Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457): Topic: Digital world — Practice Questions

These are original questions written for Marlbridge, for revision and practice on this content. They are not reproduced past-paper questions, and they do not replicate the exam’s exact structure, question count or mark tariffs – examination boards hold copyright in their own papers. Use these alongside the official past papers from your board or school.

These questions use the topic Digital world from the Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457) syllabus for examination in 2025, 2026 and 2027, Version 2 (published April 2025). Digital world is one of the 22 topics in section 3. Questions 1–7 practise the source-based skills of Component 1 Written Exam (section 4), and Questions 8–10 practise planning for Component 2 Individual Report and Component 3 Team Project. Topic knowledge is not assessed. The syllabus states that knowledge of content is not assessed, so answer the source questions from the sources only; the page shows how to use the topic to practise the skills.

Places, people and figures in the sources are fictional unless a real organisation is named. Revise first with the Digital world study guide and the Digital world revision notes. For the full course, see the IGCSE Global Perspectives hub and the IGCSE Global Perspectives checklist.

Questions

1. Explain what is meant by a “vested interest” when judging a source. [2]

2. Read Source A.

Source A – original text written for Marlbridge. From a blog post by the chief executive of BrightSlate, a fictional company that sells tablets to schools, about the fictional town of Harwick.

“Every child learns better with a tablet. In our survey of 500 Harwick parents, 92% agreed that digital skills matter for future jobs. Harwick has three secondary schools, and only one gives every student a tablet. By 2030, almost every job in Harwick will need digital skills. Schools that refuse tablets are letting their students down. Paper textbooks belong in a museum.”

(a) Identify one prediction in Source A. [1] (b) Identify one fact and one opinion in Source A. [2] (c) Explain how the author’s vested interest affects the reliability of Source A. [3]

3. Read Source B.

Source B – original text written for Marlbridge. RestWell, a fictional company that sells a sleep-tracking app, ran an online survey in the fictional district of Kelmora. 400 students aged 13–16 from two schools answered questions in one week about their usual daily recreational screen time and how long they usually sleep. RestWell’s press release was headlined: “Screens are stealing students’ sleep.”

Daily recreational screen time	Number of students	Average reported sleep per night (hours)
Under 2 hours	96	8.4
2 to 4 hours	168	7.9
Over 4 hours	136	7.1
Total	400

(a) Using Source B, calculate the percentage of students who reported over 4 hours of screen time, and the difference in average sleep between the lowest and highest screen-time groups. [2] (b) Evaluate the research described in Source B. [6] (c) Suggest how you could research the claim that screen time reduces students’ sleep. [6]

4. Read Source C.

Source C – original text written for Marlbridge. From a local news report in the fictional town of Lindmere.

“Lindmere had four bank branches in 2019; today it has one. In the town’s shops, the share of payments made by card or phone rose from 46% in 2019 to 81% in 2025, according to the fictional Lindmere Traders’ Association. Café owner Sam Reyes said: ‘Handling cash costs me time and bank fees. Most customers prefer to tap.’ Retired nurse Joan Hale, 78, said: ‘I’ve no smartphone, and the nearest branch is now a 40-minute bus ride away. I feel shut out.’ A local charity’s survey of 250 residents aged 70 and over found that 38% do not use online banking. A national government spokesperson said that banks are private businesses and decide where to open branches. Globally, the International Telecommunication Union estimated in 2024 that about 2.6 billion people were still offline.”

Identify two different perspectives in Source C and explain why they differ. [4]

5. Using Source C:

(a) Explain two causes of older residents in Lindmere feeling excluded. [4] (b) Explain two possible consequences of this exclusion. [4]

6. Read Source D.

Source D – original text written for Marlbridge. Two views on facial recognition cameras in the fictional city of Port Avalen.

Argument 1, Councillor Dana Brookes (fictional): “During a six-month trial in the city centre, our cameras produced 40 alerts, which led police to 14 people wanted for serious offences. Recorded street crime in the trial area fell by 9% compared with the same six months the year before. Residents deserve to feel safe. Anyone with nothing to hide has nothing to fear.”

