Contrast two explanations of one or more disorders.

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

The command term “contrast” requires candidates to give an account of the differences between two explanations of one or more disorders, referring to both explanations throughout. It is not necessary for candidates to evaluate the explanations in order to receive high marks.

The disorder(s) chosen must come from the list in the guide:

• anxiety disorders
• depressive disorders
• obsessive compulsive disorders
• trauma and stress related disorders
• eating disorders.

Explanations contrasted may include, but are not limited to:

• cognitive explanations
• biological explanations
• social cognitive explanations
• genetic explanations
• psychoanalytic explanations
• biopsychosocial explanations.

Although not limited to the following, factors that might be considered when contrasting two explanations include:

• genetic factors
• biochemical factors
• cognitive style
• cognitive distortion and bias
• cultural factors
• environmental factors.

Relevant studies may include but are not limited to:

• Henninger et al.’s (1996) study on reducing serotonin levels in healthy individuals
• Nurnberg and Gershon’s (1982) review of seven twin studies on major depression
• Boury et al.’s (2001) correlation between amount of negative automatic thoughts and the severity of depression
• Brown and Harris’s (1978) study on social factors of depression
• Kendler et al.’s (1991) twin research on genetic vulnerability in bulimia nervosa
• Jaeger et al.’s (2002) cross-cultural study on the relationship between body dissatisfaction and development of bulimia

If a candidate only discusses two explanations of one disorder without presenting a contrast, the response should be awarded a maximum of up to [3] for Criterion D: critical thinking. All remaining criteria should be awarded marks according to the best fit approach.