Page | 1

Media Exam questions with Marking Schemes and Examiner’s comments

Contents January 10 ............................................................................................................................................. 2

June 10 .................................................................................................................................................. 6

January 11 ........................................................................................................................................... 11

June 11 ................................................................................................................................................ 16

January 12 ........................................................................................................................................... 22

June 12 ................................................................................................................................................ 27

Page | 2

January 10

a. ‘Content analysis has shown that many video games have violent themes. Many of thesegames are aimed at adolescents. There is a growing concern that such games encourageviolent behaviour in the young people who play them.’ (i) Explain some of the difficulties of conducting research into the effects of playingvideo games. (5 marks) (ii) Discuss what psychological research has told us about some of the effects of videogames on young people. (5 marks + 5 marks) b. Discuss how social psychology explains the attraction of celebrity. (4 marks + 6 marks) AO2/3 = 5 marks Explanation of some of the methodological/ethical difficulties associated with this kind of research. This might include

problems of measuring subsequent behaviour

sampling

possible confounding variables, eg previous experience of playing games, other social, cultural and personality factors

ethical considerations. Candidates who simply list difficulties cannot gain marks above basic. AO2/3 Mark Bands (5 marks) 5 marks Effective Explanation demonstrates sound analysis and understanding. The answer is well focused and shows coherent elaboration. Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently. Consistently effective use of psychological terminology. Appropriate use of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 4-3 marks Reasonable Explanation demonstrates reasonable analysis and understanding. The answer is generally focused and shows reasonable elaboration. Most ideas appropriately structured and expressed clearly. Appropriate use of psychological terminology. Minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling only occasionally compromise meaning. 2 marks Basic Explanation demonstrates basic, superficial understanding. The answer is sometimes focused and shows some evidence of elaboration. Expression of ideas lacks clarity. Limited use of psychological terminology. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are intrusive. 1 mark Rudimentary Explanation is rudimentary demonstrating little understanding. The answer is weak, muddled and may be mainly irrelevant. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in confusion and ambiguity. The answer lacks structure, often merely a series of unconnected assertions. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are frequent and intrusive. 0 marks No creditworthy material is presented.

Page | 3

(ii) Discuss what psychological research has told us about some of the effects of video games on young people. (5 marks + 5 marks) AO1 = 5 marks Description of relevant research findings/the effects of video games on young people. These might include:

physiological arousal

decreasing/increasing helping behaviours

increasing aggressive behaviours, feelings and cognitions

desensitisation to violence

social/interpersonal effects. Candidates may achieve this through relevant research findings. AO1 Mark bands (5 marks) 5 – 4 marks Outline is reasonably thorough, accurate and coherent. 3 – 2 marks Outline is limited, generally accurate and reasonably coherent. 1 mark Outline is weak and muddled or very limited. 0 marks No creditworthy material. AO2/3 = 5 marks Analysis and commentary on research into the effects of video/computer games on young people. Candidates may focus on the distinction between short and long-term effects. Methodological evaluation could include discussion of correlational studies, problems of manipulating the IV and controlling extraneous variables. Quality of research.Implications for policy and practice. Any appropriate material is creditworthy. Possible issues/debates/approaches could include gender and culture issues; ethical/methodological issues. AO2 Mark Bands (5 marks) 5 marks Effective Commentary demonstrates sound analysis and understanding and interpretation. The answer is well focused and shows coherent elaboration. Issues/debates/approaches are used effectively. Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently. Consistently effective use of psychological terminology. Appropriate use of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 4-3 marks Reasonable Commentary demonstrates reasonable analysis and understanding and interpretation. The answer is generally focused and shows reasonable elaboration. Issues/debates/approaches are used in a reasonably effective manner. Most ideas appropriately structured and expressed clearly. Appropriate use of psychological terminology. Minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling only occasionally compromisemeaning. 2 marks Basic Commentary demonstrates basic, superficial understanding. The answer is sometimes focused and shows some evidence of elaboration. Superficial reference may be made to issues/debates/approaches. Expression of ideas lacks clarity. Limited use of psychological terminology. Errors of grammar,punctuation and spelling are intrusive. 1 mark Rudimentary

Page | 4

Commentary is rudimentary demonstrating little understanding. The answer is weak, muddled and may be mainly irrelevant. If reference is made to issues/debates/approaches, it is muddled and inaccurate. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in confusion and ambiguity. The answer lacks structure, often merely a series of unconnected assertions. Errors of grammar, punctuation andspelling are frequent and intrusive. 0 marks No creditworthy material is presented. (b) Discuss how social psychology explains the attraction of celebrity. (4 marks + 6 marks) AO1 = 4 marks Description of some psychological factors/explanations of the attraction of celebrity. These might include:

parasocial interaction

absorption-addiction

religiosity

social comparison

prestige

attachment theory. AO1 Mark Bands (4 marks) 4 marks Outline is reasonably thorough, accurate and coherent. 3 – 2 marks Outline is limited, generally accurate and reasonably coherent. 1 mark Outline is weak and muddled or very limited. 0 marks No creditworthy material. AO2/3 =6 marks Evaluation of/commentary on psychological explanations of celebrity. These might include:

an analysis/evaluation of research studies which underpin the various explanations

discussion of some of the problems associated with measuring attraction, eg use of Likert Scales

discussion of the different levels of parasocial relationship which might require different explanations.

Contrast and comparison of other explanations eg evolutionary. AO2/3 Mark bands (6 marks) 6 marks Effective Evaluation/commentary demonstrates sound analysis and understanding and interpretation. Application of knowledge is effective and shows coherent elaboration. Issues/debates/approaches are used effectively. Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently. Consistently effective use of psychological terminology. Appropriate use of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 5-4 marks Reasonable Evaluation/commentary demonstrates reasonable analysis and understanding and interpretation. Application of knowledge is reasonably effective and shows some elaboration. Issues/debates/approaches are used in a reasonably effective manner. Most ideas appropriately structured and expressed clearly. Appropriate use of psychological terminology. Minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling only occasionally compromise meaning. 3-2 marks Basic

Page | 5

Evaluation/commentary demonstrates basic, superficial understanding. Application of knowledge is basic. Superficial reference may be made to issues/debates/approaches. Expression of ideas lacks clarity. Limited use of psychological terminology. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are intrusive. 1 mark Rudimentary Evaluation/commentary is rudimentary demonstrating little understanding. Application of knowledge is weak, muddled and may be mainly irrelevant. If reference is made to issues/debates/approaches, it is muddled and inaccurate. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in confusion and ambiguity. The answer lacks structure, often merely a series of unconnected assertions. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are frequent and intrusive. 0 marks No creditworthy material is presented.

