Putting the four approaches together for the exam

The question types you will actually meet

Paper 1 asks three things about the core studies, and each has a different shape. Describe: state the aim, method, key result with figures, and conclusion — no evaluation, no opinion. Explain / apply: take a novel scenario and use a named study to account for it. Evaluate: work through the five issues, always with a detail of the study as evidence.

Which approach explains what — a comparison table in words

Take one behaviour, such as a person becoming aggressive after being insulted, and see the four accounts. Biological: arousal and hormonal response; testable by measuring heart rate or hormone levels. Cognitive: how the insult was interpreted and what memories it activated. Learning: aggression previously reinforced or observed in a model. Social: who was present, what role the person held, what the setting made acceptable. A strong answer does not pick one — it says which parts of the behaviour each account explains, and where each falls silent.

Three debates worth a prepared paragraph

Nature versus nurture: Hassett's monkeys and Bandura's children are the cleanest pair of opposing evidence on the same kind of question. Reductionism versus holism: Schachter and Singer is the best example of a study that refuses to be reductionist — arousal alone does not produce emotion. Individual versus situational: Milgram and Piliavin against personality accounts.

Sample sizes, and how to use them

Learn them, because 'small sample' with no number scores nothing. Dement and Kleitman: 9. Bandura: 72. Milgram: 40. Andrade: 40. Saavedra and Silverman: 1. Fagen: 5 elephants. Then say what the number costs: with nine sleepers you cannot claim the pattern holds for poor sleepers or for children, though the effect within those nine was very large and was replicated across many nights each.

How to write six marks of evaluation in four minutes

Two paragraphs, each in three moves: name the issue — quote a detail or figure from the study — state the consequence for how the findings can be used. Do not open with a definition of the issue; the marks are for applying it, not defining it.