Animal models in psychology are when animals are used to explain human behaviour. One animal model commonly used in the biological approach is a MAOA knockout.

An animal model is the use of animals to help demonstrate or explain processes that explain human behaviour. They are useful in the biological approach when experiments would be impractical or unethical to conduct on humans. For example, genetic knockouts are animal models where animals are genetically modified to have specific genes knocked out (or turned off). Any changes in behaviour help us know the function of the knocked out gene. MAOA knockouts are animals that have had their MAOA (aka the warrior gene) turned off.

An example of a MAOA knockout study was done using a simple experiment. They got one group of MAOA knockout mice and they compared them to another group of control mice that weren’t genetically modified. They used the resident-intruder test to test their aggression. The results showed the MAOA knockouts were more aggressive. They also measured their monoamine levels and they had higher serotonin, dopamine and noradrenaline. Using this animal model, the researchers concluded that the MAOA gene is linked with violence and this is probably because of its effect on neurotransmitters.This study shows the benefit of animal models in the biological approach because it allows researchers to conduct carefully controlled laboratory experiments on things that couldn’t be done on humans. (240 words)

Starting with a definition and then restating the question is a perfectly reasonable way to begin.

The first body paragraph should show knowledge of the topic. These are four mark questions so the explanation should be clear and concise – about 5-7 sentences explaining the topic will do.

When revising for the exams, students should think carefully about if they want to use a study or a real world example.

For this topic on animal models, I cannot think of a suitable real world example since it’s a “research methods” style question. It’s asking about how research is conducted, not a psychological explanation of behaviour.

With this style of question, I think studies work best.A good strategy is to pick a study that can be used for the essay, too.

The conclusion is a good way to connect the example back to the question.

Anchoring bias is when an initially presented piece of information biases someones judgement on a follow-up task. It can be explained with reference to consumer decision-making.

Anchoring bias can be explained using the dual processing model of decision-making. According to this model, we have two systems of processing – system one and system two. Because people are cognitive misers, we tend to prefer system one. This is fast, automatic and based on experiences. System two is slow and deliberate. The anchoring bias increases our chances of using system one – when making a judgement of something, we look for information to help guide our thinking and the anchor is readily available information in our mind so we use that, even if it’s irrelevant to the question we’ve just been asked.

This can be demonstrated with reference to consumer decision-making and how anchoring bias is used for price anchoring. Shops and salesman use anchoring bias to increase sales through price anchoring – they use a higher price to make the sale price seem better. On price tags, they leave an original high price visible but crossed out, next to the new, lower sales price. This information biases our judgement when we’re wondering if it’s a good deal. For example, if I was in a shop and I saw a pair of shoes and they were marked down from $500 to $100, the high price is the anchor which biases my decision. Instead of using system 2 to think if $100 is a good deal, I use the anchor ($500) because it’s right there in my mind already and that biases my decision to buy the shoes. (275 words).

Memorisation is a bad word in teaching, but I’d argue for key term definitions as long as students comprehend the meaning its fine to memorise precise definitions.

Even if the SAQ says “describe,” I would always encourage students to explain the topic. Giving a reason why makes it easier to demonstrate detailed knowledge of a topic.

I anticipate giving students a good key study for every topic. This will alleviate their stress if they can’t think of their own everyday example and the studies are useful for Section C essays. However, coming up with their own everyday examples could save a lot of stress come exam time as they’d be easier to remember for students.

This example from price anchoring comes from my unit on “Manipulation,” which covers the decision-making topics in the course.

SAQs don’t need a conclusion.

Social identity theory is a theory that attempts to explain group behaviour. One example of SIT in action is shown in BIRGING and CORFING.

SIT theory has three main components:

1. Social categorisation
2. Social identity
3. Social comparison

SIT is all about in-groups versus out-groups and how our belonging to in-groups affects our behaviour. For this to happen we first need to categorise people into out-groups and in-groups. Then after we do this, we can develop a social identity based on our belonging to the in-group and defining ourselves against the out-group. Then comes social comparison. SIT posits that because we have a natural desire to increase our self-esteem, we make biased comparisons so we look down on out-groups and make positive claims about our in-groups.

The effect of social identity on behaviour is shown in a phenomenon known as BIRG-ing – basking in reflected glory. When our group is successful, we bask in it. We celebrate our group’s success to show how good we are. After a win, a sports team fan for example will talk about “we.” They’ll say things like “we just wanted it more” and “we were better prepared.” However, when that same team loses, they might CORF – cut off reflected failure. They distance themselves to reduce damage to their self-esteem. Fans of a losing team CORF by using the pronoun “they,” saying things like “they blew it in the second half” or “they’re just not that good this year.” Birging helps boost our self-esteem and corfing stops it from taking a hit.

In summary, SIT explains how belonging to in-groups affects a range of human behaviours, including birging and corfing. (275 words)

Defining theories is hard, but I do think it’s good for students to be able to have a one-sentence summary. Understanding what the theory is trying to explain is a good place to start.

Bullet points are fine in an SAQ as are diagrams, as long as they support the explanation. An esteemed examiner may disagree, as they once said bullet points should not be in SAQs with “describe” command terms but to me that’s just nonsense – we are teaching informational writing and bullet points and diagrams are excellent ways of illustrating information. Imagine writing about the MSM and not diagramming it for example.

Starting with a definition and then restating the question is a perfectly reasonable way to begin.

This final sentence in this paragarph is key – it gives a reason for why the behaviour is happening according to SIT – to boost and protect self-esteem.

A finicky examiner may mark down my two examples and not one. For the purposes of these SAQs that I’m writing at 6:30pm on a Saturday night, I’ll leave both in. But yes, ideally a student would prepare to have just one.