Tom Coster – Psychology

Tag: International Baccalaureate

  • The role of Culture in behaviour (HL topic)

    Most people assume there’s a universal way humans experience identity, i.e. their sense of self. Research has shown that culture fundamentally shapes how people construct their sense of self, i.e. their identity; and this plays a role in our behaviour including our emotions and motivations.

    In 1991, Hazel Markus and Shinobu Kitayama published ‘Culture and the Self: Implications for Cognition, Emotion, and Motivation’, a paper that challenged the prevailing understanding of culture’s role in behaviour. The paper proposed that culture fosters one of two ways of experiencing identity and called these independent and interdependent self-construal.

    The theory proposes that in cultures emphasising independent self-construal, i.e. ‘Western’ societies such as the US, people consider themselves as autonomous individuals so that the sense of self is defined by internal attributes such personality traits, abilities, and personal achievements. Success means to stand out, to be unique, and to pursue and achieve individual goals. ‘Being true to yourself’ is a core value in these cultures.

    In cultures that emphasise interdependent self-construal, common in ‘the East’, many collectivist societies consider the self as one of many, i.e. connected to others rather than independent and autonomous. A person considers their identity through social relationships, roles, and group memberships. Succeeding in this culture means maintaining harmony, fulfilling obligations, and fitting harmoniously into social contexts. The question is not ‘who am I?’, rather it is ‘who are we, who am I in relation to others?’

    Self-Construal Theory is compelling because of empirical evidence supporting it. For example, in 1989, psychologist Susan Cousins used the Twenty Statements Test, asking American and Japanese participants to complete sentences beginning with ‘I am…’ Americans predominantly used abstract personal traits, such as ‘I am creative’, ‘I am independent’, but Japanese participants offered context-dependent descriptions tied to relationships and situations, such as ‘I am a daughter who helps her mother’.

    Self-Construal Theory’s predictions extend beyond self-description to behaviour. Heine et al. (1999) demonstrated striking motivational differences. After receiving failure feedback on a task, Canadian students persisted less on subsequent attempts, protecting their self-esteem, but Japanese students persisted, motivated by opportunities for self-improvement rather than self-protection.

    Self-construal can shape everyday behaviours. For example, in consumer behaviour, Americans are more likely to purchase products that emphasise uniqueness and self-expression: ‘Be yourself’ or ‘Stand out from the crowd’ and East Asian advertising emphasises belonging and harmony such as ‘Share happiness with those you love’. Westerners typically prefer items that differ from what others have chosen, demonstrating uniqueness. East Asians tend to prefer popular choices that others have validated, reducing social disharmony.

    Communication patterns often reflect different self-construals. Americans tend toward direct, explicit communication; saying ‘no’ is valued as honest and authentic, but in Japanese communication indirect expressions and contextual cues are used to avoid upsetting group harmony, saying ‘that might be difficult’ rather than ‘no’. These aren’t politeness conventions; they reflect different perceptions of appropriate self-expression.

    Even emotional expression follows self-construal patterns. Tsai et al. (2006) found that European Americans valued high-arousal positive emotions like excitement and enthusiasm, which signal individual achievement and expression, but Hong Kong Chinese valued low-arousal positive emotions like calm and peacefulness, which facilitate harmonious social functioning. Facebook profile pictures reflect this: Americans smile more broadly with teeth showing (expressing individual happiness). East Asians smile more subtly with closed mouths (maintaining social appropriateness).

    American students typically feel comfortable speaking up in class, asking questions, and debating with teachers. These behaviours demonstrate critical thinking and individual voice. East Asian students typically remain quiet, not from lack of engagement but from respect for the teacher’s authority, believing that speaking out might disrupt the collective learning environment or risk making others feel uncomfortable.

    Kitayama’s own research showed that Americans consistently rate themselves above average on various attributes (sometimes referred to as the self-enhancement bias; Japanese participants showed self-criticism, honestly acknowledging weaknesses as areas for personal growth. These aren’t just cultural politeness norms. They reflect different motivational systems shaped by self-construal.

    Perhaps most fascinating, self-construal seems to affect people’s perception and attention. Masuda and Nisbett (2001) showed participants animated underwater scenes. American participants fixated on prominent focal objects like large fish, but Japanese participants focused more on more global/background elements and the relationships between the objects in the scene. This didn’t seem to be about visual acuity; it indicated culturally-shaped patterns of attention and focus.

