The core studies — common mistakes

In Paper 2, Section B, you will be asked to discuss an issue or debate using the core studies as examples. Do not just describe the studies. You must explicitly link the aim, method, or findings of each study back to the specific issue or debate in the question to show the examiner you are answering the question directly.

This is a common worry. While you need to know the key findings, you are not expected to memorise every single statistical value. Understanding the pattern of the results (e.g., which group scored significantly higher) is more important than recalling the exact p-value. However, knowing some key quantitative data for important findings can strengthen your answers significantly.

No, and it's crucial to understand this. The core studies are chosen because they are influential or classic examples of a particular approach or method. Many have significant methodological or ethical flaws. A key skill you must develop is critically evaluating these studies, identifying their strengths and, just as importantly, their weaknesses.

No, and using studies across different approaches is a sign of a high-level answer. The approaches are not mutually exclusive. For example, you can discuss how Bandura's study (Learning Approach) has cognitive elements (e.g., mediational processes). Similarly, you can critique a study from one approach using the assumptions of another. This shows a deeper, more integrated understanding of psychology.