Argument 2, spokesperson for Open Streets, a fictional digital rights group: “In the same trial, 26 of the 40 alerts pointed to the wrong person. That means innocent people were stopped. Studies have shown that these systems make more mistakes with some groups of people than others. The city has published no rules on how long images are kept.”

Evaluate the two arguments in Source D. Which argument is better supported? Give reasons for your judgement. [12]

7. Three courses of action have been proposed for Lindmere:

• a free weekly digital-skills class at the town library
• a national law requiring shops to accept cash
• a shared banking hub where several banks offer counter services in the town on set days.

Using Source C, evaluate these courses of action and recommend the one you think would work best. Explain your judgement with reasons and evidence. [16]

8. A student planning an Individual Report on Digital world writes two possible questions.

• Question X: “How many people use social media worldwide?”
• Question Y: “Should governments set a minimum age for social media accounts?”

Explain which question is better suited to the Individual Report. [4]

9. Your Team Project team has chosen Digital world. Suggest a local issue, an action your team could carry out, and how you would plan, evidence and measure it. [6]

10. A team ran an online-safety session for younger students and gave a leaflet to 60 families. 12 families came to a follow-up evening. The team wrote: “Our action was a success because 60 leaflets were handed out.” Evaluate this way of measuring success. [4]

Answers

1. The author or funder gains from a particular outcome, such as money or influence [1]. So they may choose evidence that favours that outcome, making the source less reliable, as with a tablet seller writing about tablets [1]. [2] Examiner insight: a definition alone earns one mark; the second mark comes from saying how the interest could affect the evidence.

2. (a) “By 2030, almost every job in Harwick will need digital skills.” [1] [1] (b) Fact: “Harwick has three secondary schools, and only one gives every student a tablet” (this can be checked) [1]. Opinion: “Paper textbooks belong in a museum” or “Schools that refuse tablets are letting their students down” [1]. [2] (c) BrightSlate sells tablets, so it gains if schools buy more of them [1]. Its survey asked whether digital skills matter for jobs, not whether tablets improve learning, so the evidence sounds supportive but does not prove the claim [1]. The source is therefore less reliable and needs independent corroboration [1]. [3] Examiner insight: name the interest (selling tablets) and the weakness it causes; “it is biased” alone gains little.

3. (a) 136 ÷ 400 × 100 = 34% [1]. 8.4 − 7.1 = 1.3 hours [1]. [2] (b) A sample of 400 is reasonably large for a local study [1]. The pattern is clear: average sleep falls as screen time rises [1]. But both measures are self-reported estimates and may be inaccurate [1]. Only two schools in one district took part, so results may not apply elsewhere [1]. RestWell sells a sleep app, so it has a vested interest in showing a sleep problem [1]. The data show a link, not a cause; homework or stress could affect both, so the headline goes beyond the evidence [1]. [6] (c) Use an independent researcher [1]. Use a larger sample from many schools and areas [1]. Measure screen time with device usage records, not estimates [1]. Record sleep with diaries or trackers over several weeks [1]. Control other factors such as homework, or compare the same students before and after cutting evening screen time [1]. Get consent and keep data anonymous [1]. [6] Examiner insight: evaluation marks need Source B’s own details, such as “two schools” and “self-reported”, not a general list.

4. Sam Reyes favours card payments because cash costs him time and fees [1]. Joan Hale feels shut out because she has no smartphone and the branch is far away [1]. Their interests differ: Sam’s business saves money, while Joan needs in-person services [1]. Their access differs too: Joan lacks the device needed to take part [1]. [4] Examiner insight: half the marks are for explaining why the views differ, not restating them.

5. (a) Branches fell from four to one [1], so older residents travel further, such as Joan’s 40-minute bus ride [1]. Card and phone payments rose from 46% to 81% [1], which excludes the 38% surveyed who do not use online banking [1]. [4] (b) Older residents may depend on family to handle money [1], reducing independence and causing isolation, as “I feel shut out” suggests [1]. They may shop less in town [1], so local shops could lose customers [1]. [4] Examiner insight: each cause or consequence needs a developed link (“so”, “which means”), and quoting the source’s figures turns a general point into application.

6. The real exam marks extended answers with levels of response, not point by point. The points below show the kind of content that would be credited.