    Even memory seems to be culturally constructed. Wang (2001) found that Chinese children’s autobiographical memories emphasised collective activities and social interactions and American children’s memories focused on individual experiences and individual attributes indicating that we remember our lives through cultural filters.

    Many parenting practices show self-construal in action. American parents often ask children ‘What do YOU want?’ and ‘How do YOU feel?’ emphasising individual preferences and internal states. East Asian parents more commonly ask ‘What should we do?’ or reference social obligations, for example ‘What would grandmother think?’ These small linguistic differences shape how children learn to think about themselves in relation to others.

    Workplace behaviour can demonstrate self-construal differences. In Western organisations, employees are encouraged to promote their achievements, with annual reviews asking, ‘What are YOUR accomplishments?’ and ‘What makes YOU stand out?’ In Eastern companies, employees often deflect individual credit, attributing success to team effort or organisational support. When Americans receive praise, they typically accept it directly, for example. ‘Thank you, I worked hard on that’. Asian recipients more commonly deflect or minimise: ‘No, it was nothing special’ or ‘I was fortunate to have good colleagues’.

    Zhu et al (2007) used brain imaging to show that Chinese participants demonstrated similar neural activation patterns when thinking about themselves and their mothers, but Western participants distinguished clearly between thinking about themselves and thinking about their mothers, showing different neural activation for each. Culture doesn’t seem to just affect our self-perception and memory; it also seems to shape the neural architecture underlying self-representation.

    Self-Construal Theory helps explain why shame is more significant in some cultures and guilt is significant in other cultures, and why self-help movements flourish more in individualist than collectivist societies, and why collaborative decision-making processes are more effective in some cultures and less effective in other cultures.

    Critics of Self-Construal Theory argue that it creates a false dichotomy, overlooking within-culture variations and individual differences. For example, not all Westerners are independent and not all Asians are interdependent. Modern research suggests that many people develop bicultural competence, meaning they can shift between self-construals depending on the cultural context.

    Markus and Kitayama’s Self-Construal Theory remains important for understanding the role of culture in behaviour by demonstrating that culture is not merely superficial customs and traditions. It can shape behaviour from perception and memory to emotion and motivation. People’s sense of self is not universal; it is profoundly cultural and understanding this helps us appreciate human diversity while recognising the mechanisms underlying cultural differences.

  • The role of Motivation in behaviour (HL topic)

    Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is a simple solution to the questions of how we help students understand motivation across all four Contexts.

    What is motivation? That hidden drive to behave.

    Deci and Ryan’s SDT: Motivation stems from three needs: (i) autonomy (feeling in control), (ii) competence (feeling capable), and (iii) relatedness (feeling connected). When these needs are met, intrinsic motivation flourishes. When they’re not met, motivation is hindered. It’s a simple but powerful framework that can be applied to all 4 Contexts:

    Human Development

    Consider adolescent identity formation. Teenagers need autonomy to explore who they are, competence through experiences that build self-efficacy, and relatedness through secure attachments that provide a safe base for exploration. Identity achievement requires all three needs being met, while identity foreclosure might reflect relatedness without autonomy. Most students can grasp why overcontrolling parenting or peer rejection derails healthy development.

    Teenagers need autonomy, competence and relatedness to develop an identity.

    Human Relationships

    Relationship satisfaction directly correlates with SDT’s three needs. Partners who support each other’s autonomy (rather than being controlling), acknowledge each other’s competence (rather than being critical), and maintain emotional connection report higher relationship quality. This explains why co-dependency fails; it sacrifices autonomy for relatedness. Students can analyse their own friendships/relationships through this lens, making the theory personally relevant.

    Learning and Cognition

    This is SDT’s home territory. Intrinsic motivation predicts deeper learning, better retention, and greater creativity than extrinsic motivation. When students experience autonomy (choice in assignments), competence (appropriately challenging tasks with constructive feedback), and relatedness (collaborative learning, supportive classroom climate), academic motivation soars. It also explains why rewards sometimes backfire: because they degrade autonomy. It also explains why mastery-oriented feedback works better than performance-oriented feedback: because it builds competence without degrading autonomy.

    Self-determination theory: It’s ALL about autonomy, competence and relatedness.

    Health and Wellbeing

    Why do people stick with exercise programmes? SDT provides answers. Autonomous motivation (‘I exercise because I value health’) predicts adherence better than controlled motivation (‘I exercise because my doctor said so’). Competence comes from progressive improvement and achievable goals. Relatedness emerges from workout partners or group classes. Students can apply this to understanding treatment compliance, addiction recovery, or their own wellness behaviours.

