Topic 7: The self - 7.2 Studies — Edexcel GCSE Psychology
Verified courseTeaching note checked against the official specification.
Topic 7: The self - 7.2 Studies explained
Topic 7: The self - 7.2 Studies covers 3 specification points, including Understand the aims, procedures and findings… and Encouraging a Belief in Determinism Increases….
Read the full explanation
Open a point below for its explanation and revision guidance.
Understand the aims, procedures and findings (results and conclusions), strengths and weaknesses of:
To evaluate psychological studies concerning the self, you must systematically analyse their core components. The aim identifies the study's purpose and what the researchers intended to investigate. The procedure details the exact steps taken, including the sample, apparatus, and method, allowing for replication. Findings encompass both the raw results (quantitative or qualitative data) and the conclusions drawn from them. Evaluating a study requires identifying its strengths, such as high ecological validity or reliable standardised procedures, and its weaknesses, such as ethical issues, small sample sizes, or lack of generalisability. Mastering this framework enables comprehensive critical analysis of key studies.
7.2.1 Vohs and Schooler (2008) The Value of Believing in Free Will: Encouraging a Belief in Determinism Increases Cheating
Vohs and Schooler (2008) investigated whether reading deterministic statements (suggesting behaviour is outside our control) increases cheating compared to reading statements supporting free will. In Experiment 1, participants read either a deterministic or neutral text, then completed a computer-based maths task where a 'glitch' allowed them to see the answers. Those in the determinism condition cheated significantly more. Experiment 2 used logic and mathematics problems where participants paid themselves for correct answers from an envelope; again, the determinism group took more money than they earned. The study concludes that undermining belief in free will can lead to unethical behaviour, as individuals feel less responsible for their actions.
7.2.2 Van Houtte and Jarvis (1995) The Role of Pets in Preadolescent Psychosocial Development
Van Houtte and Jarvis (1995) explored the role of pet ownership in the psychosocial development of preadolescents. They studied 130 third- to sixth-grade students, comparing pet owners with non-owners. Participants completed questionnaires measuring autonomy, self-concept, self-esteem, and attachment to animals. The findings revealed that pet-owning preadolescents, particularly those in the higher grades (fifth and sixth), reported higher autonomy and self-esteem than non-owners. However, this difference was not significant for younger children (third and fourth grades). The study concludes that pets can serve as a source of support and contribute positively to the psychosocial development and self-concept of older preadolescents.
Your focus
- Outline the aims, procedures, and findings of key psychological studies.
- Distinguish between the raw results of a study and the conclusions drawn from them.
- Evaluate psychological studies by identifying specific methodological strengths and weaknesses.
Show all 9 objectives
- Describe the aims, procedures, findings and conclusions of Vohs and Schooler (2008).
- Evaluate the methodology of Vohs and Schooler (2008), including its strengths and weaknesses.
- Explain how belief in determinism can influence moral behaviour and self-concept.
- Outline the aims, procedures, findings and conclusions of Van Houtte and Jarvis (1995).
- Evaluate the use of self-report questionnaires in measuring psychosocial development.
- Explain the relationship between pet ownership and the development of autonomy and self-esteem in preadolescents.
Topic 7: The self - 7.2 Studies exam tips
Marking Points
- State the specific aim of the study being discussed.
- Outline the key steps of the procedure, including sample details and methodology.
- Describe the main results obtained and the conclusions drawn by the researchers.
- Provide a balanced evaluation by explaining at least one methodological strength and one weakness.
- Identify the aim of the study: to investigate whether a belief in determinism increases cheating behaviour.
- Describe the procedure of Experiment 1, including the use of a computer-based maths test with a spacebar 'glitch' that revealed the answers.
- Describe the procedure of Experiment 2, where participants completed logic and mathematics problems and paid themselves from an envelope for each correct answer.
- State the findings: participants exposed to deterministic texts cheated significantly more than those exposed to neutral or free will texts.
- Explain the conclusion: believing that behaviour is predetermined reduces feelings of personal responsibility, which can lead to unethical behaviour.
- Evaluate the methodology, noting the high level of control in the laboratory setting but the potential lack of ecological validity due to the artificial tasks.
- Identify the aim: to investigate whether pet ownership affects psychosocial development in preadolescent children.
- Describe the sample: 130 children from third to sixth grade, divided into groups of pet owners and non-owners.
- Outline the procedure: participants completed self-report questionnaires measuring self-esteem, autonomy, and self-concept.
- State the findings: older preadolescent pet owners (fifth and sixth grade) showed higher autonomy and self-esteem than non-owners, but this effect was not found in younger children.
- Evaluate the study: note that it relies on self-report questionnaires which can be subject to social desirability bias, and that the correlational design cannot establish cause and effect.
Examiner Tips
- 💡Structure extended responses by dedicating distinct paragraphs to aims, procedures, findings, and evaluation.
- 💡Use specific data points or percentages from the results to support your description of the findings.
- 💡When discussing weaknesses, suggest how the methodological flaw might have affected the validity or reliability of the conclusions.
- 💡Be prepared to describe the specific tasks used to measure cheating, such as the spacebar glitch in the maths test or the self-payment for logic problems.
- 💡Link the findings back to the broader topic of 'The self' by discussing how self-concept and personal responsibility influence behaviour.
- 💡Use this study as evidence when evaluating the free will versus determinism debate in psychology.
- 💡When describing the results, always distinguish between the younger (third and fourth grade) and older (fifth and sixth grade) participants.
- 💡Use this study to illustrate how external factors, such as relationships with pets, can influence the development of the self.
- 💡Be ready to evaluate the use of questionnaires in this study, mentioning both the ease of data collection and the risk of biased responses.
Common Mistakes
- Confusing results with conclusions. Results are the specific data collected, while conclusions are the interpretations of what that data means.
- Providing generic evaluations that could apply to any study. Always contextualise strengths and weaknesses using specific details from the study's procedure or sample.
- Omitting the procedure when asked to describe a study. Ensure you outline how the study was conducted, not just what it found.
- Confusing the independent and dependent variables. Correction: The independent variable is the type of text read (deterministic versus neutral or free will), and the dependent variable is the amount of cheating.
- Stating that the study proves free will exists. Correction: The study only demonstrates that believing in free will affects moral behaviour, not whether free will actually exists.
- Forgetting the difference between the two experiments. Correction: Remember that Experiment 1 used a computer glitch in a maths test, while Experiment 2 involved participants completing logic and mathematics problems and paying themselves from an envelope.
- Assuming pet ownership improved self-esteem for all ages in the study. Correction: The positive effects on autonomy and self-esteem were only significant for the older preadolescents (fifth and sixth graders).
- Stating that the study proves pets cause higher self-esteem. Correction: The study is correlational; it shows a relationship but cannot prove that owning a pet directly causes higher self-esteem.
- Confusing the variables measured. Correction: Ensure you mention autonomy, self-concept, and self-esteem as the specific psychosocial factors measured by the questionnaires.