Argument 1 gives specific evidence: 14 wanted people found [1]. Comparing with the same months last year gives a baseline [1]. But the 9% fall could have other causes, such as more patrols [1]. One six-month trial in one area is limited evidence [1]. It omits that most alerts were wrong, so it is selective [1]. “Nothing to hide has nothing to fear” is a value-based assertion, not evidence [1]. The councillor may have a vested interest in the scheme looking successful [1].

Argument 2 uses the same trial: 26 of 40 alerts, 65%, were wrong, which directly challenges Argument 1 [1]. It raises an ignored issue: no published rules on keeping images [1]. But “studies have shown” gives no source [1]. “Innocent people were stopped” is an assumption; the source does not say anyone was stopped [1].

Judgement: Argument 2 is slightly better supported, because its key evidence comes from the trial and Argument 1 leaves it out, though both have gaps [1]. [12] Examiner insight: this question rewards a judgement on the quality of each argument’s reasoning and evidence, not your own view on whether cameras should be used.

7. The real exam marks extended answers with levels of response, not point by point. The points below show the kind of content that would be credited.

Skills class: it tackles a cause, since 38% surveyed do not use online banking [1]. Skills last, so it is sustainable [1]. The library keeps costs low [1]. But it does not help residents with no smartphone, like Joan [1], and some may avoid online banking over security worries [1].

Cash law: it helps cash users at once [1] and protects choice [1]. But it adds costs for owners like Sam [1]. A national law is slow and may meet resistance; the government’s view that banks are private businesses suggests it is reluctant to intervene [1]. It does not make getting cash easier once branches close [1].

Banking hub: it returns counter services to the town, cutting trips like Joan’s [1]. Shared costs make it more realistic than reopening branches [1]. But it opens only on set days and needs banks to agree [1].

Comparison: the hub helps most people soonest, the classes last longest, and the cash law is least feasible [1]. Recommendation: the hub, supported by classes, because it meets the urgent need and builds future skills [1]. Further evidence would help, such as how many residents have no smartphone [1]. [16] Examiner insight: top marks need actions compared against stated criteria and a justified recommendation, not separate descriptions.

8. Question Y is better [1]. It divides opinion, while Question X has a single factual answer and so gives no debate to analyse [1]. Question Y allows perspectives at different levels, such as parents locally, governments nationally and platforms globally [1]. It also leads naturally to proposing a course of action, which the report must include [1]. [4] Examiner insight: link your choice to what the report requires, not to which question sounds more interesting.

9. Local issue: older residents near the school struggle to book appointments online [1]. Action: two help sessions at a community centre [1]. Each member researches a different perspective: residents, centre staff, families [1]. Roles: one contacts the centre, one writes guides, one handles publicity [1]. Evidence of Action: photographs and the guide produced [1]. Success measure: a before-and-after confidence survey [1]. [6] Examiner insight: the issue must be local and the action one the team can carry out and measure; lobbying for national change cannot be evidenced as a team action.

10. The number of leaflets measures activity, not impact [1]. It does not show that anyone read the leaflet or changed their behaviour online [1]. Only 12 of 60 families, 20%, came to the follow-up evening, which suggests limited engagement [1]. A better measure would be a quiz on online safety before and after the session, or a follow-up survey of the students [1]. [4] Examiner insight: credit goes to answers that separate what the team did from what changed as a result.

Where marks are usually lost

• Bringing in outside knowledge about technology instead of using the sources.
• Calling a source “biased” without naming the vested interest and the weakness it causes.
• Treating a link between two things, such as screen time and sleep, as proof that one causes the other.
• Describing perspectives without explaining why people hold them.
• Evaluating only one side of an argument, or giving your own view on the issue instead of judging the reasoning.
• Assessing courses of action one by one with no comparison or final recommendation.
• Team Project actions that are not local, not feasible, or have no way to measure success.

Next steps

• Check any weak skills with the Marlbridge diagnostics.
• Reread the Digital world study guide and the Written Exam study guide.
• Plan coursework with the Individual Report study guide and the Team Project practice questions.
• Want help from a teacher? Book a free trial class.

Official syllabus

These questions are based on the Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457) syllabus for examination in 2025, 2026 and 2027, Version 2 (published April 2025), sections 2, 3 and 4. Your teacher will confirm how your school uses the Digital world topic.