OCR A LEVEL 2022 PSYCHOLOGY MARK SCHEME -H567-01 PAPER 1-H567/01: Research methods

Document Content and Description Below

21 Write an alternative, two-tailed hypothesis for this study Question Answer Marks Guidance 21 For example … There will be a significant difference in how friendly (on a scale of 1- 10) a perso... n is thought to be depending on the length of time their hand is shaken (‘long’ (5 secs) compared to ‘short’ (2 secs)) Max 3 Can be written in future or present tense. Use of the word ‘significant’ is not necessary for full marks. For full marks both the variables must be operationalised. How friendliness is measured (DV) – can be ordinal, nominal or interval data. Rating scale does not need labelling. ‘Rating scale’ on its own not operationalised. Length of each handshake (IV) needs to be specified e.g., 6 seconds Doesn’t matter if length of handshake is not suitable e.g., 1 minute 0 marks for null, one-tailed/directional, correlational hypothesis. 0 marks if gives both directional and nondirectional - When a candidate provides contradictory responses, then no mark should be awarded, even if one of the answers is correct. 3 marks are awarded for correctly citing an appropriate two-tailed alternative hypothesis for this study with increasing level of detail in terms of reference to the variables studied 1 mark for the stem which should predict a different including both the IV and DV, plus 2 further marks for operationalising each variable. Correctly cited two-tailed alternative hypothesis with both variables operationalised 3 Correctly cited two-tailed alternative hypothesis with reference to both variables, but only one operationalised 2 Correctly cited two-tailed alternative hypothesis with reference to both variables, but neither operationalised. 1 The candidate has not provided any creditworthy information 0 H567/01 Mark Scheme June 2022 9 The mark scheme is a little different when it comes to this question. What you are being driven by is the left-hand column of the grid (‘details of the required features (RFs)’. That is always your starting point and ‘locator’ for the appropriate mark band before considering the other two columns (‘justification of decisions made’ and ‘reference to own practical work’). H567/01 Mark Scheme June 2022 10 Question 22 Max mark = 15 Context = friendliness, hand-shaking etc. Level of response Details of required features (RFs) included Justification of decisions made Reference to own practical work Good 12-15 marks -All 4 required features are good in context -Accurate and detailed knowledge and understanding of each feature in context -Good evidence of application of required features in context -Appropriate justification of all decisions with at least one that is good and some is contextualised -Well developed line of reasoning that is clear and logically structured -Explicit reference to own practical work and clear links between own work and the planned research, e.g., specific mention of question/scales used or extraneous variables controlled. e.g., specific mention of aim or procedural features -For top band (good) 12 marks if just one RF explicitly linked, 13 marks if two, 14 marks if three and 15 if all four are linked explicitly. -If there is no explicit clear link between own practical work and any of the 4 required features caps the mark at 11 maximum. Additional Guidance RF 3- Needs to lead to data being quantitative to be addressed and measures friendliness (or something similar e.g., warmth). Context needs to be linked to the DV. Mislabeling 1-10 scale as likert scale will move the response down one level (e.g., fits the good level but has mislabeled 1-10 as likert so achieves reasonable) Overall, Mark 12-15 marks - 4 RFs in context and they must all be good 8-11 marks - 3 RFs in context and these three must be at least reasonable 4-7 marks - 2 RFs in context and these two must be at least limited OR 3-4 RFs which are at least limited (whether in context or not) OR 1 RF addressed in detail, justified in context and explicit links made to own practical work award 4 marks. 1-3 marks - at least 1 RF referred to (whether in context or not) Maximum 11 marks (reasonable) if clearly done as a field experiment. Reasonable 8-11 marks -At least 3 required features are reasonable in context -Reasonably accurate and detailed knowledge and understanding of each feature -Some appropriate justification of decision with at least one that is reasonable of related to required features (if no justification in context award 8 marks) -There was a line of reasoning evident with some structure Limited 4-7 marks -At least two of the required features are limited in context -Limited application of required features -Attempt to justify decision(s) with at least one that is limited but weak -Evidence of some structure, but weak OR three or all four required features referred to but in a limited way (in context or not) If 1 RF addressed in detail and justified in context with explicit