Examiner’s comments (a)(i) Most candidates were able to gain some marks here and they were aware of some of the ethical and practical difficulties of conducting such research. However, some candidates wrote generally about difficulties of research without linking it to this topic area. It is not a requirement to engage with the quote, but some candidates might have found it helpful to point them in the right direction. Some candidates completely misunderstood this question and wrote about research evidence. (a)(ii) Most candidates focused on anti-social effects but there were some good answers which acknowledged pro-social effects as well. The main problem for candidates here was selecting the right part of the study to use in their answer. Too many candidates simply described procedural details in great detail, without making it relevant to the question, ie without focusing on the findings and what they tell us. The commentary was often quite weak and very generic. Candidates need to pay attention to the division of marks, this was a 5 + 5 and their answers often didn‟t reflect this. Some candidates offered no evaluation/commentary at all so forfeited all the 5 AO2/3 marks. Some answers were not well focused on video games and drifted into descriptions of research into TV violence. (b) There were some really good answers showing excellent AO1 knowledge - often much more detail than would be necessary for 4 marks. However, some included descriptions of evolutionary explanations which were not creditworthy. More astute candidates were able to use evolutionary explanations as evaluation/commentary. A common pitfall here was to write anecdotal responses. Unfortunately, in many cases there was little or no AO2/3 material

Page | 6

June 10

01- ‘It has been suggested that people who watch violent media images may be encouraged to imitate the violence. Television and film producers frequently reject this view.’

Discuss what psychological research has told us about some of the media influences on anti-social behaviour. (5 marks + 6 marks)

02- A group of students has been asked to produce a short film to encourage more school leavers to apply for science degree courses at university instead of arts-based courses. Using your knowledge of psychological research into persuasion and attitude change, identify some of the factors which the film-makers might take into account. (4 marks) 03- Explain how factors such as those you identified in your answer to 02 might help to persuade young people to apply for particular courses. (10 marks)

Question 01 AO1 = 5 marks Introductory material on what is meant by media influence and anti-social behaviour can gain some AO1 credit but the emphasis here is on describing findings of psychological research into media influences on anti-social behaviour. The question is focused on anti-social behaviour so material on pro-social behaviour does not attract AO1 credit. However, if material on pro-social behaviour is used as sustained commentary/evaluation, it can attract AO2 credit. AO2 = 6 marks Candidates are required to evaluate psychological research into media influences on anti-social behaviour. Commentary on research is likely to focus on limitations of:

methodological issues (particularly associated with limitations of correlational research and operationalisation and controlling variables).

Ethical issues.

Comparison of findings from different research methods/settings.

How research relates to theory/models.

Implications of the research for real world application. AO1 marks 5 – 4 marks Outline is accurate and coherent 3 – 2 marks Outline is limited, generally accurate and reasonably coherent 1 mark Outline is weak and muddled or very limited 0 marks No creditworthy material AO2/3 Mark bands – 6 marks 6 marks Effective Commentary demonstrates sound analysis and understanding. Application of knowledge is effective and shows coherent elaboration.

Page | 7

Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently. Consistently effective use of psychological terminology. Appropriate use of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 5-4 marks Reasonable Commentary demonstrates reasonable analysis and understanding. Application of knowledge is reasonably effective and shows some elaboration. Most ideas appropriately structured and expressed clearly. Appropriate use of psychological terminology. Minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling only occasionally compromise meaning. 3-2 marks Basic Commentary demonstrates basic, superficial understanding. Application of knowledge is basic. Expression of ideas lacks clarity. Limited use of psychological terminology. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are intrusive. 1 mark Rudimentary Commentary is rudimentary demonstrating very limited understanding. Application of knowledge is weak, muddled and may be mainly irrelevant. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in confusion and ambiguity. The answer lacks structure, often merely a series of unconnected assertions. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are frequent and intrusive. 0 marks No creditworthy material is presented. Question 02 AO1 = 4 marks Candidates are required to identify some of the factors that might be important in trying to persuade young people to apply for particular courses. They might consider the Hovland-Yale model of persuasion and outline factors such as:

the source of the message

the content of the message

the medium in which it is transmitted

the target audience They might also identify factors such as age, gender and status or describe the sequential process of attitude change which involves attention, comprehension, reactance and acceptance Any appropriate and relevant factors are creditworthy. Examiners should bear in mind that there are only 4 marks available for the AO1 material so candidates could gain full marks for 2 or 3 factors with elaboration or for naming 4 factors (as above). Question 03 AO2/AO3 = 10 marks Candidates are required to explain how factors such as those listed above might help to persuade young people to apply for particular courses. To attract full marks, they need to use their knowledge of psychological research into persuasion/attitude change in an applied context and relate their answers to the scenario in the question. If candidates do not apply their knowledge to the stem they can only achieve a maximum of 5 marks. AO2/3 mark bands 10 marks

Page | 8

10-9 marks Effective Explanation demonstrates sound analysis and understanding. The answer is well focused and shows coherent elaboration and/or a clear line of argument. Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently. Consistently effective use of psychological terminology. Appropriate use of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 8-6 marks Reasonable Explanation demonstrates reasonable analysis and understanding. The answer is generally focused and shows reasonable elaboration and/or a line of argument is evident. Most ideas appropriately structured and expressed clearly. Appropriate use of psychological terminology. Minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling only occasionally compromise meaning. 5-3 marks Basic Explanation demonstrates basic, superficial understanding. The answer is sometimes focused and shows some evidence of elaboration. Expression of ideas lacks clarity. Limited use of psychological terminology. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are intrusive. 2-1 marks Rudimentary Explanation is rudimentary demonstrating very limited understanding. The answer is weak, muddled and incomplete. Material is not used effectively and may be mainly irrelevant. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in confusion and ambiguity. The answer lacks structure, often merely a series of unconnected assertions. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are frequent and intrusive. 0 marks No creditworthy material is presented

