October/November 2025 Series Exam Performance & Analysis
The October/November 2025 series for Cambridge International AS & A Level Psychology (9990) offered a highly representative test of the updated syllabus, emphasizing critical application of core studies alongside systematic methodological design. Across all four papers, candidates faced a balanced yet rigorous spread of easy-recall questions alongside complex, higher-order evaluative tasks.
Paper 1: Core Approaches and Evaluation Mastery
Paper 12 highlighted the critical importance of being able to describe and evaluate key studies under tight time constraints. In particular, the 10-mark evaluation of Pozzulo et al. (line-ups) demanded candidates to construct an argument with at least one evaluation point explicitly focused on ecological validity. High-performing students successfully linked specific elements of the study (e.g., the cartoon targets Dora and Diego) to explain how standardization impacts validity in real-world witness scenarios, whereas lower-tier responses drifted into generic, non-contextual assertions. The comparison of Saavedra & Silverman with Bandura et al. also tested the ability to compare distinct theoretical frameworks under the Learning approach, specifically operant/classical conditioning versus vicarious learning.
Paper 2: The Contextualized Application of Research Methods
In Paper 22, the chief examiner report highlighted that a significant number of marks were lost when candidates treated research methods questions as purely theoretical exercises. In questions asking to explain standard deviation \( \text{SD} \) in the context of Pozzulo et al., candidates frequently failed to link their definition to the actual age ranges (children aged 4–7 vs. decades of adulthood). This contextualization is crucial for securing full marks. Similarly, when designing Dr Gul's field experiment on train advertisement attention, candidates had to meticulously operationalize their IV (bright vs. dull advertisements) and DV (duration or direction of passenger focus) to reach Level 5.
Specialist Options (Papers 3 & 4): Conceptual Integration
Papers 32 and 42 required candidates to show deep structural understanding of their chosen specialist options (such as Clinical and Consumer Psychology). For instance, the discussion of decision-making strategies (compensatory vs. non-compensatory) in Paper 3 demanded practical everyday examples, while evaluation of treatments for anxiety required an explicit discussion of generalisations. In Paper 4, the 24-mark planning questions (such as investigating pyromania thoughts) required candidates to clearly outline both specific features (e.g., question format, scoring technique) and general methodology (e.g., sampling and ethics) to produce a replicable plan.
Exam Strategy & Future Outlook
To maximize success in future series, candidates must focus heavily on the dual-aspect approach: consolidating detailed core study metrics (such as sample sizes and exact percentages) and practicing the contextualized explanation of methodological terminology. Studies like Baron-Cohen et al. (eyes test) and Fagen et al. (elephant learning) are highly overdue for extensive evaluation in upcoming sittings and should be prioritised in revision cycles.