    Motivation is what keeps us going.

    Smart teaching: Self-Determination Theory

    Here’s the beauty: teach SDT once, thoroughly, then reference it across contexts throughout the year. Students build a cognitive schema that helps them predict and explain motivational phenomena wherever they encounter them. When the HL exam question asks about motivation in any context, they have a robust theoretical framework ready to write about.

    SDT can be applied to all four of the Contexts.

    Something VERY big is coming VERY soon to

    www.TomCoster.com

    It’s new, innovative, and exciting.

  • The role of Technology in behaviour (HL topic)

    When the IB Psychology guide lists “the role of technology in behaviour” as a Higher Level topic, many teachers immediately think smartphones and social media. And yes, Instagram’s impact on attention spans is relevant. But this topic offers so much more depth and variety than we might initially assume.

    Coupling AI to brain scanning techniques to predict behaviour… but is AI sufficiently accurate to replace human expertise and experience?

    Start with the basics: brain scanning technology itself. fMRI and PET scans aren’t just research tools—they’re technologies that have fundamentally changed how we understand behaviour. Now add AI software interpreting those scans, potentially diagnosing conditions before human experts spot the patterns. Suddenly we’re discussing how technology doesn’t just study behaviour; it actively shapes our understanding of what behaviour even is.

    Then there’s the everyday technology students actually use. Does relying on smartphones for navigation atrophy our spatial memory? When we outsource our recall to Google, are we fundamentally changing how memory consolidation works? Language learning apps like Duolingo use gamification and spaced repetition algorithms—technologies that directly target learning behaviour. Meanwhile, YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creates confirmation bias echo chambers, reinforcing existing beliefs and shaping political behaviour worldwide.

    Is social media changing the way people behave in relationships?

    But let’s go broader. Does television count as technology? Absolutely—and its effects on attention, aggression, and prosocial behaviour are well-researched. eBooks versus physical books might seem trivial until you examine reading comprehension and retention studies. Online courses use adaptive learning technologies that personalize content delivery in ways a human teacher never could.

    Here’s the historical perspective students need: When Gutenberg invented the printing press, scholars worried it would destroy memory and critical thinking because ‘why remember anything if it’s written down?’ When Edison’s light bulb extended waking hours, social critics feared it would disrupt natural human rhythms and family cohesion. Sound familiar?

    A note to teachers: You don’t need to cover every technological innovation from the abacus to ChatGPT. The goal is helping students think critically about how any technology might influence behaviour—through cognitive load, social interaction patterns, information access, or behavioural conditioning. Give them a framework for analysis and a few solid examples. When exam day comes, they’ll be equipped to write intelligently about whatever technological scenario appears in the question, whether it’s covered in your lessons or not.

  • The Class Practicals

    The Class Practicals are students’ opportunity to engage directly with research methods while developing ethical awareness. The Practicals can also be scaffolding activities for the Internal Assessment. Whatever you do, you MUST link the Class Practical experience with Paper 2 Section A’s 4 questions.

    The primary purpose of Class Practicals is for students to be directly involved in planning, preparing and conducting research studies, in particular an experiment, an interview, a survey, and an observation. The Subject Guide describes in detail what variations of these studies can be conducted, for example a true experiment and a quasi-experiment are OK, a natural and a field experiment are not OK. The Subject Guide also details the ethical requirements to be considered.

    Students should complete 4 Practicals and their experience should inform their answers to Paper 2, Section A’s 4 questions, but this doesn’t mean the students must each plan, prepare and conduct 4 studies. Students must be involved to some extent. They may be involved in a study that’s ultimately an in-class demonstration. Perhaps the students are involved in planning and preparations, or maybe they’re members of an ethics committee or perhaps they’re involved as participants or assistant researchers or data collectors. And perhaps they change roles over the 4 different Practicals.

    The December 2025 curriculum update, any research method can now be applied to any context. In my opinion though, thinking through the logistics and ethical considerations of each method, the original suggestions are probably best: an experiment in the Learning and Cognition context, a questionnaire in the Human Relationships context, an observation in the Human Development context and an interview in the Health and wellbeing context.

    Practicals can be teacher-led or student-led, conducted in-school or out-of-school. Under the Keep It Simple ‘rule’, I strongly recommend strong teacher guidance and in school (in class). The key requirement is meaningful student participation. Students who are participants in a practical gain invaluable perspective to research. ‘How did you feel during the debriefing that your were lied to during the study? The researchers called it reasonable deception – is that how you feel about it?’

