Jason is a university lecturer and is interested in doodling behaviour. One day, Jason sees one of his students, Karen, doodling. Jason is especially interested because Karen has a visual impairment that means she cannot see. Jason decides to conduct a case study on her.

Mark scheme

Marking points from the official mark scheme (May/June 2020). The mark or mark type is shown in brackets.

1. [10] Three major omissions for a case study are: How: technique used to collect data asked (e.g. interview, questionnaire, observations) What: content e.g. questions (open etc.), qualitative data, multiple sessions (questions about doodling, observe doodling in different situation) How: use of data e.g. interpretation, triangulation etc. (how open questions will be interpreted, how doodles will be analysed) The minor omissions are: where: location of participants when completing the questionnaire / how it is distributed who: Karen Also: ethical issues Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (8–10 marks) • Response is described in sufficient detail to be replicable (i.e. what and how). • Response may have a minor omission (i.e. who or where). • Use of psychological terminology is accurate and comprehensive. Level 2 (5–7 marks) • Response is in some detail. • Response has minor omission(s) (i.e. who and/or where). • Use of psychological terminology is accurate. Level 1 (1–4 marks) • Response is basic in detail. • Response has major omission(s). • If response is impossible to conduct max. 2. • Use of psychological terminology is mainly accurate. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit.
2. [4] Answer will depend on problem identified. Problems may, for example, be matters of: Validity • operationalisation • difficulty with lying / social desirability Reliability • researcher bias This list is not exhaustive and other appropriate responses should also be credited. marks comment 3-4 Appropriate problem identified. Appropriate solution is clearly described. 2 Appropriate problem identified. plus EITHER Explanation of why it is a problem OR Ineffectual but possible solution described. 1 Appropriate problem identified. Little or no justification. 0 No response worthy of credit