Examiner’s comments Candidates seemed to find getting the balance here difficult; some didn‟t write enough for question 07 and then wrote far too much for question 02. Question 01 Most candidates knew some relevant research, but there was often too much time spent describing procedure, especially of Bandura‟s bobo dolls, instead of focusing on what psychologists have found. Bandura‟s research was not always made explicitly relevant and often candidates seemed to take it as given that this research relates to the media. Bandura‟soriginal study had the model in the same room and so candidates needed to describe thetelevised model study in order to make this relevant and to relate observational learning to themedia. Stronger candidates were also able to offer research findings into desensitisation and cognitive priming and to offer effective evaluation. Unfortunately, a significant number of candidates included hardly any AO2/3 material at all. In some cases answers were very long, but this was often at the expense of coherence. Question 02 Some candidates did not seem to realise that this question required identification of factors. Although many provided relevant information and gained full marks, a minority wrote far too

Page | 9

much and included material which would have received more credit in the next question. However, there were some very good answers which used factors from the Hovland-Yale model and/or the elaboration likelihood model to answer the question. Question 03 Some candidates were able to provide a well-informed answer in which they applied their knowledge of research into persuasion and attitude change to the novel situation. Unfortunately, however, many candidates did not perform well on this question. There were two main reasons why candidates performed less well on this question. Some included no real reference to psychology at all and produced an entirely common sense answer. Others did show knowledge and understanding of relevant psychological research, but showed no application of this knowledge to the stem. There were some bizarre suggestions with no attempt to make them relevant to the stem such as: „in order to change the students‟ attitude then the course needs to be associated with something they like such as puppies‟ or 'they should use a celebrity like Tiger Woods'.

Page | 10

Page | 11

January 11

0 8 Outline and evaluate one psychological explanation of media influence on pro-social behaviour. (4 marks + 4 marks) 0 9 In a study, researchers investigated celebrity worship in young people. They sent two questionnaires to several hundred university students. One questionnaire measured attitudes to celebrity and the other questionnaire measured self-esteem. The researchers analysed the completed questionnaires and found a significant correlation between low self-esteem and high levels of celebrity worship. Explain one methodological and one ethical issue that might have arisen in this study. (2 marks + 2 marks) 1 0 Discuss one or more explanations for the effectiveness of television in persuasion. (5 marks + 8 marks) Question 08 AO1 = 4 marks for outline of one explanation Any appropriate explanation can be credited. The most likely explanation is social modelling (SLT). This suggests that people use others as models to regulate their own behaviour and to learn new things. People (particularly children) imitate models that they see portrayed on television or in other forms of media. Imitation is more likely if the observer identifies with the model in some way, if the context in which the behaviour is observed is realistic and if the model is rewarded. Programmes such as Sesame Street include many situations and characters designed to provide pro-social models for children. Some text books refer to The General Learning Model (GLM) (Buckley and Anderson, 2006) so it is likely that some candidates will use this in their answer. The question asks for an explanation not a theory or approach so answers which focus onfactors such as empathy, parental support etc are perfectly acceptable provided theexplanation is in the context of media influence. This question refers to pro-social behaviour and requires an outline of an explanation ratherthan supporting studies. Straight descriptions of Bandura's Bobo doll study are, therefore,unlikely to attract credit. AO1 Mark bands 4 marks Outline is reasonably thorough, accurate and coherent 3 - 2 marks Outline is limited, generally accurate and reasonably coherent 1 mark Outline is weak and muddled or very limited 0 marks No creditworthy material AO2/AO3 = 4 marks for evaluation of the explanation The evaluation will obviously depend on the particular explanation chosen. Evaluation can be specific eg a criticism of SLT is that research has shown that exposure to filmed models has less effect than to real-life models and also that the effect is often not generalised to new settings. It is equally acceptable for the evaluation to be rather more general eg in terms of the practical and ethical problems of carrying out research to support the explanation. There is no requirement for candidates to consider both strengths and limitations of the explanation.

Page | 12

AO2/AO3 Mark bands 4 marks Effective Evaluation demonstrates sound analysis and understanding. The answer is well focused and shows coherent elaboration. Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently. Consistently effective use of psychological terminology.Appropriate use of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 3 marks Reasonable Evaluation demonstrates reasonable analysis and understanding. The answer is generally focused and shows reasonable elaboration. Most ideas appropriately structured and expressed clearly. Appropriate use of psychological terminology. Minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling only occasionally compromise meaning. 2 marks Basic Evaluation demonstrates basic, superficial understanding. The answer is sometimes focused and shows some evidence of elaboration. Expression of ideas lacks clarity. Limited use of psychological terminology. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are intrusive. 1 mark Rudimentary Evaluation is rudimentary demonstrating very limited understanding. The answer is weak, muddled and may be mainly irrelevant. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in confusion and ambiguity. The answer lacks structure, often merely a series of unconnected assertions. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are frequent and intrusive. 0 marks No creditworthy material is presented. Question 09 AO2/AO3 = 4 marks 2 marks for explanation of appropriate methodological issue 2 marks for explanation of appropriate ethical issue Methodological issues are most likely to arise from the use of questionnaires eg their reliability/ validity, poor response rate associated with sending back questionnaires leading to biased sample, demand characteristics etc. Reference to problems with correlational research should be credited. Ethical issues are most likely to surround confidentiality and consent. Protection from harm is also a possible issue in that this is a rather sensitive area and the results of the questionnaire could be distressing for the participants and they might need some support/ counselling. Simply naming an issue is only credit worthy if the issue is made relevant to the study. 'Poor response rate' = 0 marks 'The use of questionnaires could cause problems in this study because people often do not send them back' = 1 mark One problem with using questionnaires is that people often do not send them back. This means that the sample is biased.' = 2 marks Question 10 AO1 = 5 marks There are several ways to achieve AO1 marks. One is to take a theoretical approach so that candidates focus on one or more explanations of how television has influenced personal and social attitudes over time. Candidates who do this could offer an explanation such as uses and gratifications theory, cultivation theory, social learning theory. It is also likely that candidates will outline the Hovland-Yale model of persuasion or the elaboration likelihood model. Another legitimate approach is to take one aspect of television and explain how it works to persuade the viewer. In this case candidates are most likely to focus on the influence of television advertising, perhaps including behavioural and/or cognitive mechanisms.

