Mark Scheme

Section A — Memory

1. (a) Sensory register/store → short-term memory → long-term memory (1 each, must be in order). [3] (b) Capacity of STM ≈ 7 ± 2 items (accept "5–9 items"); duration ≈ 18–30 seconds (1 each). [2] (c) Information is transferred from STM to LTM through rehearsal (repetition); the more information is rehearsed, the more likely it is to be transferred/stored in LTM. [2] (d) Any valid evidence, described (up to 3): reconstructive memory studies (e.g. people recall a story changed to fit their own schemas); eyewitness testimony affected by leading questions/misleading information (people report details that were not there); false memories can be created. Mark for a clear description showing memory was altered, not simply recorded. [3]

2. (a) The serial position effect (accept primacy/recency effect). [1] (b) (up to 3) Items at the start of the list have been rehearsed more; rehearsal transfers them to long-term memory; so they can still be recalled later, producing the primacy effect. [3]

3. Two factors, each explained (3 marks each): interference — similar memories compete and disrupt recall; context/cues — recall is better when the environment or state matches that at learning (cue-dependent); leading/misleading information — alters what is recalled; anxiety/emotion — can reduce accuracy. 1 for naming + 2 for explanation each. [6]

4. (up to 4) Strengths: supported by evidence (e.g. serial position effect; cases of brain damage affecting one store); clear and testable. Weaknesses: too simple — treats STM and LTM as single stores when there are different types; over-emphasises rehearsal (some things are remembered without it). 1 mark per developed evaluative point, balanced answer required for full marks. [4]

Section B — Perception

5. (a) Sensation = the raw information detected by the sense organs (e.g. light hitting the eye); perception = the way the brain interprets and makes sense of that information. [2] (b) Two monocular cues explained (2 each): relative size — objects that appear smaller are judged to be further away; superimposition/overlap — an object partly hidden by another is seen as further away; height in plane — objects higher up the visual field seem further away; linear perspective — parallel lines appear to converge with distance; texture gradient — detail becomes finer with distance. [4]

6. (a) (up to 3) Gibson's theory is direct — perception comes straight from the rich information in the environment, no need for the brain to add anything ("bottom-up"); Gregory's theory is constructivist — the brain uses past experience and expectations to make inferences about incomplete information ("top-down"). Difference clearly drawn. [3] (b) Any valid study/example described (up to 3): a study where prior information or expectation changed what participants perceived (e.g. an ambiguous figure interpreted differently depending on what people expected to see); perceptual set influenced by context. Mark for a clear description linking expectation to the perception. [3]

7. (a) Any named illusion with description (2): e.g. the Müller-Lyer illusion — two lines of equal length appear different lengths because of the arrowheads; the Ponzo illusion; the Rubin vase (ambiguous figure). [2] (b) (up to 3) One reason explained: the brain applies size constancy/depth cues inappropriately (e.g. interprets 2D cues as if 3D); ambiguous figures allow more than one interpretation; misapplied expectations. Clear explanation required. [3]

8. Two factors other than expectation, each developed (up to 7): culture — people from different cultures perceive some illusions differently due to their environment; motivation/emotion — needs and desires can affect what we notice or perceive; context — surrounding information changes interpretation. Award up to 4 for one well-developed factor and 3 for the second (or 3+4). [7]

Section C — Development

9. (a) A schema = a mental framework/package of ideas and information about an object or situation, built from experience. [1] (b) (up to 4) Assimilation = fitting new information into an existing schema without changing it; accommodation = changing an existing schema (or creating a new one) when new information does not fit. 2 marks per term (definition + sense of the difference). [4]

10. (a) Sensorimotor → pre-operational → concrete operational → formal operational (1 each, correct order). [4] (b) (up to 3) The child lacks conservation — the understanding that quantity stays the same despite a change in appearance; the child is misled by the taller glass and thinks there is more; this is typical of the pre-operational stage. [3]

11. (a) Any valid criticism explained (up to 3): Piaget may have underestimated children's abilities (later studies showed children could conserve/be less egocentric with clearer tasks); development may be more continuous than fixed stages; sample/method limitations. Named + explained. [3] (b) (up to 3) One application explained: readiness — teaching matched to the child's stage of development; active/discovery learning — children learn by doing and exploring, so lessons use hands-on activities; arranging the curriculum in stages. [3]

12. (a) (up to 4) Fixed mindset = believing intelligence/ability is fixed and cannot change, so people avoid challenges and give up easily; growth mindset = believing ability can be developed through effort, so people embrace challenges and persist. 2 per mindset. [4] (b) (6 marks) Discussion of how understanding development and mindset helps learners: a growth mindset encourages effort, persistence and learning from mistakes, improving achievement; praising effort rather than ability fosters this; matching tasks to developmental stage supports success; some evaluation/limitations for full marks. Levels: 5–6 detailed and balanced with application; 3–4 sound points, some development; 1–2 basic. [6]

Section D — Research methods

13. (a) A testable statement predicting the effect, e.g. "Students who learn a word list in silence will recall more words than students who learn it with music playing." (Accept a clear directional or non-directional hypothesis stating a difference.) 2 marks for a clear, testable statement naming both conditions. [2] (b) IV = whether music is playing or not (music vs silence); DV = the number of words recalled (1 each). [2] (c) (up to 3) A suitable control (e.g. the same word list, the same time to learn, the same test, the same room/noise level) + why: so that it is a fair test and any difference in recall can be attributed to the IV (music) rather than another variable. [3] (d) (up to 2) Opportunity sample disadvantage: it may be unrepresentative/biased (only people available are chosen), so results cannot be generalised to the wider population. [2]

