Jane is planning a laboratory experiment with two groups of participants. One group speaks one language fluently and the other group speaks two or more languages fluently. Jane thinks this may affect her dependent variable of how well they learn ‘nonsense' words. These are words that read like real words but have no meaning.
- (a)(i)Explain one strength of one of Jane's measures of her dependent variable.[2]
- (a)(ii)Explain one weakness of the measure of the dependent variable that you have referred to in (a)(i).[2]
- (b)Suggest one way that Jane can operationalise 'speaking a language fluently'.[2]
- (c)Jane used an independent measures design in her experiment. Explain one reason why it would have been better for Jane to use a matched pairs design than an independent measures design.[2]
Mark scheme
Marking points from the official mark scheme (May/June 2021). The mark or mark type is shown in brackets.
- [1] 1 mark for justification of candidate's choice of measure (no mark for just choosing one of the measures)
- [1] 1 mark for link / context
- [1] Timing / number of spelling errors is objective/valid/quantitative; (strength)
- [1] i.e. comparisons of speed of response to / errors in nonsense words between one and two-language groups; (link)
- [1] Timing / counting errors is objective; (strength)
- [1] So Jane can't make be biased in her judgments (of time); (link)
- [1] Jane so she must be testing what she claimed to;
- [1] Because they've not learned the words if they can't spell them; (link)
- [1] 1 mark for a brief muddled weakness
- [2] 2 marks for a clear/detailed weakness
- [1] how quickly the participant can respond:
- [1] timing may not be valid as a measure because people learn words at different speeds;
- [1] so the times would depend on individual differences / participant variables not number of languages spoken;
- [1] number of spelling errors:
- [1] number of errors may not be valid as a measure because people differ in spelling ability anyway;
- [1] so the errors would depend on individual differences / participant variables not number of languages spoken;
- [1] 1 mark for a brief muddled operationalisation
- [2] 2 marks for a clear/detailed operationalisation
- [2] Speaking easily and without many pauses = 2
- [1] Being able to understand = 1
- [2] Being able to understand well enough to deal with a native speaker in conversation = 2
- [1] Coping with everyday life in that language = 1
- [2] Coping with everyday life in that language, such as being able to buy food / work / study / understand a film = 2
- [1] Having a qualification = 1
- [1] e.g. British Council Certificate / IGCSE English
- [1] 1 mark for reason (comparison may be explicit or implicit)
- [1] 1 mark for link (e.g. variable relevant to ability to learn/recall words or speed of response)
- [1] Matched pairs designs reduce/eliminate participant variables; (reason)
- [1] In Jane's experiment these might be reaction time / age / intelligence (which could affect ability to learn nonsense words / respond quickly/accurately to questions); (link)
Write your answer and get it marked
On Oracle Prep you can write or photograph your own answer and have it marked by AI against this mark scheme, with feedback on what you missed.
Sign up free →