Page | 13

Explanations of persuasion with no reference to television are 'weak and muddled' and can gain no more than one mark. Examiners should bear in mind that this part of the question is only worth 5 marks so should not expect great length or detail. AO1 Mark bands 5 – 4 marks Outline is reasonably thorough, accurate and coherent 3 - 2 marks Outline is limited, generally accurate and reasonably coherent 1 mark Outline is weak and muddled or very limited 0 marks No creditworthy material AO2/AO3 = 8 marks Evaluation will depend on the explanation(s) outlined for AO1 marks. Evaluation can take the form of studies which relate to particular explanation; methodological/ ethical criticisms of studies; contrast/comparison of one explanation with another. Examiners should be prepared to credit any material which specifically evaluates explanations for the effectiveness of television in persuasion. If evaluation is generic and not applied to TV then the answer would not rise above the basic band. AO2/3 Mark bands 8-7 marks Effective Evaluation demonstrates sound analysis and understanding. Application of knowledge is effective and shows coherent elaboration. Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently. Consistently effective use of psychological terminology.Appropriate use of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 6-5 marks Reasonable Evaluation demonstrates reasonable analysis and understanding. Application of knowledge is reasonably effective and shows some elaboration. Most ideas appropriately structured and expressed clearly. Appropriate use of psychological terminology. Minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling only occasionally compromise meaning. 4-3 marks Basic Analysis and evaluation demonstrate basic, superficial understanding. Application of knowledge is basic. Expression of ideas lacks clarity. Limited use of psychological terminology. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are intrusive. 2-1 mark Rudimentary Analysis and evaluation is rudimentary, demonstrating very limited understanding. Application of knowledge is weak, muddled and may be mainly irrelevant. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in confusion and ambiguity. The answer lacks structure, often merely a series of unconnected assertions. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are frequent and intrusive. 0 marks No creditworthy material is presented.

Page | 14

Examiner’s comment Question 08 This part of the question was usually done well. The most common answer was social learning theory, which was generally outlined accurately. A few candidates forgot that they were supposed to be considering pro-social behaviour and veered into anti-social behaviour, especially those who used Bobo dolls as an example. Better answers used directly relevant supporting evidence egSprafkin. Some candidates simply described research studies without identifying an explanation. Question 09 Some candidates could identify a relevant methodological and ethical issue, but did not explain how or why the issues were relevant to the study described. They could say that protection from harm was an ethical issue, but did not link it to this research. Question 10 There were some excellent answers, which were informed, accurate and coherent. However many answers described the Hovland-Yale model, or the central-peripheral route, without any attempt to link it to the effectiveness of television in persuasion. In this question the link to television needed to be made explicit in order to gain many marks.

Page | 15

Page | 16

June 11 0 5 A local school head teacher wants to produce a leaflet for parents about the possibleeffects of video games and computers on young people. Suggest what informationshould be included in the leaflet. Use your knowledge of psychological research in thisarea to justify your advice. (10 marks) 0 6 Outline the Hovland-Yale model of persuasion. (5 marks) 0 7 Outline and evaluate findings of research into intense fandom. (4 marks + 6 marks) Question 05 AO2/AO3 = 10 marks Examiners should be aware that research in this area has produced some contradictory findings. Candidates are required to apply their knowledge of research findings to provide advice on what to include in the leaflet and justification for the advice. While some candidates might refer to both the risks and benefits, this is not necessary for full marks. Likely suggestions include: Benefits Computer gaming can improve certain cognitive skills egVisuo-spatial and attentional skills (eg Sims and Mayer, 2002) Games with a pro-social theme can promote helping behaviour in children who play them (eg Gentile et al, 2009) Some active games allow children to use up more energy compared to sitting watching TV (egMellecker et al, 2008) Internet communication can nurture existing friendships and help children who areself-conscious and shy to communicate (egValkenburg and Peter, 2009) Internet relationships can provide a buffer against stressors in adolescence. Risks There is some evidence (although it is not clear-cut) that playing violent games fostersaggression in the players (eg Anderson et al, 2007) Excessive gaming has been linked toaggressive behaviour (Gruesser et al, 2007). One suggestion is that children who have anexisting aggressive predisposition are more likely to be adversely influenced (eg Gentile et al,2004, Peng et al, 2008). Parents should then be particularly careful in allowing such children toplay violent games It is also thought that for children who play such games frequently, their judgement about whatis real and what is fantasy becomes blurred. There are growing concerns about obesity levels in young people. One contributory factor isthat they spend much of their time sitting down engaged in screen-based activity. While activevideo games use up more energy than watching TV, energy expenditure nowhere near matchesthat of actual physical activity eg walking, playing football etc (eg Graves et al, 2009, Sprostonand Primatesta, 2003) Children can have poorer relationships with family and friends if they spend too much time ontheir computers (eg Padilla-Walker, 2009, Nie and Ebring, 2000) Children can become 'addicted' to the internet or to game-playing (eg Young, 1998) Although internet communication can help to nurture existing friendships, it can lead tounhealthy relationships – social networking websites need to be carefully monitored by parents.(eg Byron, 2008) Maximum of 5 marks if candidates provide appropriate suggestions for the leaflet without anyjustification.

Page | 17

Maximum of 4 marks if candidates simply describe research and do not offer any suggestionsfor the leaflet. However, not all the criteria need be satisfied for an answer to be placed in a particular band. Weak performance in one area may be compensated for by strong performance in others. AO2/AO3 mark bands – Best Fit 10-9 marks Effective Application demonstrates sound analysis and understanding. Application of knowledge is effective and shows coherent elaboration. Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently. Consistently effective use of psychological terminology.Appropriate use of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 8-6 marks Reasonable Application demonstrates reasonable analysis and understanding. Application of knowledge is reasonably effective and shows some elaboration. Most ideas appropriately structured and expressed clearly. Appropriate use of psychological terminology. Minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling only occasionally compromise meaning. 5-3 marks Basic Application demonstrates basic, superficial understanding. Application of knowledge is basic. Expression of ideas lacks clarity. Limited use of psychological terminology. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are intrusive. 2-1 mark Rudimentary Application is rudimentary, demonstrating very limited understanding. Application of knowledge is weak, muddled and may be mainly irrelevant. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in confusion and ambiguity. The answer lacks structure, often merely a series of unconnected assertions. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are frequent and intrusive. 0 marks No creditworthy material is presented. Question 06 AO1 = 5 marks Candidates are required to provide an outline of the Hovland-Yale model of persuasion. This model was developed in the 1950s by Carl Hovland and colleagues at Yale University. They were initially interested in seeing how propaganda could be used to support the American war effort but then turned their attention to a slightly broader study of persuasion. They believed that the key to predicting whether a piece of communication would succeed in

persuading its audience was to study the characteristics of: the person(s) presenting the message ie the source (experts generally more persuasive than non-experts, celebrities/ attractive people more persuasive than unattractive)

the contents of the message (whether the argument is one-or two-sided, repeated exposure, fear)

the receiver of the message ie the audience (self-esteem, age, intelligence) Reference to the 4 stages of the model (attention, comprehension, reactance, acceptance) is creditworthy.

