OxfordAQA International A-level Psychology (9685): 3.4.2 Issues and debates in psychology – Revision Notes

These notes condense the issues and debates study guide, so read that first if a term here is new. They follow section 3.4.2 of the OxfordAQA International AS and A-level Psychology (9685) specification, Version 3.1 (International A-level exams May/June 2020 onwards). The content is assessed in Unit 4: Approaches and application, Section B, which the specification gives as 30 marks of compulsory questions in a 1 hour 30 minute, 90-mark exam worth 30% of the International A-level.

Test yourself with the issues and debates practice questions. The 9685 course hub and the 9685 checklist cover the rest of the course.

Unit 4 Section B in one box

• Four debates are printed in section 3.4.2: free will and determinism; nature-nurture; holism and reductionism; psychology and science.
• Unit 4 is labelled a synoptic unit. The specification expects you to use “knowledge and understanding from other areas of the course” to illustrate Section A and B answers.
• Approximate Unit 4 weightings (share of the whole A-level): AO1 9%, AO2 8%, AO3 13%. Evaluation carries the most weight.
• Command words and mark schemes are not printed in the specification; your teacher will confirm them.

Key terms

Term	Definition
Free will	People can make genuine choices that are not fully caused by internal or external forces
Determinism	Every behaviour has prior causes and could in principle be predicted
Hard determinism	All behaviour is caused; free will is an illusion
Soft determinism	Behaviour is caused, but conscious choice still operates within those limits
Biological determinism	Behaviour caused by genes, brain structures, hormones or neurochemistry
Environmental determinism	Behaviour caused by the environment, mainly through learning
Causal explanation	An account that identifies what produces a behaviour; tested by manipulating an IV and measuring a DV
Heredity	Characteristics passed from parents to offspring through genes
Environment	Every non-genetic influence, from conditions before birth to culture
Interactionist approach	Nature and nurture influence each other, so behaviour results from both together
Reductionism	Explaining behaviour by breaking it into smaller, more basic parts
Holism	Studying the person or group as a whole, because the whole has properties the parts lack
Levels of explanation	Biological, basic behavioural, cognitive, and social or cultural accounts of the same behaviour
Biological reductionism	Explaining behaviour at the physical level: genes, neurotransmitters, brain areas
Stimulus-response (environmental) reductionism	Explaining behaviour as learned links between stimuli and responses
Objectivity	Findings not affected by the researcher’s expectations or feelings
Empirical method	Gaining knowledge through observation and measurement
Replicability	A study can be repeated with the same method and give similar results
Falsifiability	A theory makes predictions that could, in principle, be shown false
Hypothetico-deductive method	Theory produces a hypothesis; data test it; the theory is supported, revised or rejected

Studies and theories at a glance

Who	What	Finding or claim	One evaluation point
Skinner (1971), Beyond Freedom and Dignity	Behaviourist view of freedom	Behaviour is shaped by reinforcement; the “autonomous” person is an illusion	Hard to falsify: any act can be called “reinforced” after the event
Bandura (1986), reciprocal determinism	Social cognitive theory	Behaviour, environment and personal factors influence each other	Soft determinism; less precise to test than single causes
Rotter (1966)	Locus of control	Beliefs about control lie on a continuum from internal to external	Links beliefs about choice to real behaviour, such as resisting pressure
Vohs and Schooler (2008)	Reading a determinist passage	Participants were more likely to cheat on a later test	Later studies have reported contradictory findings
Baillargeon (1987)	Violation of expectation	Some infants as young as 3.5 months looked longer at impossible events	Looking time may reflect novelty, not knowledge
Maguire et al. (2000)	London taxi drivers, brain scans	Larger posterior hippocampus; volume correlated with time as a driver	Correlational, but the years-of-driving link supports plasticity
Frith (1992)	Cognitive account of schizophrenia	A fault in central monitoring of action	A cognitive level of explanation alongside the dopamine hypothesis
Tolman and Honzik (1930)	Rats in a maze	Rats rewarded only from day 11 quickly matched always-rewarded rats	Challenges stimulus-response reductionism: learning without reinforcement
Janis (1972)	Groupthink	Drive for agreement in a close group overrides realistic appraisal of alternatives	Supports holism, but group-level claims are hard to test
Watson (1913)	Behaviourist manifesto	Psychology should be objective natural science aiming at prediction and control	Rejected introspection; narrowed what psychology could study
Popper (1934; English 1959)	Falsifiability	A scientific theory must be open to refutation	Criticised theories that could explain any outcome
Baddeley and Hitch (1974); Baddeley (2000)	Working memory model	Episodic buffer added to fit new evidence	Shows theory revision through hypothesis testing
Open Science Collaboration (2015)	Replication of 100 studies	97% of originals significant; 36% of replications significant	Failed replications do not always mean the original was false

Must-know distinctions

• Hard vs soft determinism. Both say behaviour has causes. Only soft determinism says conscious choice still operates within those causes.
• Biological vs environmental determinism. The cause is inside the body versus outside it, through learning.
• Determinism vs reductionism. Determinism is about whether behaviour is caused. Reductionism is about which level you explain it at. A theory can be one without the other: Bandura’s reciprocal determinism is deterministic but not reductionist.
• Heredity vs environment vs interaction. Nature, nurture, or both changing each other (plasticity, endogenous pacemakers reset by zeitgebers).
• Biological vs stimulus-response reductionism. Physical level versus learned stimulus-response links. Both ignore the cognitive level.
• Falsifiable vs falsified. Falsifiable means it could be shown wrong. Falsified means it has been.
• Replication vs reliability. Replication repeats a whole study, often by other researchers. Reliability is consistency of a measure, such as test-retest.
• Objective vs empirical. Objective is free of researcher bias. Empirical is based on observation. A study can be empirical but not objective, if the observer’s expectations shape the record.

