Evaluate one or more studies investigating 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 the strengths and limitations of one or more studies related to prosocial behaviour. The focus of the evaluation should be on the study/studies, not on prosocial behaviour.
Although both strengths and limitations should be addressed, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.

Relevant studies may include, but are not limited to:

• Piliavin et al.’s (1969), field experiment on factors involved in helping behaviour
• Whiting and Whiting’s (1979) comparison of prosocial behaviour in six cultures as a result of child-rearing practices
• Batson et al.’s (1981) experiment on participants' motivation to help if they could escape based on the empathy-altruism theory
• Latane and Darley’s (1968) study on bystanderism
• Oliner and Oliner’s (1998) study on dispositional factors and personal norms in prosocial behaviour in relation to rescuing Jews during the Second World War
• Miller et al.’s (1990) study on the influence of cultural norms and moral values on perceptions of social responsibility
• Levine et al.’s (2001) study investigating cross-cultural differences in helping behaviour
• Bartlett and DeSteno’s (2006) study on gratitude mediation of prosocial behaviour
• Gentile et al.’s (2009) study on the effects of prosocial video games on prosocial behaviours.

Evaluation of the selected research may include, but is not limited to:

• methodological and ethical considerations
• cultural and gender considerations
• supporting and/or contradictory findings
• practical applications of empirical findings (e.g. anti-bullying programmes)
• how the findings of the research have been interpreted
• implications of the findings.

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 best fit approach.

In questions that ask for evaluation of studies, in criterion A we assess to what extent is the response focused on the question. Responses that are generic, lack a focus on the specific question and seem as pre-prepared essays of relevance to the general topic (but not to evaluation of one or more studies) should be awarded [0]. If the response identifies which studies will be evaluated but there is also extra information that is not relevant or necessary for the specific question then [1] should be awarded. Responses that are clearly focused on evaluating one or more studies should gain [2].

Marks awarded for criterion B should refer to definitions of terms and concepts relating to research studies. Overall this could include some knowledge of topic but more specifically knowledge and understanding related to research methods and ethics of chosen studies.

Marks awarded for criterion C assess the quality of the description of as 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 also a very popular question. Overall, responses reflected that candidates understood the question and could provide classic studies to illustrate prosocial behaviour. Most who attempted this question did fairly well. Responses provided many different studies — popular choices were:

• Piliavin et al.'s (1969) field experiment on factors involved in helping behaviour 
• Whiting and Whiting's (1979) comparison of prosocial behaviour in six cultures as a result of child-rearing practices
• Batson et al.'s (1981) experiment on participants' motivation to help if they could escape based on the empathy-altruism theory
• Latane and Darley's (1968)study on bystanderism
• Levine et al.'s (2001) study investigating cross-cultural differences in helping behaviour

In the majority of cases, studies were correctly described, though not always fully evaluated. Weaker responses tended to focus more on presenting factors influencing prosocial behaviour or on theories explaining prosocial behaviour.

Many responses provided clear evidence of critical thinking by offering:

• methodological and ethical considerations
• cultural and gender considerations
• supporting and/or contradictory findings