Evaluate one or more studies related to promoting prosocial behaviour.

Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks. These can be found under the “Your tests” tab > supplemental materials.

The command term “evaluate” requires candidates to make an appraisal by weighing up strengths and limitations of one or more studies related to promoting prosocial behaviour. Although both strengths and limitations should be addressed, it does not have to be evenly balanced.

The concept of promoting prosocial behaviour refers to any method that develops prosocial behavior (i.e., Subido Methodology) or a more general application of a model investigating factors investigating prosocial behavior (i.e., Social Cognitive Theory suggesting the use of TV or video games).

Relevant studies related to promoting prosocial behavior may include, but are not limited to:

• Luiselli et al.’s (2005) study evaluating the effectiveness of positive behavioral interventions and supports
• Elliott et al.’s (1999) study on the effects of the Responsive Classroom programme on students in elementary school
• Kleemans et al. (2015) study on the impact of prosocial television news on children’s prosocial behaviour in the Netherlands
• Flook et al.’s (2015) study on promoting prosocial behaviour in schoolchildren using mindfulness
• Layous et al.’s (2012) study on prompting prosocial behaviour in pre-adolescents
• Pollock’s (2014) field study done in Rwanda, concerning Subido methodology.

Evaluation may include, but is not limited to:

• validity/reliability of the study/studies
• supporting and/or contradictory studies
• productivity of the study in generating further research
• cultural and gender considerations
• application of the research.

If the candidate addresses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [3] for criterion D: critical thinking. All remaining criteria should be awarded marks according to the markbands independently, and could achieve up to full marks.

In questions that ask for evaluation of studies, marks awarded for criterion B should refer to definitions of terms, theories and concepts. Overall, this includes knowledge of the specific topic and general knowledge and understanding related to research methods and ethics (for example definitions of relevant terms in research methodology or ethics in research). Marks awarded for criterion C assess the quality of the description of a study/studies and assess how well the student linked the findings of the study to the question – this doesn’t have to be very sophisticated or long for these questions but still the aim or the conclusion should be linked to the topic of the specific question. Criterion D assesses how well the student is explaining strengths and limitations of the study/studies.

This was one of the most popular questions on the exam. A variety of studies was used here, including some new studies that involved the use of media and technology to promote prosocial behaviour. However, other candidates lapsed into a discussion of bystanderism. A common error was to not include the idea of promoting prosocial behaviour, which was specifically asked for in the answer.