GCSE Psychology – Key Studies Summary – Paper 1

Name Aim Method Results Conclusion Evaluation

Murdock’s To provide Lab study (control of EVs). Standardised First words from list recalled well Separate stored for short Remembering lists of words is not typical
“Serial evidence for procedures. 16 participants/ 20 words (primacy effect). End of list words term and long term of how we use memory in real life,
position separate STS and at rate of 1 per min. Male and female recalled well (recency effect). memory. Supports multi- therefore study lacks ecological validity.
curve” LTM of the multi- psych students (course requirement). Middle of list not remembered store memory model. First
(1962) store model of Free-recall of words over 90 secs. well. words in LTS, last words in Participants similar age. Representative?
memory Repeated 80 times over a few days with Drew serial position curve STS. Middle words from list
different words in neither. Participants were psych students. Might
have guess study aims?

Bartlett’s If we are given Lab study (control of EVs). Standardised Passages because shorter (330- Memory not an exact copy Supporting study: people shown picture
“War of the an unfamiliar procedures. Participants all Cambridge 150 words) of what we hear. of white man holding razor to black man
ghosts” story, would we students. Read story twice to self, 15 Omissions (ghosts) Memory influenced by but people ‘remembered’ seeing black
(1932) alter the mins later told story to another, who Changes to details (names of beliefs and stereotypes man holding weapon
information so told to another etc. Changes to story places, canoes to boats)
that it makes recorded Changes to order of events More representative of how we use
more sense? memory in real life
Testing Bartlett’s
theory of Cambridge Uni students – representative?
reconstructive
memory
Gilchrist & How motivation Lab expt (control of EVs) Control group – little difference in Motivation affects High ecological validity – participants
Nesberg’s affects 26 uni student volunteer brightness with time perception really hungry
“need & perception 20 hrs without food Experimental group – made image Study was controlled – replicable
perceptual Random allocation; control group vs brighter with time Small sample size, similar age –
change” hungry group representative?
(1952) Showed picture of food for 15s
After 15s shown picture and adjusted
brightness
Tested at start of study, after 6hrs, after
20hrs
Name Aim Method Results Conclusion Evaluation
Bruner & How Lab expt (control of EVs) 13 when shown numbers Expectations directly Controlled and counterbalances – reliable
Minturn expectations can 24 students – half shown series of letter B when shown letters affected how stimulus was Challenges Gibson’s theory of direct
“perceptual affect direct flashing up on screen very quickly then interpreted. perception
set study” perception test image then shown numbers then Supports Gregory’s theory of
(1955) test image, then mixed numbers and constructivist perception
letters then test image Small sample size
Counterbalanced – other half of Low ecological validity – task not similar
students to how we perceive in real life.

Hughes To see if children Lab expt (control of EVs) 90% children aged 3.5-5 could If the tasks makes sense to Children tested in an unfamiliar
“policeman can see things Standardised procedures – can replicate hide doll (children were not them, children aged 3.5-5 environment by a stranger. Maybe they
doll study” from someone study easily egocentric) years old can see something stopped being egocentric at an even
(1978) else’s point of 30 children 3.5-5 years old from another person’s point younger age?
view earlier than Model as shown in diagram of view.
Piaget suggested Child asked to hide doll so policeman Different to Piaget’s findings Hiding from a policeman is not a familiar
can’t see him. Trialled with one that children were task to most children
policeman until children understood egocentric until age 7 (3
then with two. mountains task)

McGarrigle Can children Lab study (control of EVs) 62% of 4-6yos said there were the Children under 7 can Challenged Piaget’s conclusions
& conserve at an Standardised procedures – can replicate same in each row, therefore could conserve if change Over 30% of children still failed to
Donaldson earlier age than study easily conserve (compared to 16% in appeared to be accidental conserve
“naughty Piaget found if 80 children 4-6yo Piaget’s study) Children tested by adult stranger in
teddy” the change to Shown 2 rows of counters. strange environment
(1974) the material was Asked if there were the same in each
accidental row
Puppet ‘accidentally’ messed up a row
of counters and spread them out
Asked if there were the same number in
each row
GCSE Psychology – Key Studies Summary – Paper 2
Name Aim Method Results Conclusion Evaluation
Asch’s Would people Lab study (control of EVs) Participants conformed to People conform to fit within Lab expt – low ecological validity, people
“conformity” conform to Standardised procedures – can replicate give same incorrect answer a group even when they may not have behaved naturally
(1956) the opinions study easily as the group 36.8% of the know they are wrong
of others to Male American college students time (normative social influence) Trivial task – doesn’t reflect real life
give an Groups of 7-9 people shown sets of 4 lines 76% conformed at least once instances of conformity
answer they (one standard line and 3 comparison lines). 24% never conformed Conformity rose when
knew to be Participant had to state out loud which group size USA – individualistic culture. Findings
wrong? comparison line was the same length as the increased to 3 could not be generalised to all cultures
standard line. Correct answer always clear  task was made
Only 1 real participant in each group, others more difficult (lines
were confederates who has been told to give more similar in
the same incorrect response for 12/18 sets of length)
lines.  participant has to
Real participant was always the last to answer say answer aloud
rather than
anonymously
Piliavin’s Does the Field expt (little control of EVs) Walking stick = help within Appearance affects whether High ecological validity – participants
“subway” appearance of Male and female passengers on subway in 70sec 95% of time help given didn’t know they were taking part so did
(1969) a victim affect NYC Drunk = help within 70sec not show demand characteristics, acted as
helping Participants unaware they were in study 50% of time usually would.
behaviour? Actor collapses on train in various disguises
38 trials = alcohol props USA – individualistic culture. Findings
65 trials = sober and walking stick cannot be generalised to all cultures
Observers record frequency and speed of
help City centre not rural - cannot generalise

