Discuss one or more studies of the positive and/or negative effects of technologies on cognitive processes.

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 studies of the positive and/or negative effects of technologies on cognitive processes.

Candidates may discuss the effects of technologies on one or more specific cognitive processes (such as memory, thinking and decision-making, perception, attention and/or language) or on cognitive processes in general. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

Studies may include, but are not limited to:

• Bavelier et al. (2011), Small et al. (2011) on decision-making
• Blacker et al. (2014), McAvinue et al. (2013), and Pei-Chi Ho, Szu-Ming Chung and Yi-Hua Lin’s (2012) studies on video games and working memory
• Kaspersky Lab (2015) on digital amnesia
• Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) and Hembrooke and Gay’s (2003) studies on the role of laptops in memory
• Rosen et al.’s (2011) study on digital distraction and memory
• Sparrow (2011) on the Google effect.

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

• ecological versus internal validity
• implications of the research
• the measurement of cognitive processes
• the recency of the research and its lack of reliability
• sampling biases (e.g. gender, culture, age)
• potential participant and researcher biases.

There were many strong responses that clearly discussed one or more studies related to the influence of technology on cognitive processes. Some candidates failed to identify a cognitive process when explaining research or identified the process as "academic performance", "emotion" or "stress." Some candidates focused on the role of social media on mental health which is not the focus of the question.

Stronger candidates made explicit links between the research and models of memory, attention or decision making — that is, they explained why technology may have this effect on cognition. Some candidates discussed theories, such as transactive memory, but then did not use any research that demonstrated this theory. This earned low marks for criterion B.

Some research was quite complex and was misunderstood by candidates — for example, there were many inaccurate explanations of Rosser et al. (2007).