    The Class Practicals are good preparation for the Internal Assessment, which requires students to write a research proposal rather than conduct actual research. It’s very difficult to propose an experiment, for example, if you’ve never conducted one. After experiencing a Class Practical experiment firsthand, describing a quasi-experiment’s aim, the participant recruitment process, managing variables, addressing ethical concerns… become more achievable. Through the Class Practicals, students will develop better understanding of research design. If they were involved as participants in the Class Practical, students will be better prepared to write about ethical considerations.

    Whatever practical you conduct, ensure explicit connections to Paper 2 Section A’s four questions. The Practicals aren’t isolated exercises; they’re preparation for exam questions. The experience should strengthen students’ understanding of ethical considerations, research design, methodological strengths and limitations, and data interpretation.

  • How do we teach Psychology conceptually?

    Here’s a question that’s been bouncing around: ‘What do we mean when we say psychology is conceptual?’

    It sounds like academic jargon, I know. But stick with me, because this idea gets right to the heart of what makes psychology such a fascinating and essentially human field.

    What ‘conceptual’ means

    When we say psychology is conceptual, we’re pointing to something fundamental: the things psychologists study aren’t sitting out there in nature waiting to be discovered, like gold deposits or new species of beetle.

    Think about it. ‘Memory’, ‘aggression’, ‘intelligence’, ‘attachment’, ‘depression’… these are all human-created concepts. We invented them. We drew the boundaries. We decided what counts as ‘aggression’ versus ‘assertiveness’, where ‘normal anxiety’ ends and ‘anxiety disorder’ begins, and what behaviors signal ‘secure attachment’.

    These aren’t discoveries of pre-existing, naturally occuring things. They’re useful ways we’ve carved up the messy, continuous reality of human behavior.

    Concepts change with time and culture

    Here’s where it gets interesting. If psychological concepts were natural features, fixed features of reality, they’d be universal and unchanging. And of course, they’re not.

    The concept of ADHD didn’t exist 100 years ago. ‘Hysteria’ was once a major diagnostic category; now it’s vanished from our textbooks. Different cultures conceptualize mental states in different ways. Some languages don’t even have a word that maps onto our concept of ‘depression’.

    Our psychological concepts are also theory-laden. When we talk about ‘working memory’, we’re not just describing something neutral, we’re buying into a particular model of how cognition works. When Freudians spoke of ‘ego defence mechanisms’, they were smuggling in a whole theoretical framework.

    So what’s the alternative?

    If psychology is conceptual, what would it look like if it weren’t?

    The alternative would be studying human behavior and experience as purely physical or biological phenomena. We’d focus only on directly measurable, observer-independent entities: neurons firing, neurotransmitter concentrations, brain structures, hormone levels, reaction times, genetic markers…

    This would be neuroscience or physiology: concrete, physical, and measurable.

    The problem is…

    The problem is that most of what makes us human: love, identity, grief, creativity, the search for meaning…, these can’t be fully captured by purely physical descriptions.

    You could give me a complete neural map of everything happening in someone’s brain during grief. Every synapse, every chemical cascade, every pattern of activation. And yet that description wouldn’t capture what grief is as a human experience. It wouldn’t tell you what it means to lose someone you love.

    Living in the tension

    This is why psychology occupies such uncomfortable territory. It sits between the natural sciences, which study observer-independent physical phenomena, and the human sciences, which study meaning-laden, conceptual phenomena.

    Psychology is both at once. It studies real biological processes and culturally-situated concepts. It measures objective behaviors and interprets subjective meanings. It discovers and constructs.

    This creates unique methodological and philosophical challenges. But it’s also what makes psychology  interesting. We’re not just measuring things; we’re constantly negotiating what those things even are.

    And that’s not a weakness. It’s the nature of studying something as complex, dynamic, and meaning-soaked as human experience.

    What do you think? Does recognizing psychology as conceptual make it less scientific or does it make it more honest about what science of the human mind can actually be?

  • Psychology vocabulary

    An often-neglected aspect of teaching IBDP Psychology helping students develop fluency with subject-specific terminology. Words like validity, reliability, etiology, synaptic gap, neurotransmitter, and operant conditioning aren’t just vocabulary, they’re the precise tools we use to communicate complex ideas about behavior.

