to stages versus continuous process
- the accuracy and falsifiability of the concepts
- productivity of the theory in generating psychological research
- applicability of the theory such as its impact on educative practice or work
- supporting and contradicting evidence.
If a candidate evaluates more than one theory, credit should be given only to the first evaluation. However, candidates may address other theories and be awarded marks for these as long as they are clearly used to evaluate the main theory addressed in the response.
A discussion of attachment theory or other theories that are not cognitive in nature should not be awarded marks.
If a candidate discusses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5 marks] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2 marks] for criterion C, organization. Up to full marks may be awarded for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension.
Evaluate one or more studies on the development of empathy and/or theory of mind.
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 on the development of empathy and/or theory of mind. 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:
- Bischof-Köhler 's (1991) 'The Development of Empathy in Infants'
- van der Mark et al.'s (2002) 'Development of Empathy in Girls During the Second Year of Life: Associations with Parenting, Attachment, and Temperament'
- McDonald and Messinger's (2011) 'The Development of Empathy: How, when and why'
- Happé's (1995) 'The role of age and verbal ability in the theory of mind task performance of subjects with autism'
- Peterson et al.'s (2016) 'Peer Social Skills and Theory of Mind in Children with Autism, Deafness, or Typical Development'
- Meltzoff's (1995) 'Representation of intentions in human children'
- Baron-Cohen, Leslie and Frith's (1985) 'Understanding false beliefs in human children'
Evaluation may include, but is not limited to:
- methodological and ethical considerations
- areas of uncertainty
- gender and cultural considerations
- supporting and/or contradictory evidence
- contrary and supporting findings
- alternative explanations or factors
- practical applications
- implications of the findings
Responses referring to animal research are acceptable as long as they are explicitly linked to human behaviour.
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 in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may evaluate a greater number of studies in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.
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 (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 ethics of chosen studies. Marks for criterion B should be awarded as follows:
- 1-2 General knowledge of topic (development of empathy and/or theory of mind)
- 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.
Criterion D assesses how well the student is explaining strengths and limitations of the study/studies.
Evaluate one example of psychological research (theory or study) relevant to attachment.
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 theory or study related to attachment. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.
Relevant theories may include, but are not limited to:
- Schaffer's cognitive theory of attachment
- Bowlby's attachment theory
- Ainsworth's attachment theory
- Spitz's psychodynamic theory of attachment.
Relevant studies may include, but are not limited to:
- Ainsworth's strange situation studies (1967, 1971, 1978)
- Robertson and Bowlby's study (1952) on the short-term effects of deprivation
- Harlow and Harlow's rhesus monkeys study (1962)
- Hodges and Tizard's adoption study (1989)
- Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s cross-cultural study (1988)
- Hazan and Shaver's study (1987) on adult attachment behaviour.
Whichever theory or study is selected, the focus of the answer should be on the evaluation of that theory or study. The focus of the response should be on one example of psychological research relevant to attachment rather than a general overview of attachment
Evaluation of the research may include, but is not limited to:
- methodological considerations
- cultural considerations
- contrary findings or explanations
- the productivity of the theory in generating psychological research
- the applications of the empirical findings.
If a candidate evaluates more than one theory or study, credit should be given only to the first evaluation. However, candidates may address other theories/studies and be awarded marks for these as long as they are clearly used to evaluate the main research addressed in the response.
If a candidate discusses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5 marks] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2 marks] for criterion C, organization. Up to full marks may be awarded for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension.
Evaluate one or more examples of psychological research (theories and/or studies) relevant to the formation and development of gender roles.
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "evaluate" requires candidates to make an appraisal of research related to the formation and development of gender roles by weighing up the strengths and limitations. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.
Relevant theories may include, but are not limited to:
- gender schema theory that stresses the key role of cognitive processes in the development of gender roles
- social learning theory that highlights the importance of the social environment and emphasizes the potency of observational and modelling processes
- theory of psychosexual differentiation that is based on the assumption that gender roles are related to genetic sex determined by chromosomes
- evolutionary theory that attempts to locate gender role differences in a historical evolutionary context
- psychodynamic theory that is based on the assumption that gender roles appear when children identify with their same-sex parent.
Relevant studies may include, but are not limited to:
- Martin and Halvorson's (1983) study showing the role of gender schemas on gender roles
- Fagot's (1978) study showing the influence of parents on gender roles
- Mead's (1935) study showing that gender roles depend upon the society
- Money and Ehrhardt's (1972) study claiming that children are gender neutral at birth.
Evaluation may include but is not limited to:
- methodological and ethical considerations
- cultural and gender considerations
- the accuracy and clarity of the concepts
- contrary findings or explanations
- the productivity of the theory in generating psychological research
- the applications of the empirical findings.
A candidate may evaluate one theory or study in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may evaluate a larger number of theories/studies in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.
If a candidate discusses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2] for criterion C, organization. Up to full marks may be awarded for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension.
Discuss the role of peers and/or play in development.
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "discuss" requires the candidate to offer a considered review of the role of peers and/or play in development.
Relevant studies may include but are not limited to:
- Fagot's (1985) study on gender-specific toys and play
- Hughes's (1999) study on learning social skills through role play
- Todd et al.'s (2016) study on preferences for gender-type toys
- Russ's (2004) study of a child's capacity for cognitive flexibility and creativity developed by role play
- Bradley's (1985) study on social cognitive development and toys
- Bradbard et al.'s (1986) study of the influence of sex stereotypes on children's exploration and memory
- Albert et al.'s (2013) study on peer influences in adolescent decision-making.
Topics for discussion may include, but are not limited to:
- gender specific toys and clothing in gender identity development
- the role of toys in cognitive development
- the role of peers in modelling behaviours
- the role of peers and play in gender role development
- the role of peers and play in cognitive development
- research into types of play and the effect on social development
- the role of play in learning about co-operation and competition.
Candidates may discuss one aspect of the role of peers or play in development in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may discuss a larger number of aspects of the role of peers and/or play in development in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.
To what extent does deprivation and/or trauma in childhood affect later development?
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "to what extent" requires candidates to consider the merits or otherwise of the potential effects of deprivation or trauma in childhood on later development.
Candidates may address both deprivation and trauma experiences or candidates may choose to discuss only deprivation or only trauma experiences. In either case, these experiences do not have to be specifically identified as deprivation or trauma situations.
Candidates may address biological, cognitive and/or social aspects of later development. All approaches are equally acceptable.
Relevant theories may include, but are not limited to:
- Cyrulnik's (2005) theory of resilience
- Bowlby's (1951) maternal deprivation hypothesis
- Spitz's (1946) psychodynamic theory
- Tedeschi and Calhoun's (2004) theory on positive aspects of trauma experiences.
It would also be appropriate to refer to studies related to short-term or long-term effects of deprivation and/or trauma, such as:
- Robertson and Bowlby's (1952) studies showing that maternal deprivation may cause physical, mental and emotional growth retardation
- Rutter et al.'s (2001) studies demonstrating that the consequences of deprivation vary with the severity and duration of the depriving experience, the age of the child at which the deprivation occurs and the adequacy of substitute measures such as the quality of the caretaker
- Cockett and Tripp's (1994) study on long-term attachment deprivation effects.
Candidates may refer to animal studies as part of their response, and credit should be awarded for this as long as they relate the findings to human development.
Deprivation and/or trauma may have detrimental effects, may not have long-lasting effects or may even lead to growth (for example, resilience) in later development. In order to gain high marks, responses should include some consideration of non-detrimental effects.