Describe one effect of one hormone on behaviour, 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 one effect of one hormone on behaviour, with reference to one relevant study.

Any aspect of human behaviour (e.g., aggression, attachment, sexual behaviour) is acceptable as long as the response focuses on how one hormone affects a particular behaviour.

Although hormones may act as neurotransmitters by activating receptor sites within the synapse, it is the origin of the chemical that classifies it as a hormone. Responses that address the effect of neurotransmitters such as dopamine, serotonin, GABA and acetylcholine on behaviour should not be awarded marks.

Relevant studies may include, but are not limited to:

• Radke et al.’s (2015) study investigating the effect of testosterone on women’s responses to angry faces
• McGaugh and Cahill’s (1995) study on the effect of adrenaline in memories linked to emotional arousal
• Newcomer et al.’s (1999) study on cortisol and memory
• Baumgartner et al.’s (2008) study on the effect of oxytocin on trust in economic behaviour.

If a candidate describes more than one effect on more than one hormone, credit should be given only to the first effect or the first hormone described.

If a candidate refers to more than one study credit should be given only to the first study.

If a candidate describes the effect of one hormone without making reference to a study, up to a maximum of [5] should be awarded.

If a candidate only describes a relevant study without describing the effect of the hormone, up to a maximum of [4] should be awarded.

SL:

Most candidates were able to identify a relevant hormone and a relevant research study but many found it a challenge to describe the effect of the hormone on human behaviour and to use the selected study effectively in light of the question.

The most common studies selected were descriptions of Newcomer et al.'s (1999) study on cortisol and verbal declarative memory, Baumgartner et al.'s (2008) study on the effect of oxytocin on trust in economic behaviour and McGaugh and Cahill's (1995) study on the effect of adrenaline in memories linked to emotional arousal.

The best responses tended to demonstrate accurate knowledge of the function and role of hormones generally as well as accurate and detailed knowledge and understanding of the effect of one specific hormone on a behaviour. The study findings were linked explicitly to the effect of the hormone, with a directional focus; showing how the hormone increases or decreases the specific behaviour.

Weaker answers merely made a statement on the function of the hormone and focused on describing a relevant study. Some candidates referred to an appropriate hormone and identified a relevant effect on a behaviour but used animal studies, most notably Romero et al. (2014) or Meany et al. (1988) to ineffectively support their response to this question. However, in such cases there was inevitably no more than a passing reference to how the findings could be related to human behaviour. Some students included evaluation of the studies they used which reduced their focus on the command term. Unfortunately some students selected a neurotransmitter rather than a hormone (serotonin, dopamine or acetylcholine).

Overall the quality of responses was not high, as many students did not demonstrate a good depth of understanding of the effect of hormones on behaviour.

HL: 

Candidates who performed well in this question were able to clearly identify a hormone and describe its effect on a specific behaviour through the use of a relevant study which was usually quite well described. However, the majority of responses were not able to address the command term well and simply gave a very brief account of how a hormone affected a behaviour so that the response was not well focused on the demands of the question.

The most common studies chosen were descriptions of Newcomer et al.'s (1999) study on cortisol and verbal declarative memory, Baumgartner et al.'s (2008) study on the effect of oxytocin on trust in economic behaviour and McGaugh and Cahill's (1995) study on the effect of adrenaline in memories linked to emotional arousal.

The strongest responses tended to demonstrate accurate knowledge of the function and role of hormones generally as well as accurate and detailed knowledge and understanding of the effect of one specific hormone on a behaviour. The study findings were linked explicitly to the effect of the hormone, with a directional focus and showing how the hormone increases or decreases the specific behaviour selected.

Unfortunately there was a surprisingly high number of responses that provided completely irrelevant studies from the biological approach (for example, studies of pheromones or neurotransmitters). Several candidates were able to identify and somewhat describe the effect of a hormone on behaviour eg the effect of testosterone on aggression, but then provided a study that was not of direct relevance, such as that of Bandura.

Some candidates referred to an appropriate hormone and identified a relevant effect on a behaviour but used animal studies, most notably Romero et al. (2014) or Meany et al. (1988) to ineffectively support their response to this question. In such cases there was inevitably no more than a passing reference to how the findings could be related to human behaviour.