Page | 18

Examiners need to be sensitive to a breadth/depth trade off. Candidates who focus on characteristics or stages can gain full credit. AO1 mark bands 5 – 4 marks Outline is reasonably thorough, accurate and coherent 3 – 2 marks Outline is limited, generally accurate and reasonably coherent 1 mark Outline is weak and muddled or very limited 0 marks No creditworthy material Question 07 AO1 = 4 marks Candidates are required to outline research findings into intense fandom. The specification uses examples of celebrity worship and stalking so it is acceptable for candidates to base their answer on research into these areas. The emphasis is on findings so detailed procedural descriptions are not creditworthy. There is a breadth-depth trade-off here – candidates can offer one or two findings in detail or more findings in less detail. There is quite a wide range of research on this topic and the main textbooks all offer slightly different accounts. Maltby and McCutcheon are key researchers in this area and it is likely that candidates will refer to some of their work. Candidates could refer to the three types of celebrity worship identified in the Celebrity Attitude Scale (CAS): entertainment-social, intense-personal and borderline pathological. Researchers have since used the CAS to test other hypotheses, for example, the possible link between celebrity worship and poor mental health (Maltby et al, 2001), the link between celebrity worship and poor body image (Maltby et al ,2005), or the link between insecure attachments and celebrity-following (McCutcheon et al, 2006). Any relevant findings are creditworthy. Examiners should be mindful that there are only 4 marks available here so candidates cannot cover a wide range of findings AO1 – mark bands 4 marks Outline is reasonably thorough, accurate and coherent. 3 – 2 marks Outline is limited, generally accurate and reasonably coherent. 1 mark Outline is weak and muddled or very limited 0 marks No creditworthy material. AO2/AO3 = 6 marks Candidates are required to evaluate research findings in this area. Evaluation will depend on the particular findings selected for AO1 credit. For example, candidates could consider the reliability/ validity of scales such as the CAS, or other methodological problems involved in measuring stalking eg agreeing on a definition. Candidates could consider the strengths and weaknesses of some of the theories/explanations which underpin some of the findings e.g. the prestige hypothesis, absorption-addiction model, attachment theory of stalking, rational goal pursuit theory of stalking etc. Possible issues/debates/approaches could include gender, cultural issues and ethical issues. AO2/AO3 material should first be placed in the appropriate band according to the descriptors. However, not all the criteria need be satisfied for an answer to be placed in a particular band. Weak performance in one area may be compensated for by strong performance in others. AO2/AO3 marks bands – Best Fit

Page | 19

6 marks Effective Evaluation demonstrates sound analysis and understanding. The answer is well focused and shows coherent elaboration and/or clear line of argument. Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently. Consistently effective use of psychological terminology. Appropriate use of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 5-4 marks Reasonable Evaluation demonstrates reasonable analysis and understanding. The answer is generally focused and shows reasonable elaboration and/or clear line of argument is evident. Most ideas appropriately structured and expressed clearly. Appropriate use of psychological terminology. Minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling only occasionally compromise meaning. 3-2 marks Basic Analysis and evaluation demonstrate basic analysis and superficial understanding. The answer is sometimes focused and shows some evidence of elaboration. Expression of ideas lacks clarity. Limited use of psychological terminology. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are intrusive. 1 mark Rudimentary Evaluation is rudimentary, demonstrating very limited understanding. The answer is weak, muddled and incomplete. Material is not used effectively and maybe mainly irrelevant. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in confusion and ambiguity. The answer lacks structure, often merely a series of unconnected assertions. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are frequent and intrusive. 0 marks No creditworthy material is presented.

Examiner’s comments

Question 05 This question was challenging for candidates and many did not appear to read the requirements in the question carefully. The question required candidates to suggest information to include in the leaflet and use research to justify the choice. The most common problem made by candidates was describing research with no attempt to apply it to the leaflet in the question. Some candidates presented far too much procedural detail of research studies, without considering the implications or conclusions of the research for video games. Some candidates presented findings of research into watching violence (TV, films and the inevitable Bobo dolls) or presented examples taken from cases reported in the press. These often contained little psychological material and gained minimal credit. Candidates who achieved high marks, structured their answers around advice for the leaflet (for example, alerting parents to the possibility of desensitisation) followed by justification using relevant research findings. There was no requirement to include both negative and positive effects of gaming; however, those candidates who approached the question in this way found it easier to structure their answers.

Question 06 This question was generally well done with better candidates scoring 4 or 5 marks for descriptions of the Hovland-Yale model. Many candidates provided much more detail than was necessary for a 5-mark answer, often including two or three research studies which supported the claims of the Hovland-Yale model. A small number of candidates became sidetracked into the Elaboration Likelihood model and presented details of peripheral versus central processing routes.

Page | 20

Question 07 This question produced a diverse range of answers and it was clear that many candidates were unprepared for a question on intense fandom. Many candidates did not seem to have a clear understanding of the meaning of intense fandom. Others did not read the question properly and produced lengthy procedural descriptions of studies into intense fandom. AO1 credit was awarded for descriptions of research „findings‟ and candidates who looked carefully at the wording of the question and focused their answers on this achieved the higher marks. Better candidates scored well on the AO1. However, even the stronger candidates did not divide their answer appropriately between the AO1 and AO2/AO3 marks and there were very few answers scoring highly on the AO2/AO3 evaluation of the findings.

