Comprehensive Guide to Designing a Study for Psychology Paper 2 (9990)

Overview of 9990 Psychology Paper 2: Research Methods

• Paper Specifications:

  • Time Duration: $1$ hour and $30$ minutes.
  • Total Marks: $60$ marks.
  • Assessment Requirements: Candidates are required to answer all questions.

• Structure of the Paper:

  • Section A: This section consists of short answer questions. Topics include general research methods, research methods relating directly to a core study, and three short answer scenario-based questions.
  • Section B: This section focuses on a high-value planning question where candidates must design an original study and evaluate specific aspects of that plan.

• Core Objectives:

  • Application of knowledge regarding research methods and methodological concepts.
  • Connecting methods back to core studies.
  • Planning an investigation while adhering to specific constraints provided in the prompt.

Detailed Breakdown of Section B: The Planning Question (Question 10)

• Task Description: Candidates are asked to design an investigation based on pre-set criteria. This is similar to conceptualizing field experiments (e.g., examining teachers’ helping behavior).
• Execution Strategy:
  • Part 1: Design a study based on stipulated conditions.
  • Part 2: Explain and evaluate specific features of the designed plan.
• Constraints: You must strictly follow the conditions provided in the prompt. If certain elements (like sampling or ethics) are already provided, you must not waste space describing them, as they will not earn credit.
• Required Cognitive Skills: Knowledge and application of methodology, practical issues, and methodological concepts.

Systematic Requirements for Planning Specific Research Methods

According to the syllabus "Cheat Sheet," candidates must be able to plan studies including both general and method-specific features. As you provide this information, you must explain and justify the purpose of each feature.

• General Features to Include in All Plans:

  • Detailed procedure of the study.
  • How the plan ensures the study is valid.
  • How the plan ensures the study is reliable.
  • The types of data to be collected.

• Method-Specific Requirements:

  • Experiments:
    • Independent Variable ($IV$).
    • Dependent Variable ($DV$).
    • Controls and standardization procedures.
    • Choice of experimental design.
  • Field Experiments (Additional):
    • Specific location details.
  • Self-Reports (Questionnaires):
    • Question format (open and closed questions).
    • Examples of specific questions to be used.
    • Scoring and interpretation of questions.
    • Technique (e.g., paper and pencil, online).
  • Self-Reports (Interviews):
    • Format (Structured, Unstructured, or Semi-structured).
    • Technique (e.g., face-to-face, telephone).
  • Case Studies:
    • Details about the participant or unit being studied.
    • Content of the information collected.
    • Use of two or more techniques for data collection.
    • Analysis, interpretation, and triangulation of data.
  • Observational Studies:
    • Role of observer (Overt or Covert).
    • Participation level (Participant or Non-participant).
    • Setting (Naturalistic or Controlled).
    • Structure (Structured using behavioral categories or Unstructured).
  • Correlational Studies:
    • Identification of two co-variables.
    • Measurement of Variable $1$.
    • Measurement of Variable $2$.
    • Description of the nature of the relationship and use of a scatter graph.
  • Longitudinal Studies (including experiments with longitudinal design):
    • Tests/tasks to be performed.
    • Scoring methods.
    • Frequency and interval of testing.
    • Methods for re-contacting participants for repeated testing (if not provided).
    • Controls and standardization across intervals.

Evaluation Criteria for Planned Studies

Candidates must evaluate their plan based on:

• Practical and methodological issues.
• Validity (internal and external).
• Reliability (consistency over time and between researchers).
• Exclusions: Candidates are not expected to include aims, hypotheses, or evaluate issues relating to the sample, generalisability, or ethics in their plan for Question $10$.

Case Study: Dr. Felix Longitudinal Study Example

• Prompt: Dr. Felix believes adults aged $55$ to $65$ cope less well with their jobs regardless of job stability. She uses a sample of adults aged $55$ at the start. She re-contacts them via telephone (already defined, so do not describe in the answer).
• Required Features for Answer:
  • Tests/Tasks: Specific measures used (e.g., descriptions of tasks, tests, or questions).
  • Scoring: How data is scored or analyzed (ratings, totals, qualitative interpretation, or comparing averages over time).
  • Frequency/Interval: The pattern of testing over time (how often, staffing, reuse of materials). Note: Simply a test-retest experiment is not acceptable for a longitudinal study design.
  • Controls/Standardization: Keeping conditions parity across testing intervals.

Examiner Insights and Performance Levels

• Marking Grid (Level 5 Response - 9-10 Marks):
  • Describes all required features explicitly and with detail.
  • Uses mostly appropriate terminology.
  • Clearly applies knowledge of methodology involved in planning.
• Common Pitfalls according to Examiner Reports:
  • Replicability: High-level responses provide enough detail that another researcher could replicate the procedure.
  • Scale Confusion: Many candidates confuse numerical rating scales (quantity/frequency) with Likert scales (agreement/disagreement attitudes).
  • Methodological Errors: Using experimental terms ($IV$/$DV$) in correlational studies, or using qualitative methods (open questions) when a correlation requires quantitative data.
  • Observational Research Errors: A lack of understanding of "naturalistic observation." High-level answers for structured observations must include fully operationalized behavioral categories and discuss time or event sampling.
  • Implicit vs. Explicit: Lower-level responses (Level $3$ and below) often identify features but provide little description, or leave features as "implicit" rather than clearly stated.

Qualitative Observations and Replicability

• Replicability Example (Chloë's Town Centre Observation):
  • A high-level response would suggest posing as a worker on a lunch break sitting on a bench to remain covert.
  • Behavioral categories must be thorough and fully operationalized (e.g., defining exactly what counts as "social behavior").
  • Time or event sampling should be justified.
• Examiner Warning: Do not use an unstructured observational methodology if the prompt specifically requests a structured one. This results in a loss of credit.