Ignores role of dispositional factors –

some people more likely to help than
others
Name Aim Method Results Conclusion Evaluation
Von Frisch’s How to bees Field expt in natural environment of If food <100m away bees Bees use movements to One of the first studies into animal
“bee” (1950) communicate participants (the bees) circled to the right and then communicate distance and communication, which encouraged more.
the location Experimenter controlled IV but little control left direction of food to each
of a food of EVs If food >100m away, ‘waggle other Results have been replicated – reliable
source Glass of sugar water placed at different dance’
locations Dance: straight line, Sugar water glass – not natural for bees,
Glass sided hive to allow observation of bees abdomen waggled side to so lacks ecological validity
Bees who visited sugar water marked with side then left circle, straight,
paint right circle
Researcher observed behaviour of the bees
when they returned to the hive Distance: number of turns
made in 15sec
Food angle from sun: straight
part of dance
Yuki’s Does culture Questionnaire Japanese – happy eyes = People learn their own Emoticons instead of real faces – lacks
“emoticons” affect how American and Japanese students happiest culture’s norms ecological validity (but results same when
(2007) facial cue are Standard questions USA – happy mouths = Japan – culture tries to limit replicated with photos)
used in Rating scale 1-9 of how happy the face looked happiest outward emotion. Eyes
understandin 6 different combinations of eyes and mouths more genuine to read Participants aware they were taking part
g emption? happiness in research so may not have given true
responses. Researchers could have
displayed demand characteristics about
expected answers, making research less
reliable

Representative – participants all students

Only happy and sad investigated – can’t

generalise to all emotions
Name Aim Method Results Conclusion Evaluation
Penfield’s To investigate Clinical case studies – people who were Qualitative results Localisation of function in All patients had severe epilepsy so were
“interpretive the workings undergoing conscious brain surgery Temporal lobe = hear piano brain’s cerebral cortex not representative of whole population
cortex” of the Cerebral cortex given gentle electrical music and could ID song. As a Findings were slightly different between
(1959) conscious stimulation with probe. Patient asked what control, surgeon said he was individuals
mind they experienced going to re-stimulate the People struggled to put their experiences
same area but didn’t, and into words
patient heard nothing.
Temporal lobe = heard
orchestra playing
Temporal lobe = boy heard
his mother speaking
Visual cortex = people ‘saw’
images such as balloons
Motor area = movement
Sensory area = feeling of
being touched
Tulving’s To explore Case studies – 6 volunteered Results of 3 participants Semantic and episodic Ethics – full informed consent gained
“gold connections 6 people injected with radioactive gold discounted as they had memories produce activity Only 3 participants showed the effects –
memory” between isotope which spreads into brain inconsistent results in different parts of the not generalisable
(1989) types of Radioactive half life = 30s so minimal risk 3 participants showed clear brain Can’t control what people actually think at
memory and PET scanned difference in blood flow the exact moment of the scan
brain activity Compared episodic and semantic memory when recalling semantic and Participants were fully informed
Participants thought of a topic, then were episodic memories volunteers who may have tried to get the
injected, then reading taken Episodic = frontal and procedure to work
12 rapid scans 0.2s long taken temporal lobes
8 trials per participant Semantic = parietal and
occipital lobes
Name Aim Method Results Conclusion Evaluation
Wiles’ To investigate Longitudinal field study over 1 yr After 6 months CBT is an effective way of 54% of participants showed no
“effectiveness the IV manipulated by researcher but limited 90% of participants were reducing symptoms of improvement despite CBT
of CBT” effectiveness control of EVs followed up depression when used with 32% of people didn’t attend all 12 sessions
(2013) of CBT in UK participants aged 18-75 who had been 46% of CBT group showed ADs compared to ADs alone of CBT
people who taking antidepressants (Ads) for >6wks with improvement in symptoms Some control of EVs (bipolar patients and
have not no improvement in symptoms 22% of control group people who had already had therapy
responded to Random allocation of participants improved couldn’t take part)
medication 234 people CBT and medication Ethics: all patients were still treated with
235 medication only (control group) ADs and followed up with
12 x 1hr sessions of CBT and follow up
Kaij’s “alcohol Do hereditary Case studies, questionnaires, interviews and 54% of identical twins were Hereditary factors are Self-reporting by participants – lying?
abuse in factors psych testing in the same category as each involved in alcohol use age Subjective? Give socially-desirable
twins” (1960) influence Public records of alcohol abusers used to other and addiction answers
development identify participants 28% of non-identical twins Only looked at alcohol – can’t generalise
of alcohol 174 pairs of participants: 48 pairs were were in the same category as to other addictions
addiction identical twins, 126 pairs were non-identical each other All male, Swedish and twins – can’t
twins As the level of dependency generalise
All male, Swedish increased, there was greater Identical twins have same environment as
Categorised alcohol use scale 1-5 concordance between well as DNA
identical twins 46% of twins not in same category as co-
72% of chronic alcoholic twin so may not all be genetic
identical twins were in same
category