Page | 21

Page | 22

January 12

0 6 Outline the Elaboration Likelihood model of persuasion. Explain how a mobile phone company might use knowledge of this model in a campaign to market a new phone. (4 marks + 6 marks) 0 7 Researchers conducted a study of media influences on anti-social behaviour. The researchers asked child participants to name their favourite TV programmes. Fifteen years later, the researchers assessed the same participants for levels of anti-social behaviour. Two measures of adult anti-social behaviour were obtained for each participant. Measure A: The researchers interviewed a person who knew the participant well andasked them about the participant’s behaviour. Measure B: The researchers studied official records of the participant’s criminalconvictions. The researchers concluded that there was a link between watching violent TV programmes as a child and levels of adult aggression. Other than ethical issues, explain two methodological problems involved in the studydescribed above. (4 marks) 0 8 Outline and evaluate research into celebrity stalking. (4 marks + 6 marks) Question 06 AO1 = 4 marks AO1 credit is awarded for an outline of Petty and Cacioppo‟s Elaboration Likelihood model (1986). This model describes two alternative processing routes of persuasive messages:

the central route to persuasion involves cognitive effort and active engagement. It is likely

to result in permanent change in attitude/behaviour

the peripheral route to persuasion involves minimal cognitive effort. It is likely to result in

temporary change of attitude/behaviour For 3 or 4 marks, the outline should cover both routes. Outlines may also include related concepts including need for cognition, cognitive misers and the role of personal relevance. AO1 Mark Bands 4 marks Sound Knowledge and understanding are accurate and well detailed. Organization and structure of the answer are coherent. 3 marks Reasonable Knowledge and understanding are generally accurate and reasonably detailed. Organization and structure of the answer are reasonably coherent. 2 marks Basic Knowledge and understanding are basic/relatively superficial. Organization and structure of the answer are basic. 1 mark Rudimentary Knowledge and understanding are rudimentary and may be very brief, muddled and/or inaccurate. Lacks organization and structure.

Page | 23

0 marks No creditworthy material. AO2/AO3 = 6 marks AO2/AO3 credit is awarded for an application of knowledge of the Elaboration Likelihood model to the scenario which refers to the marketing of a new phone by a mobile phone company:

Adverts which encourage the central route should provide detailed information /

arguments about the specific features of the phone. These may be designed to appeal to business users

Adverts designed to stimulate peripheral processing will use messages with a preference

for images, imaginative contexts and emotional rather than fact-based arguments eg showing people using the accessory with friends. In view of the context, candidates could refer to either or both of the routes to persuasion. Both of these approaches are creditworthy and the marks awarded will depend on theaccuracy, level of detail and engagement with the scenario. There is a depth/ breadth tradeoff here for candidates covering both routes. AO2/AO3 Mark bands 6 marks Effective Explanation /application demonstrate sound analysis and understanding. Application of knowledge is well focused and effective. 5-4 marks Reasonable Explanation /application demonstrate reasonable analysis and understanding. Application of knowledge is generally focused. 3-2 marks Basic Explanation /application demonstrate basic analysis and superficial understanding. Application is sometimes focused. 1 mark Rudimentary Explanation /application are rudimentary demonstrating very limited understanding. The answer is weak, muddled and may be mainly largely irrelevant. 0 marks No creditworthy material is presented.

Question 07 AO2/AO3 = 4 marks Award 1 mark for identification of each problem and one further mark each for explaining why it is a problem.

In longitudinal studies problems include participant attrition, inability to control

intervening events

In self-report measures problems include demand characteristics (eg children identified

their own favourite TV programmes)

Problems with Measure A: issues of validity, reliability and demand characteristics

Page | 24

Problems with Measure B: reasons why records may not be an accurate measure

Difficulties in establishing cause and effect.

Credit other relevant problems.

Question 08 AO1 = 4 marks AO1 credit is awarded for an outline of research into celebrity stalking. As the question asks about research in general, research studies and/or explanations could receive AO1 credit. Examiners should read the material presented carefully to decide how to award AO1 and AO2/AO3 credit. Stalking is defined as intrusive and obsessional behaviour directed towards an individual which is unwanted and creates fear. It is clearly distinguished from attraction to celebrity in the specification and examiners should be mindful to credit relevant material on celebrity stalking. Note that the question is focused on the stalking of celebrities. Therefore, material focused on stalking in general (eg Mullen‟s typography) should be shaped towards celebrity stalking to achieve marks in the reasonable band and above. Relevant explanations of celebrity stalking include:

Attachment theory of stalking – early attachments acts as a foundation for later

relationships).

Relational goal pursuit theory – obsession pursuit which is rejected by celebrity makes the

goal more desirable and fuels efforts to gain access (McIntosh 1995)

Evolutionary explanations – attention to high profile/prestigious members of the same

species confers survival advantage if we learn through imitation, modelling requires access, hence stalking. Relevant studies include:

Mullen et al (1999) – different motives in 5 types of stalker

Meloy (1992) stalkers have been found to show pre-occupied attachments constant

approval seeking, low self-esteem

Kienlen et al (1997) - childhood attachment disruption in 25 stalkers in Missouri

Lewis et al (2001) - stalkers show traits characteristic of insecure attachments

McCutcheon et al (2006) – links between childhood attachment, condoning stalking and

celebrity worship in 299 students Candidates who present media reports or cases of celebrity stalking as AO1 can receive a mark in the rudimentary band. AO1 Mark bands 4 marks Sound Knowledge and understanding are accurate and well detailed. Organisation and structure of the answer are coherent. 3 marks Reasonable Knowledge and understanding are generally accurate and reasonably detailed. Organisation and structure of the answer are reasonably coherent. 2 marks Basic Knowledge and understanding are basic/relatively superficial. Organisation and structure of the answer are basic. 1 mark Rudimentary Knowledge and understanding are rudimentary and may be very brief, muddled and/or

Page | 25

inaccurate. Lacks organisation and structure. 0 marks No creditworthy material. AO2/AO3 = 6 marks AO2/AO3 credit is awarded for evaluation of the research presented as AO1. Candidates who present research studies as AO1 can receive credit for relevant methodological evaluations of these studies. Some of these could include:

use of retrospective interviews

inability to determine cause and effect

small samples and inability to generalise from case studies

ethical issues

Candidates may also gain AO2/AO3 credit for discussing the extent to which studies or models of general stalking can be applied to celebrity stalking. Candidates who present theoretical explanations of celebrity stalking (eg attachment theory) can gain AO2/AO3 credit by providing supporting or contradictory evidence for the explanations presented. Given that evaluative points are often relevant to more than one explanation, no partial performance criteria apply for this question. AO2/AO3 Mark bands 6 marks Effective Commentary and/or evaluation demonstrate sound analysis, understanding and interpretation. The answer is well focused and shows coherent elaboration and/or a clear line of argument. Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently. Consistently effective use of psychological terminology.Appropriate use of grammar, punctuation and spelling. 5 - 4 marks Reasonable Commentary and/or evaluation demonstrate reasonable analysis and understanding. The answer is generally focused and shows reasonable elaboration and/or a line of argument is evident. Most ideas appropriately structured and expressed clearly. Appropriate use of psychological terminology. Minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling only occasionally compromise meaning. 3 - 2 marks Basic Commentary and/or evaluation demonstrate basic, superficial understanding. The answer is sometimes focused and shows some evidence of elaboration. Expression of ideas lacks clarity. Limited use of psychological terminology. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are intrusive. 1 mark Rudimentary Commentary and/or evaluation are rudimentary, demonstrating a very limited understanding. The answer is weak, muddled and incomplete. Material is not used effectively and may be mainly irrelevant. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in confusion and ambiguity. The answer lacks structure, often merely a series of unconnected assertions. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are frequent and intrusive. 0 marks No creditworthy material is presented.

