A question from the Kleptomania Symptom Assessment Scale (K-SAS): During the past WEEK, approximately how many hours (add up hours) did you spend thinking about stealing? Please circle the appropriate number. None 1 hour or less 1 to 4 hours 4 to 10 hours over 10 hours 0 1 2 3 4

Mark scheme

Marking points from the official mark scheme (Oct/Nov 2019). The mark or mark type is shown in brackets.

1. 1(a) Most likely answer (other appropriate responses to be credited): Note: Question is characteristics (plural) so two different characteristics needed. ∞ not being able to resist the urge to collect or hoard things ∞ involves experiencing tension before the theft; feelings of pleasure, gratification, or relief when committing the theft ∞ uncontrollable urge to steal (with example) = 1 mark Marks: 1 mark for basic answer, e.g. identification. 1 mark for elaboration/example.
2. 1(b) Most likely answer (other appropriate responses to be credited): ∞ the question is ambiguous; 1 and 4 hours appear twice so which should a participant choose? ∞ what constitutes 'thinking about stealing'? Vague thoughts or planning in detail something major? Note: Answers which do not relate to 'the question above' 1 mark max however detailed. ∞ participants may give socially desirable answers either to hide their symptoms (for assessment) or to show their therapy is working ∞ only quantitative data/no in-depth answers. Marks: 1 mark for basic answer. 1 mark for elaboration/example. x2
3. 1(c)(i) Most likely answer (other appropriate responses to be credited): ∞ reliability: use test-retest (1 mark) give the same test to same person at a later date (+1 mark) ∞ reliability: use split half Marks: 1 mark for basic answer. 1 mark for elaboration/example. 0 marks for inter-rater reliability of scores/numbers.
4. 1(c)(ii) Most likely answer (other appropriate responses to be credited): ∞ validity: concurrent validity – compared with an alternative measure (e.g. Global Assessment Functioning Scale) ∞ face validity - it looks like it measures kleptomania Marks: 1 mark for basic answer. 1 mark for elaboration/example. 0 marks for ecological validity.
5. 1(d) Marks: Question requires discussion; always plural of each argument, and always requires conclusion. 1 mark for each advantage/disadvantage (however detailed) and related to the question up to 4 max. 2 marks max for two strengths/weaknesses unrelated to the question. 1 mark for conclusion. Most likely answer (other appropriate responses to be credited): Strengths: ∞ questionnaires using quantitative data provide the therapist with useful information so they can assess the extent of the problem (1 mark). The K-SAS question can show that a person may spend over 10 hours per week thinking about stealing (+1 mark) ∞ in general, asking people directly means that people are given the opportunity to express their feelings and explain their behaviour rather than the researcher trying to work out reasons for their behaviour from other methods. The K-SAS gives the therapist important information ∞ relatively large numbers of participants can be done relatively easily. ∞ Questionnaires are easy to replicate ∞ data can be quantitative, but may also be qualitative depending on type of question Weaknesses: ∞ some participants may provide socially desirable responses; not give truthful answers; respond to demand characteristics ∞ closed/fixed choice questions may force people into choosing answers that do not reflect their true opinion and therefore may lower the validity ∞ researchers have to be careful about use of leading questions; it could affect the validity of the data collected Conclusion: any appropriate conclusion drawn from the discussion that has been presented. 1 mark if appropriate. A conclusion is a 'decision reached by reasoning' and so a summary of points already made scores 0 marks.