OxfordAQA A-Level Psychology: Biopsychology, Development and Research Methods 1 — Practice Questions

These are original questions written for Marlbridge, in the style and at the standard of the examination. They are not reproduced past-paper questions — examination boards hold copyright in their own papers. Use these alongside the official past papers available free from your board.

Related: Biopsychology, Development and Research Methods 1 study guide · Biopsychology, Development and Research Methods 1 revision notes

---

Section A

1. Distinguish between the central and peripheral nervous systems, and explain how the autonomic nervous system relates to this division. [4]

2. Outline the process of synaptic transmission, including the role of neurotransmitters and the difference between excitation and inhibition. [5]

3. Explain what is meant by localisation of function in the brain, using Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area as examples. [4]

Section B

4. Explain the sequence of events in the fight-or-flight response, from a perceived threat to the physiological changes produced by adrenaline. [6]

5. Compare Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s theories of cognitive development, including at least one named concept from each. [8]

6. Describe the Sally-Anne study and explain what it demonstrates about theory of mind. [6]

7. A study reports a correlation of −0.6 between hours of sleep and reported stress levels.

(a) Describe what this correlation shows. [2] (b) Explain two reasons why this does not prove that poor sleep causes higher stress. [4] (c) Suggest one appropriate way to display this data. [1]

8. Evaluate the claim that split-brain research provides strong evidence for hemispheric lateralisation of function. [8]

---

Answers

1. The central nervous system (CNS) consists of the brain and spinal cord [1]; the peripheral nervous system (PNS) consists of all the nerves connecting the CNS to the rest of the body [1]. The autonomic nervous system is a division of the peripheral nervous system, not a separate category [1], governing involuntary functions such as heart rate and digestion, alongside the somatic nervous system, which governs voluntary movement and carries sensory information [1].

2. An electrical impulse travels along the presynaptic neuron to the synapse [1]; this triggers the release of neurotransmitters from vesicles into the synaptic gap [1]; these bind to receptors on the postsynaptic neuron’s membrane [1]. Binding produces either excitation, making the postsynaptic neuron more likely to fire an impulse, or inhibition, making it less likely to fire [1]; whether the overall effect is excitatory or inhibitory depends on the specific neurotransmitter and receptor involved [1].

3. Localisation of function is the idea that specific psychological functions are controlled by specific, identifiable areas of the brain, rather than the brain acting as a single undifferentiated mass [1]. Broca’s area, in the frontal lobe, is associated with speech production — damage typically produces slow, non-fluent speech [1] [1]. Wernicke’s area, in the temporal lobe, is associated with language comprehension — damage typically produces fluent but meaningless speech [1] [1].

4. A perceived threat is detected and processed by the hypothalamus [1], which activates the sympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system [1]. This triggers the adrenal medulla to release adrenaline into the bloodstream [1]. Adrenaline produces physiological changes that prepare the body for rapid action, including increased heart rate [1], blood diverted away from digestion and toward the muscles [1], and pupil dilation [1]. A strong answer explains this as a single connected sequence rather than naming the stages in isolation.

5. Piaget’s theory frames cognitive development as an internal, stage-based process, driven by schemas being adjusted through assimilation and accommodation toward equilibration, with named stages such as the concrete operational stage (in which conservation is achieved) [1] [1] [1]. Vygotsky’s theory frames development as socially and culturally driven, centred on the zone of proximal development — the gap between what a child can do alone and what they can do with support — and scaffolding, the support given by a more knowledgeable other and gradually withdrawn as competence grows [1] [1] [1]. A strong comparative answer notes that both theories concern how children’s thinking develops, but disagree fundamentally on whether that development is primarily internally or socially driven, and can cite Baillargeon’s violation-of-expectation research as evidence complicating Piaget’s account of when object permanence is actually achieved [1] [1].

6. In the Sally-Anne study, a child watches Sally hide an object and leave the room, after which Anne moves it to a new location; the child is then asked where Sally will look for the object on her return [1] [1]. A child who answers with the object’s original location demonstrates they can represent that Sally holds a false belief distinct from reality, showing they have developed theory of mind [1] [1]. A child who answers with the object’s actual new location has not yet developed this capacity, since they cannot yet separate their own knowledge from Sally’s [1] [1].

7. (a) A moderate-to-strong negative correlation [1] — as hours of sleep increase, reported stress levels tend to decrease [1]. (b) Correlation does not establish the direction of causation — high stress could plausibly cause poor sleep, rather than poor sleep causing stress [1] [1]. A third variable, such as workload or an underlying health condition, could plausibly cause both reduced sleep and increased stress [1] [1]. (c) A scattergram [1].

8. Split-brain research studies patients whose corpus callosum has been surgically severed, allowing researchers to present information to just one hemisphere at a time and observe what the patient can and cannot report or act on [2]. This provides strong evidence for lateralisation because it isolates each hemisphere’s function directly, in a way that ordinary observation of intact brains cannot — for example, showing that a patient can act on information shown only to the right hemisphere without being able to verbally name it, consistent with left-hemisphere dominance for language [2] [2]. A balanced evaluation notes limitations: the sample of split-brain patients is small and unusual (all had severe epilepsy, an atypical population), the surgery itself may alter brain function beyond simply disconnecting the hemispheres, and findings from a severed brain may not generalise straightforwardly to how the two hemispheres cooperate in an intact one [2]. A top-band answer therefore concludes that split-brain research provides valuable but not unlimited evidence, and should be read alongside other lateralisation evidence rather than treated as definitive on its own [2].

---

Where marks are usually lost

• Treating the autonomic nervous system as a category separate from the peripheral nervous system, rather than a division within it.
• Naming a stage of Piaget’s theory without its defining feature (for example, “concrete operational” without conservation).
• Answering a correlation question as though it proves causation, or failing to name a specific, plausible third variable.
• Describing split-brain research without evaluating its limitations — a description alone will not reach the top band on an “evaluate” question.
• Explaining the fight-or-flight response as a list of disconnected facts rather than a single ordered sequence.