Page | 26

Examiner’s comments There is some evidence that students are starting to use the mark allocation as a guide to how much to write. However, students still need to be reminded that Section B is the applied section and they must be prepared to apply their knowledge to the demands of the question, rather than merely describe what they know. In order to do this, students must read questions very carefully. For example, question 08 asked about celebrity stalking and question 14 asked students to evaluate the Ganzfeld technique as a way of investigating ESP. Many students ignored these words and often produced answers that failed to gain many marks.

Question 06 This question required students to outline the ELM model of persuasion and apply their knowledge of the model to the marketing of a mobile phone. Most students were familiar with the basic elements of the ELM model and were able to identify two processing routes, central and peripheral. However, there were some misunderstandings of the peripheral route, where students could often do little more than refer to the use of celebrities to advertise or persuade. The application aspect of the question proved challenging for most students who could do little more than make suggestions which were weakly linked to the ELM and could have equally well applied to the Hovland-Yale model (use a celebrity). These answers often contained little psychological material and gained minimal credit. Students who did well structured their answers around both processing routes and made clear links between features of ELM and marketing campaign strategy specifically for mobile phones. Creative students used their personal knowledge of mobile phones to make some good suggestions about the kinds of factual information which could be included in central route adverts and the sorts of images and slogans which would lead to heuristic, short cut processing.

Question 07 This question required students to identify two methodological problems involved in a longitudinal study of media influences. Students produced a wide range of answers some of which were speculative in relation to the proposed study (for example, sample size). The most successful answers worked with the information provided about Measure A and Measure B and structured their response around clearly identified methodological problem such as social desirability or demand characteristics.

Question 08 It was clear that many students were unprepared for a question on this topic and found it challenging. AO1 credit was awarded for descriptions of research into celebrity stalking. Stronger students applied the material they had (for example, McCutcheon‟s Celebrity Attitude Scale) to the topic of stalking, selecting those aspects which were relevant (eg level three, borderline pathological) and scored well on the AO1. However, many students used material related to attraction to celebrity and/or celebrity worship (eg evolutionary explanations) which had little relevance to stalking. There was often no attempt to select material or shape it to the demands of the question. Some students relied almost entirely on media reports of celebrity stalking which gained rudimentary AO1 marks. However, even the better students did not divide their answer appropriately between the AO1 and AO2/3 marks and there were very few answers scoring highly on the evaluation of research.

Page | 27

June 12 0 6 Discuss psychological research into media influences on pro-social behaviour. (4 marks + 6 marks) 0 7 A company is about to launch a new perfume aimed at young career women and wantsto devise a television advertising campaign to promote the perfume. Using your knowledge of the persuasive effects of television, what advice would you give to the company so that it could make the television advertising campaign as effective as possible? Refer to psychological research to justify your advice. (10 marks) 0 8 Outline one or more evolutionary explanations of the attraction of „celebrity‟. (4 marks) Marking scheme Question 06 AO1 = 4 marks Candidates can gain credit for describing any research into media influences on pro-social behaviour. This includes research studies and/or explanations/theories of media influence. Candidates can take a broad approach or can focus on one study in detail. Examiners should read answers carefully to decide what material is being presented as AO1 and AO2/3. Likely content includes: • Baran et al (1979) investigated the effects of The Waltons on children‟s pro-social behaviour. • Gentile et al (2009) used students and video games. • A General Learning Model (Buckley and Anderson 2006) was developed to account for pro-social effects. • Social learning theory or more recent cognitive explanations are also relevant. AO1 Mark bands

4 marks Sound Knowledge and understanding are accurate and well detailed. Organisation and structure of the answer are coherent.

3 marks Reasonable Knowledge and understanding are generally accurate and reasonably detailed. Organisation and structure of the answer are reasonably coherent.

2 marks Basic Knowledge and understanding are basic/relatively superficial. Organisation and structure of the answer are basic.

1 mark Rudimentary Knowledge and understanding are rudimentary and may be very brief, muddled and/or inaccurate. Lacks organisation and structure.

0 marks No creditworthy material eg description of Bandura‟s study of anti-social behaviour with no reference to pro-social behaviour.

AO2/AO3 = 6 marks Candidates are required to evaluate psychological research into media influences on pro-social behaviour. Commentary on research is likely to focus on:

Page | 28

• The relatively small number of research studies into pro-social behaviour compared to anti-social behaviour. • Methodological issues, eg those associated with the limitations of correlational research; operationalisation of and control of variables. • Ethical issues. • Comparison of findings from different research methods/settings/participants. • How research findings relate to theories and models. • Limited predictive ability of theories such as GLM. • Implications of the research for real world applications. AO2/AO3 Mark bands

6 marks Effective Commentary and/or evaluation demonstrate sound analysis, understanding and interpretation. The answer is well focused and shows coherent elaboration and/or a clear line of argument. Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently. Consistently effective use of psychological terminology. Appropriate use of grammar, punctuation and spelling.

5-4 marks Reasonable Commentary and/or evaluation demonstrate reasonable analysis and understanding. The answer is generally focused and shows reasonable elaboration and/or a line of argument is evident. Most ideas appropriately structured and expressed clearly. Appropriate use of psychological terminology. Minor errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling only occasionally compromise meaning.