Linking each debate to the rest of 9685

Debate	Example from another topic	How to use it
Biological determinism	Narcolepsy and loss of orexin-producing cells	Sleepiness is caused by the body, not chosen
Environmental determinism	Skinner’s operant conditioning	Behaviour shaped by reinforcement history
Soft determinism	Locus of control (Unit 1)	Beliefs about control change behaviour
Nature	Baillargeon’s violation of expectation research	Early object understanding suggests innate knowledge
Nurture	Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development	Thinking develops through social help and language
Interaction	Plasticity (Maguire et al., 2000); circadian rhythms	Experience changes the brain; inherited clock reset by light
Biological reductionism	Dopamine hypothesis of schizophrenia	Positive symptoms linked to dopamine activity
Stimulus-response reductionism	Pavlov and Skinner	Learning reduced to conditioned associations
Holism	Groupthink (Janis, 1972)	A group effect absent in individuals
Falsifiability	Piaget’s timing of object permanence	Tested and challenged by looking-time research
Theory construction	Working memory model	Revised in 2000 to fit amnesia evidence

Mini essay plan: “Discuss the view that psychology is a science.” (extended response)

1. Define (AO1). Objectivity, the empirical method, replicability, falsifiability, theory construction and hypothesis testing.
2. Point for (AO1 + example). Behaviourism set out to be objective (Watson, 1913) and produced testable laws of learning.
3. Point for (AO2 + example). The working memory model was revised in 2000 after new evidence: the hypothetico-deductive cycle working as it should.
4. Point for (AO3). Baillargeon’s looking-time research tested and challenged Piaget’s timing, so developmental theory is falsifiable.
5. Point against (AO3). The Open Science Collaboration (2015) found significant results in 36% of replications, against 97% of originals.
6. Point against (AO3). Participants react to being studied (demand characteristics), and measures such as looking time still need interpretation.
7. Counter-point (AO3). The replication problem was found and is being corrected by scientific methods.
8. Judgement. Psychology uses scientific methods well in some areas (biological, cognitive) and less in others; “is it a science?” depends on which part you mean.

Quick self-test

1. What does soft determinism claim?
2. Which type of determinism does Skinner’s view of behaviour represent?
3. Why does the experimental method assume determinism?
4. What does “relative importance” of heredity and environment ask you to do?
5. How does the sleep/wake cycle illustrate the interactionist approach?
6. Name the two kinds of reductionism printed in the specification.
7. What did Tolman and Honzik (1930) show that challenges stimulus-response reductionism?
8. What is the difference between “falsifiable” and “falsified”?
9. What did the Open Science Collaboration (2015) find?
10. Why was the episodic buffer added to the working memory model?
11. Give one reason looking-time studies may not show what infants know.

Answers

1. Behaviour has causes, but people can still make conscious choices within those limits.
2. Hard, environmental determinism.
3. It manipulates an IV to find its effect on a DV, which only makes sense if behaviour has regular causes.
4. Weigh how much each contributes, rather than choosing one.
5. An inherited endogenous pacemaker sets a rhythm, but exogenous zeitgebers such as light reset it.
6. Biological reductionism and stimulus-response (environmental) reductionism.
7. Rats that were not rewarded for 10 days had still learned the maze, which showed once food was added on day 11.
8. Falsifiable means it could be shown false; falsified means evidence has shown it false.
9. Of 100 studies, 97% of the originals had significant results, but only 36% of the replications did.
10. Some amnesic patients recalled more of a story in the short term than the phonological loop could hold.
11. Longer looking may reflect novelty or perceptual interest rather than understanding.

Where marks are usually lost

• Writing “determinism” with no type. Say whether it is hard or soft, biological or environmental.
• Mixing up determinism and reductionism. One concerns causes; the other concerns levels of explanation.
• Claiming Piaget is “the nature side”. His theory needs experience to drive accommodation, so it is interactionist.
• Calling Maguire et al. (2000) proof that experience changes the brain. It is correlational; say so and then use the years-of-driving link.
• Listing levels of explanation without applying them to one behaviour.
• Defining falsifiability as “proved wrong”.
• Using the replication figures without saying what they show about objectivity or scientific status.
• Giving a debate answer with no example from the rest of 9685, when the specification asks you to use one.
• Ending an extended answer without a judgement. AO3 has the largest Unit 4 weighting.

For the examples above in more depth, see the introductory topics revision notes, the biopsychology and development revision notes the psychology of sleep revision notes, the schizophrenia revision notes and the scientific approaches revision notes.

Official syllabus

OxfordAQA International AS and A-level Psychology (9685) specification, Version 3.1 (International A-level exams May/June 2020 onwards): section 3.4.2 (Issues and debates in psychology), section 3.4 (synoptic aims), section 2.3 (Unit 4 structure) and section 4.3.2 (assessment objective weightings).