Describe localization with reference to one relevant study.

Refer to the paper 1 section A markbands when awarding marks. These can be found under the “Your tests” tab > supplemental materials.

The command term “describe” requires candidates to give a detailed account of localization of function related to one relevant study.

Responses should describe localization of function, clearly indicating how a specific area of the brain is, or specific areas are, involved in behaviour or cognition.

Candidates should refer to an appropriate study that is relevant to the biological approach.

Examples of studies could include but are not limited to:

• localization of speech production/understanding (Wernicke, 1900; Broca, 1861)
• the role of the hippocampus in episodic, semantic memory or spatial memory (Corkin, 1997; Maguire, 2000)
• the role of the amygdala in aggression (Matthies et al., 2012) or memory (McGaugh and Cahill, 1995; Sharot et al., 2007)
• role of the prefrontal lobe in decision making (Bechara, 1999).

If a candidate describes localization of function with reference to more than one study, credit should be given only to the first study.

If a candidate describes a relevant study, but localization of function and its link to the study is not explicitly described, up to a maximum of [4] should be awarded.

If a candidate addresses localization of function but does not refer to an appropriate study, up to a maximum of [5] should be awarded.

HL - Many candidates had a very limited description of localization.

In addition, many candidates used Maguire’s study, but were not able to explain how it demonstrates localization. Most candidates focused on neuroplasticity without making the link to why neuroplasticity can be used as evidence of localization – that is, long-term potentiation in the posterior hippocampus leads to dendritic branching, indicating that this area of the brain is active during a behaviour. Many also mentioned the anterior hippocampus without any clarification.

Some candidates are still using research from the 19th century. Phineas Gage is only acceptable if described in light of modern research. Candidates writing about older research usually included inaccurate information – for example, about Gage’s autopsy. Candidates should use more modern research in order to access the full range of marks.

SL - The majority of responses used either Maguire’s study demonstrating neuroplasticity in London taxi drivers or Corkin/Milner’s research into Henry Molaison. Both studies looked at the hippocampus’s role in episodic and spatial memory, although there was a distinct lack of conceptual understanding with regards to both localization and how the research demonstrated this concept. Many candidates were not adequately able to explain the complexities of the hippocampus’s role and gave generic, explanatory statements.

Many candidates began their response with an irrelevant list of examples of localization or a list of studies (not those relevant to their answer), before actually beginning to address the question with their specific example and study. This sometimes included a simple list of areas of the brain and their function.

A large proportion of candidates used outdated research originating in the 19th century. Phineas Gage, Paul Broca and Carl Wernicke constituted the majority of these. Whilst these are mentioned in both the textbooks and the markscheme, candidates using these examples were often not able to access the top mark bands as their explanations included many errors and misconceptions.

Finally, many responses provided unnecessary descriptions and evaluations of concepts and research. Candidates often described how research into localization has developed in terms of brain imaging technology and then also spent unnecessary time evaluating research.