3-2 marks Basic Commentary and/or evaluation demonstrate basic, superficial understanding. The answer is sometimes focused and shows some evidence of elaboration. Expression of ideas lacks clarity. Limited use of psychological terminology. Errors of grammar, punctuation and spelling are intrusive

1 marks Rudimentary Commentary and/or evaluation are rudimentary, demonstrating a very limited understanding. The answer is weak, muddled and incomplete. Material is not used effectively and may be mainly irrelevant. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in conf

Question 07 AO2/AO3 = 10 marks Candidates are required to apply their knowledge of the effectiveness of television in persuasion to the scenario. There are two components to the question: firstly candidates are asked to provide advice for the company. Secondly they are required to justify this with reference to relevant research. There is a wide range of material that would be creditworthy in this answer. Candidates are most likely to refer to theories to explain how to put together an effective television advertising campaign. Potential material drawn directly from the specification includes: • Hovland Yale model • The Elaboration Likelihood model Candidates may also refer to other theories related to the persuasive effects of television such as: • uses and gratifications theory • cultivation theory • McGuire‟s theory

Page | 29

• Social learning theory and the impact of role models Candidates could choose to draw on research studies which demonstrate the use of TV in advertising campaigns. Candidates who make no attempt to engage with the material in the stem cannot achieve more than 4 marks. AO2/AO3 Mark bands

10-9 marks Effective Application demonstrates sound analysis and understanding. The answer is well focused and effective. A number of appropriate pieces of advice are presented and justified with reference to relevant theory or research. Ideas are well structured and expressed clearly and fluently.

8-6 marks Reasonable Application demonstrates reasonable analysis and understanding. Application of knowledge is generally focused. Some appropriate advice is presented, this is partially justified with reference to relevant research. Most ideas are appropriately structured and expressed clearly.

5-3 marks Basic Application demonstrates basic analysis and superficial understanding. Application is sometimes focused. Either appropriate suggestions are made but not justified OR relevant research is presented but not applied to the task OR both are very weak. Expression of ideas lacks clarity.

2-1 mark Rudimentary Application is rudimentary demonstrating very limited understanding. Suggestions for advice/ justification are weak, muddled and may be mainly largely irrelevant. Deficiency in expression of ideas results in confusion and ambiguity.

0 marks No creditworthy material is presented.

Question 08 AO1 = 4 marks Candidates are required to outline at least one evolutionary explanation of the attraction of “celebrity”. Examiners should be aware of a breadth/depth trade-off when candidates produce more than one explanation. There are several evolutionary explanations of attraction to celebrity. These share the view that the behaviour is adaptive ie it increased the probability of survival. Relevant explanations include: • Ornamental mind theory – Celebrities are attractive because they display fitness indicators such as creativity and entertainment value. • Gossip theory – Gossiping about high status individuals could help individuals be more like them which might improve their attractiveness and chance of finding a mate. • Preference for creative individuals – Music, art and humour are highly valued in mate choice. Attraction for celebrities could be an extension of this including neophilia (the love of novelty) • Potential for education – Provides useful day to day social learning about consequences of cheating on partner, what to wear etc.

Page | 30

Entertainment as play theory and leisure time theory could also be used as long as links are made to the attraction to celebrity. Social psychological explanations cannot receive credit. AO1 Mark bands

Examiner’s comments Question 06 Most students were reasonably well prepared for this question which required description and evaluation of research into media influences on pro-social behaviour. There were different routes for students to take, for example focusing on explanations of media influence (social learning theory) and/or research studies. Weaker students presented generic accounts of social learning theory but failed to focus the description on the learning of take over pro-social behaviour from media models. A small number presented Bandura‟s Bobo doll study and stated the findings would also apply to pro-social behaviour. Such answers did not achieve credit. The majority of students were able to describe at least one study with Sprafkin‟s „Lassie‟ study being cited in most instances. Studies by Baron et al (1979) Rosenkoetter (1999) and Johnston &Ettema (1982) were also used to good effect. Students who chose to describe Mueller‟s work on desensitisation and compassion fatigue were often confused about the implications for pro-social behaviour. The distinction between good and excellent description was that stronger students explicitly linked back to pro-social behaviour throughout and specified what exactly the pro-social behaviour was in the findings. Weaker answers merely referred to “higher pro-social behaviour”, without demonstrating knowledge of what form this took (co-operation etc). Evaluation was of mixed quality with many students achieving basic marks. Commentary/evaluation were often of poor quality and appeared to have been rote learned, for example, one liners on issues and debates or citing individual differences as a critical point in Sprafkin‟s „Lassie‟ study with little apparent appreciation of random allocation to experimental conditions. Students who could discuss the challenges of assessing the longer term impacts of pro-social models in experimental work or those who engaged in a consideration of developmental differences in response to pro social models were rewarded.

4 marks Sound Knowledge and understanding are accurate and well detailed. Organisation and structure of the answer are coherent.

3 marks Reasonable Knowledge and understanding are generally accurate and reasonably detailed. Organisation and structure of the answer are reasonably coherent.

2 marks Basic Knowledge and understanding are basic/relatively superficial. Organisation and structure of the answer are basic.

1 mark Rudimentary Knowledge and understanding are rudimentary and may be very brief, muddled and/or inaccurate. Lacks organisation and structure.

0 marks No creditworthy material.

Page | 31

Question 07 The application aspect of this question proved challenging for most students. Many found it difficult to provide appropriate advice and/or justify their advice with reference to relevant research. Weaker students simply described potentially relevant models or studies (eg the Hovland Yale model or the ELM) others provided relevant suggestions but provided little by way of justification. A third group provided both elements of the answer but did not link advice and justification together. These approaches achieved basic credit. The most successful students supplied a piece of clear and specific advice (for example, the use of a famous career woman in the advert) then justified this with reference to relevant research (similarity between target audience and source). Students who used the ELM model made some appropriate suggestions about the kinds of factual information which could be included in central route adverts and the sorts of images and slogans which would lead to peripheral, heuristic processing. Students who used explanations derived from areas of media studies such as the two step model or hypodermic approach were generally less successful in providing explicit advice or a clear rationale for it. There was considerable evidence that weak students failed to read stem material thoroughly: many presented generic answers which had little relevance to perfume and career women. Some discarded the reference to television adverts and suggested using cinema adverts instead. The general principles of Section B applied starkly here: read the question and apply material to what you have been asked to do.

Question 08 Answers to this question were mixed in quality. Some centres had clearly prepared students well and answers covered a range of relevant evolutionary explanations, the most common being the global campfire/gossip theory and answers based on sexual selection, reproductive success and the prestige hypothesis. Weaker students often selected appropriate explanations but failed to show the evolutionary element of these. Some students provided anecdotal answers or answers which were not evolutionary (we look up to celebrities as role models).