| Date | May 2018 | Marks available | 22 | Reference code | 18M.Paper 2.BP.TZ0.11 |
| Level | SL and HL | Paper | Paper 2 | Time zone | TZ0 |
| Command term | Evaluate | Question number | 11 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
Psychology of human relationships
Evaluate two examples of research (theories and/or studies) investigating the role of communication in maintaining relationships.
Markscheme
Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term “evaluate” requires candidates to make an appraisal of two examples of research investigating the role of communication in maintaining relationships by weighing up the strengths and limitations of the research. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.
Examples of research may include, but are not limited to:
• gender or cultural differences in communication patterns (for example, Tannen, 1990)
• the role of attribution in relationships (for example, Bradbury and Fincham, 1992)
• the value of disclosure (for example, social penetration theory)
• the role of communication of emotions in maintaining relationships (for example, Gottman and Levenson, 1986)
• studies on marital satisfaction (for example, Fincham, 2004).
Evaluation of the research may include, but is not limited to:
• methodological considerations
• cultural and gender considerations
• the accuracy and clarity of the concepts
• supporting and/or contradictory evidence
• alternative explanations
• the productivity of the theory in generating psychological research
• the applications of the empirical findings.
If a candidate evaluates more than two examples of research, credit should be given only to the first two examples of research. However, candidates may discuss other theories/studies and be awarded marks for this as long as these theories/studies are clearly used to evaluate the two main examples of research addressed in the response.
If a candidate evaluates only one theory/study, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5] for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension, up to a maximum of [4] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2] for criterion C, organization.
If a candidate discusses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2] for criterion C, organization. Up to full marks may be awarded for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension.