14. (a) Mean = (8 + 6 + 7 + 9 + 5 + 7) ÷ 6 = 42 ÷ 6 = 7 (M1 for total ÷ 6, A1). [2] (b) The mean uses all the data/scores, so it is more representative/sensitive than the mode. [1] (c) (up to 2) The score of 2 is much lower than the others (an outlier/anomaly); the mean is affected/pulled down by extreme values, whereas the median is resistant to them, so the median better represents the typical score here. [2]

15. (a) Informed consent = participants agree to take part having been told what the study involves (its aims/what they will do) so they can make an informed decision. [2] (b) (up to 4) One other ethical issue + how to deal with it: right to withdraw — tell participants they can leave at any time; protection from harm — ensure the task causes no distress; confidentiality — keep data anonymous; deception — avoid it or debrief afterwards. 2 for the issue, 2 for how it is addressed. [4]

16. (up to 4) Strength of lab experiment: high control of variables → cause and effect can be established; replicable. Weakness: artificial/lacks ecological validity → behaviour may not reflect real life; possible demand characteristics. 1 mark point + 1 development each. [4]

Sample Answers with Examiner Commentary

Question 3 — Sample Answers

Grade A response. "One factor that affects the accuracy of memory is interference. This happens when similar memories compete with each other, so one disrupts the recall of another. For example, if someone learns French and then Spanish, the two sets of vocabulary can become confused, making recall less accurate. A second factor is context. Memory is more accurate when the context at recall matches the context at learning, because the surroundings act as cues. For example, someone who revises in the room where they will sit the exam may recall more, as the environment provides retrieval cues that were present when the information was learned."

Mark: 6/6. Examiner commentary: A model six-mark answer. The command word is "explain", so naming the factors is not enough — and this candidate does the harder part well, giving the mechanism for each (interference = competing similar memories; context = matching cues aiding retrieval) and supporting each with a clear, relevant example. The two factors are genuinely distinct, and each is developed to the depth the three marks require. Structuring the answer as two clearly separated factors makes it easy for the examiner to award full credit.

Grade C response. "Memory can be affected by interference, which is when you get memories mixed up. It can also be affected by how you are feeling, like if you are stressed you might not remember as well."

Mark: 3/6. Examiner commentary: Both factors named are valid, and the candidate earns three marks — roughly one for naming and lightly touching each, plus a little development on stress. But neither is explained in enough depth. For interference, "get memories mixed up" restates the term without explaining that it is similar memories competing; for anxiety, there is no explanation of why stress reduces accuracy. Adding a sentence of mechanism and an example to each factor would lift this to full marks — the marks are in the explanation, not the naming.

Question 12(b) — Sample Answers

Grade A response. "Understanding development and mindset can help learners succeed in several ways. A learner with a growth mindset believes their ability can improve with effort, so they take on challenges, keep trying after setbacks and see mistakes as part of learning. This tends to improve achievement, because they put in more effort and do not give up. Teachers can encourage a growth mindset by praising effort and strategy rather than just being 'clever', which research suggests helps students persevere. Understanding Piaget's idea of readiness also helps: if tasks are matched to the learner's stage of development, they are more likely to understand and succeed. However, mindset is not the whole picture — factors such as teaching quality and prior knowledge also matter, so a growth mindset helps but does not guarantee success on its own."

Mark: 6/6. Examiner commentary: This reaches the top level because it does three things well: it explains the mechanism (why a growth mindset raises achievement — more effort, persistence, learning from mistakes), it applies the idea practically (praising effort; matching tasks to developmental stage), and it evaluates (recognising that mindset alone is not sufficient). The balance of description, application and a critical point is exactly what a six-mark "discuss" question rewards.

Grade C response. "A growth mindset helps learners succeed because they believe they can get better if they try hard. This means they work harder and do better than someone with a fixed mindset who gives up."

Mark: 3/6. Examiner commentary: The core idea is correct and clearly expressed, and it earns a solid three marks — the candidate understands the difference a growth mindset makes and links it to effort and outcome. To move higher, the answer needs more: a practical example of how a growth mindset can be encouraged (such as praising effort), some link to development more broadly (e.g. matching tasks to stage), and a note of evaluation or limitation. A "discuss" question at this tariff expects breadth and a balanced view, not a single point repeated.

Question 16 (research methods) — Sample Answers

Grade A response. "One strength of a laboratory experiment is the high level of control over variables. Because the experimenter controls the conditions and holds other variables constant, any change in the dependent variable can be confidently attributed to the independent variable, so cause and effect can be established. The controlled conditions also mean the study can be replicated to check the results are reliable. One weakness is that laboratory experiments can lack ecological validity. The setting is artificial and the task may not reflect how people behave in everyday life, so the findings may not generalise to real situations. Participants may also respond to demand characteristics, changing their behaviour because they know they are being studied."

Mark: 4/4. Examiner commentary: Full marks. The command word requires one strength and one weakness, and this answer develops each rather than just naming it. The strength is explained through the mechanism — control allows cause and effect to be established — and extended to replication. The weakness pairs the technical term "ecological validity" with a plain-English explanation of why artificial settings limit generalisation, and adds demand characteristics. Naming "control" and "artificial" alone would have earned only half the marks; the explanation of why each matters is what secures the other two.

Grade C response. "A strength of a lab experiment is that it is controlled so it is a fair test. A weakness is that it is not like real life so the results might not be accurate."

Mark: 2/4. Examiner commentary: Both a strength and a weakness are identified, earning two marks, and "controlled" and "not like real life" are the right ideas. But each is left underdeveloped. For the strength, the answer needs to say that control lets us establish cause and effect; "fair test" gestures at this without stating it. For the weakness, "might not be accurate" is vague — the precise point is that an artificial setting lacks ecological validity, so the behaviour may not generalise to real life. Turning each phrase into a full explanation would lift this to full marks.