links made to own practical work award 4 marks Basic 1-3 marks -At least one of the required features addressed -Weak application of required features -None, or if present very weak OR more than one of the required features referred to but in a very brief and/or basic way H567/01 Mark Scheme June 2022 11 RF Details of RF 1 Sampling technique • Good – Identified the sampling method and clearly explained how this has been carried out in their study. Details of how is the sampling method is enacted/procedural details. • Reasonable – Identified the sampling method, possibly defined and attempted to explain how this has been carried out in their study, • Limited – sampling method identified and defined, • Basic – Just identifying the sampling technique or confuses sampling methods 2 Experimental design • Good – Design identified and conditions labelled with how the participants would be assigned to each condition. If RMD which condition is first/is it counter-balanced. • Reasonable – Design identified and conditions labelled and brief or somewhat muddled outline of how the participants would be assigned to each condition. • Limited – Design identified and conditions labelled. • Basic – Design identified or described or confuses experimental designs (e.g., identifies RMD and outlines IMD). 3 Operationalising DV • Good – if a rating scale is suggested - clear numerical scale with ends of rating scale labelled. Semantic differential scales can be creditworthy and are considered reasonable (good if the numerical scale is given or an explanation of how the data will be made ordinal). • Reasonable – rating scale given but lacks clarity (e.g., Ends of rating scale not labelled). Indicates a number of questions will be asked but does not explain how the final score for each participant will be calculated. • Limited – way DV is operationalised could be considered to be quantitative but not explicit. • Basic – vague indication of how DV would be measured e.g., Likert scale. 4 Control of one Extraneous variable • Good – Clear and somewhat detailed of how EV can be controlled, • Reasonable – outline of how EV can be controlled, • Limited explanation of the EV is unclear, • Basic – identifies how EV can be controlled or is muddled. H567/01 Mark Scheme June 2022 12 23 (a) Suggest one closed question you could use to obtain some additional information for this study. Question Answer Marks Guidance 23 (a) Accept any appropriate closed question (e.g., what influences your impression of how friendly a person is (a) personality, (b) appearance or (c) sense of humour) Max 3 Context - friendliness, hand-shaking, short/long, greet, personality (e.g., extrovert) Allow any appropriate context. Fixed choice responses must be provided for full marks or stated within the question. Must label rating scales e.g., 1-10 where 10 is very friendly. For 2 marks – Answer categories implied and in context. Attempt – answer choices not provided where a closed answer could be provided (e.g., Did you enjoy having your hand shaken? Do you think appearance affects whether you think someone is friendly? How much did you enjoy having your hand shaken?) zero marks if the only way to answer the question is qualitative (e.g., Describe how friendly the person is.) Clear suggestion of an appropriate closed question in context 3 Suggestion of an appropriate closed question in context where the fixed responses lack clarity Appropriate closed question but not in context 2 Attempt to suggest appropriate closed question (whether in context or not) 1 The candidate has not provided any creditworthy information 0 H567/01 Mark Scheme June 2022 13 23 (b) Outline one strength of the use of closed questions in this study 23 (b) Likely answers: easy to analyse; easy to compare across participants etc. Max 3 Context = friendliness, hand-shaking etc. Quick - open Qs take longer to gather data and/or data is quicker to analyse. The strength must be specific to closed questions and not self-reports generally. Clear outline of strength in context 3 Clear outline of strength but not in context Attempted outline of strength in context 2 Brief and/or weak attempt at an outline (whether in context or not) 1 The candidate has not provided any creditworthy information 0 24 Outline one weakness of conducting this study as a laboratory experiment. 24 Likely answers: The artificiality of the setting may produce unnatural behaviour that does not reflect real life, i.e., low ecological validity. This means it would not be possible to generalise the findings to a real-life setting. Demand characteristics or experimenter effects may bias the results and become confounding variables Max 3 Context = friendliness, hand-shaking etc. Clear outline of weakness in context 3 Clear outline but not in context Attempted outline in context 2 Brief and/or weak attempt (whether in context or not) 1 The candidate has not provided any creditworthy informatio [Show More]

Last updated: 1 year ago

Preview 1 out of 30 pages