Difficulty Verdict: A Test of Granular Detail
The May/June 2023 Psychology (9990) Papers 12 and 22 present a moderate to high challenge. While many of the core studies selected—such as Andrade (doodling) and Saavedra and Silverman (button phobia)—are student favourites, the questions targeted highly specific procedural elements rather than general study overviews. Success required precise memory of exact questionnaire names, operationalised behavioural categories, and matched-pair variables.
Where the Marks Are Won and Lost
A substantial number of candidates struggled with Paper 12, Question 5 (Laney et al.). Examiners noted a major pitfall where students incorrectly compared the 'Love' group to the 'Control' group for the Food Preferences Questionnaire, whereas the actual analysis in Experiment 2 was focused on 'Believers' versus 'Non-believers'. Additionally, outlining evaluative learning in Question 9(b) proved to be a significant discriminator, with many candidates confusing it with operant conditioning or simple classical fear conditioning without the cognitive element of disgust.
Key Examiner Pitfalls in Research Methods
In Paper 22 (Research Methods), marks were frequently lost due to a lack of contextualisation. When a question prompts 'in this study', candidates must directly hook their psychological knowledge to the scenario. Key areas of concern included:
- Reliability vs. Replication: Candidates frequently confused these two terms. Inter-observer reliability refers to the consistency of measurement between observers, not repeating the entire experiment.
- Median Calculations: Circular definitions such as 'the median is the middle because it is in the centre' failed to score. Candidates must explain that scores must be put in numerical order to find the middle value.
- Section C Design Muddle: In Question 10, a significant number of candidates attempted to design a laboratory experiment rather than the specified interview study, leading to zero marks for inappropriate methodology.
Revision Strategy and Recommendations
To secure top-band marks, students should practice planning Section C questions under timed conditions, ensuring they explicitly list the three majors for their chosen method (e.g., for an interview: content, structure, and style of questions). Memorising the exact visual elements and scales of measures (such as the Wong-Baker scale or the 0-3 intensity button scale in Canli et al.) is no longer optional—it is a core mark-earner.
Future Predictions
With cognitive and learning approaches featuring heavily in the evaluation essays this year (Andrade and Bandura), candidates should anticipate a focus on the Biological Approach (specifically Hölzel et al. or Hassett et al.) or the Social Approach (such as Piliavin et al.) for the 10-mark evaluation essay in upcoming series.