Topic 10: Language, thought and communication - 10.2 Studies — Edexcel GCSE Psychology
Verified courseTeaching note checked against the official specification.
Topic 10: Language, thought and communication - 10.2 Studies explained
Topic 10: Language, thought and communication - 10.2 Studies covers 3 specification points, including Understand the aims, procedures, and findings… and *10.2.1 Yuki et al.
Read the full explanation
(2007) Are the windows to…. Open a point below for its explanation and revision guidance.
Understand the aims, procedures, and findings (results and conclusions), strengths and weaknesses of:
This specification point requires students to systematically analyse the key studies in the language, thought, and communication topic. For each named study, learners must be able to state the specific aims of the research and describe the procedures used, including the sample and tasks. They must also recall the findings, distinguishing between the numerical or descriptive results and the overall conclusions drawn by the researchers. Finally, students must evaluate each study by identifying and explaining its methodological strengths and weaknesses, such as issues with ecological validity, sample bias, or the level of control in the experimental design.
*10.2.1 Yuki et al. (2007) Are the windows to the soul the same in the East and West? Cultural differences in using the eyes and mouth as cues to recognize emotions in Japan and the United States
Yuki et al. (2007) investigated cultural differences in how people from Japan and the United States recognise emotions. The procedure showed Japanese and American participants computer-generated emoticons with varying combinations of happy, sad, and neutral eyes and mouths. Participants rated the happiness of each face. Findings revealed Japanese participants gave higher happiness ratings to faces with happy eyes, whereas American participants gave higher ratings to faces with happy mouths. The conclusions suggest Japanese culture focuses on eyes, while American culture focuses on mouths. Strengths include high experimental control using standardised emoticons. Weaknesses include low ecological validity, as emoticons are not real human faces.
10.2.2 Boroditsky (2001) Does Language Shape Thought?: Mandarin and English Speakers’ Conceptions of Time
Boroditsky (2001) investigated whether language influences how we think about time by comparing English and Mandarin speakers. English speakers typically use horizontal spatial metaphors for time (e.g., looking "forward"). Mandarin speakers often use vertical metaphors (e.g., "up" for earlier events). Participants were primed with horizontal or vertical spatial arrays before answering true/false questions about time. English speakers answered time questions faster after horizontal priming, whereas Mandarin speakers were faster after vertical priming. This supports the linguistic relativity hypothesis, demonstrating that the language we speak shapes our habitual thought patterns regarding abstract concepts like time.
Your focus
- Identify the aims, procedures, findings, and conclusions of key psychological studies.
- Differentiate between the results obtained in a study and the conclusions drawn from them.
- Evaluate psychological studies by explaining their methodological strengths and weaknesses.
Show all 9 objectives
- Describe the aims and procedures of Yuki et al. (2007) regarding cultural differences in emotion recognition.
- Outline the findings and conclusions of Yuki et al. (2007), specifically the focus on eyes versus mouths.
- Evaluate Yuki et al. (2007) by identifying its methodological strengths and weaknesses, such as ecological validity.
- Describe the aim and procedure of Boroditsky's (2001) study on language and thought.
- Explain the findings regarding how English and Mandarin speakers conceptualise time.
- Evaluate the study in terms of its support for the linguistic relativity hypothesis.
Topic 10: Language, thought and communication - 10.2 Studies exam tips
Marking Points
- State that the aim was to investigate cultural differences in the recognition of emotions using facial cues.
- Describe the procedure involving Japanese and American participants rating the happiness of computer-generated emoticons.
- Identify that Japanese participants focused more on the eyes when rating emotions, while American participants focused more on the mouth.
- Explain that a weakness of the study is its low ecological validity because it used artificial emoticons rather than real human faces.
- Identify the aim of the study as investigating whether language shapes thought regarding the abstract concept of time.
- Describe the sample as consisting of native English speakers and native Mandarin speakers.
- Explain the procedure involving spatial priming (horizontal versus vertical) followed by time-related true/false questions.
- State the findings that English speakers were faster after horizontal priming, while Mandarin speakers were faster after vertical priming.
- Conclude that the study supports the linguistic relativity hypothesis by showing language influences cognitive processes.
Examiner Tips
- 💡Create summary cards for each core study detailing the aim, procedure, findings, conclusions, strengths, and weaknesses.
- 💡When evaluating a study, use a structured approach to ensure the strength or weakness is fully developed and linked back to the study.
- 💡Practice distinguishing between results and conclusions by writing them out as separate bullet points for each study.
- 💡Be prepared to describe the specific combinations of eyes and mouths used in the emoticons, such as happy, sad, and neutral.
- 💡When evaluating the study, explicitly use the term 'ecological validity' and explain why the use of emoticons reduces it.
- 💡Link the findings to the conclusion by explaining why Japanese culture might focus on eyes and American culture on mouths.
- 💡Be prepared to describe the specific spatial metaphors used by each language group in the study.
- 💡Remember that the dependent variable was the reaction time to answer the true/false questions about time.
- 💡Link the findings explicitly to the concept of linguistic relativity when evaluating the study's conclusions.
Common Mistakes
- Confusing the results (what the data showed) with the conclusions (what the data means). Correction: Ensure results refer to specific data or observations, while conclusions refer to the broader interpretation of that data.
- Failing to link a strength or weakness specifically to the study being evaluated. Correction: Always contextualise methodological evaluations by referring to the specific procedures or samples used in the named study.
- Describing the procedure without mentioning the aim of the study. Correction: Always start by clearly stating what the researchers were trying to find out before detailing how they did it.
- Stating that the study used photographs of real human faces. Correction: The study used computer-generated emoticons with different combinations of eyes and mouths.
- Confusing which culture focused on which facial feature. Correction: Remember that Japanese participants focused on the eyes, while American participants focused on the mouth.
- Claiming the study proves all people in these countries behave this way. Correction: The study highlights cultural tendencies, but individual differences still exist within any culture.
- Believing Mandarin speakers only use vertical metaphors. Correction: Mandarin speakers use both horizontal and vertical metaphors, but use vertical ones much more frequently than English speakers.
- Confusing the priming directions. Correction: English speakers showed faster reaction times after horizontal priming, while Mandarin speakers were faster after vertical priming.
- Stating the study proves linguistic determinism. Correction: The study supports linguistic relativity (a weaker form), showing language influences thought, not that it completely determines it.