Discuss one or more research methods used to investigate cultural origins of behaviour and/or cultural origins of cognition.

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

The command term “discuss" requires candidates to offer a considered review of one or more research methods used to investigate the cultural origins of behaviour and/or cognition.

Candidates may discuss research methods investigating specific aspects of human behaviour and/or cognition or discuss research methods investigating behaviour and/or cognition in general. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

Relevant research methods may include, but are not limited to:

• case studies
• correlational studies
• experiments (laboratory, field or natural/quasi)
• interviews
• observations
• meta-analysis.

Relevant studies include, but are not limited to:

• Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s (1988); Sagi et al.’s (1985) studies on culture and attachment
• Berry’s (1967) study on culture and conformity
• Lin and Kleinman’s (1988); Parker et al.’s (2001) studies on culture and abnormal behaviour
• Raylu and Oei’s (2004); Brady’s (1995) studies on culture and addictive behaviour
• Cole and Scribner’s (1974); Kearin’s (1981) studies on cultural differences in cognitive skills
• Kulkofsky et al.’s (2011); Rogoff and Waddell’s (1982) studies on culture and memory.

Critical discussion points may include, but are not limited to:

• the appropriateness of the method for the aim
• the issues of validity and reliability
• the sample choice and size
• the ease and cost of the procedure
• the generalizability of findings
• the strengths and limitations of the research method.

There were very limited responses to this question. Unfortunately, the majority of candidates struggled with this essay. The focus of the essay needed to be on the use of one or more research methods and this should be linked to cultural origins.

The best candidates provided knowledge relevant to this question about the nature of research methods. For example, if writing about experiments, they wrote about hypothesis testing, manipulation of the IV, measurement of the DV, control variables, statistical analysis of quantitative data, and random allocation to conditions. They gave an explicit link back to the question of the role of the research method in understanding origins of culture. Unfortunately, this was seldom seen.

The most popular studies were studies in either cultural origins of conformity (Berry, 1967) or the cultural dimension of individualism and collectivism (Hofstede) or Kulkofsky et al. (2011) study on the role of culture on flashbulb memory.

Candidates could use research on acculturation/enculturation, but this had to be explicitly linked to cultural origins of behaviour/cognition.

Evaluation of the research needed to focus on the research method and not on other aspects of the study. For example, ethical considerations are not relevant unless there is a clear link to the use of the research method; the difficulty of carrying out experimental research on human participants because of ethical limitations or the need to deceive individuals in order to control for demand characteristics. Many candidates were unable to maintain this focus.