    The assessment criteria make this explicit: ‘There is accurate and precise use of psychological terminology’ and ‘Psychological terminology relevant to the research methods is used effectively’. These aren’t minor criteria, they directly affect student grades in all assessment components. When students write about ‘proof’ instead of evidence, or ‘sadness’ instead of depression, they’re not just being imprecise; they’re failing to demonstrate the precise and accurate vocabulary that examiners expect.

    Teaching terminology effectively means more than providing definitions. Students must understand when and how to use these terms. Does this theory apply to all cultures or is it ‘culture-bound’? Is this a hormone or a neurotransmitter? Understanding these distinctions demonstrates genuine psychological literacy, not just memorization.

    The payoff extends beyond exam scores. Students who master the subject’s vocabulary think more precisely about behavior, communicate more effectively in their internal assessment and extended essays, and develop the academic foundation necessary for university level psychology study.

    IB Diploma Psychology – The Glossary of Psychology Vocabulary (by Tom Coster) is an essential companion for every IB Diploma Psychology student, providing a clear and concise collection of key terms and concepts tailored to the IB Psychology syllabus.

    Designed to support your journey into the field, this glossary will enhance your understanding of human thought, emotion, and behavior, while helping you master the specialized vocabulary required for academic success and real-world application.

  • How to conduct a thematic analysis

    Thematic analysis is a method for identifying, analysing, and reporting patterns (or themes) within qualitative data, often interview transcripts or text-based data.

    Braun and Clarke’s widely used six-phase approach includes: (1) familiarising yourself with the data, (2) generating initial codes, (3) searching for themes, (4) reviewing themes, (5) defining and naming themes, and (6) producing the final report.

    Braun and Clarke’s approach encourages reflexivity, transparency, and detailed interpretation of meaning. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke are psychologists and qualitative research experts who developed this structured approach to thematic analysis. Braun is a professor at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, and Clarke is based at the University of the West of England, Bristol. Their paper, Using thematic analysis in psychology (2006) helped establish thematic analysis as a distinct and rigorous method. Since then, they have continued to publish widely on qualitative methods, advocating for reflexive and transparent practices in thematic analysis.

    To read more about how to conduct a thematic analysis, and to see a worked example, download the FREE document below.

    How to conduct a thematic analysisDownload

  • Causality and the experimental method

    At the heart of psychology lies a beautifully simple question: What causes what? The experimental method gives us the clearest path to answering this question, and its elegance lies in its straightforward logic.

    Causality is the relationship between cause and effect. When we say “X causes Y,” we mean that changes in X directly produce changes in Y. In psychology, establishing causality allows us to move beyond mere correlation and understand the mechanisms behind behavior.

    The key requirement for causality is that we must demonstrate that one variable directly produces a change in another variable.

    The experimental method is powerful precisely because of its simple logic. The basic formula involves three steps. First, change one thing, which is the Independent Variable or IV. Second, keep everything else the same by controlling all other variables. Third, measure what happens by observing changes in the Dependent Variable or DV.

    The beautiful conclusion follows naturally. If the DV changes, and we’ve controlled everything else, then the change in the IV must have caused the change in the DV. That’s it. That’s the entire logic.

    Teaching Tip 1: Start with the Logic: Before diving into terminology, help students grasp the fundamental reasoning. If I want to know whether caffeine improves memory, I need to change only the caffeine and see what happens to memory. If I change multiple things at once, I can’t know which one caused the effect.

    Teaching Tip 2: Emphasize Control: The power of the experimental method isn’t in what we change, it’s in what we don’t change. Every variable we control strengthens our claim of causality.

    Teaching Tip 3: Connect to Real Research: When teaching studies like Loftus and Palmer on leading questions and memory, or Bandura’s Bobo doll experiment on observational learning and aggression, highlight the beautiful simplicity. Identify the IV, which is the variable the researcher manipulated. Identify the DV, which is what they measured. Note the controls, which is everything they kept the same. Then draw the conclusion: because everything else was controlled, the IV caused the change in the DV.

    The Three Essential Components: Help students remember these three pillars. First is manipulation, where the researcher deliberately changes the IV. Second is control, where all other variables are kept constant. Third is measurement, where the DV is carefully observed and recorded.

    When all three are present, we can claim causality. When any are missing, we cannot.

    Some students believe that correlation shows causation. This is incorrect. Only the experimental method establishes causality because only experiments control for alternative explanations.

    Others think that any study with numbers shows causation. This is also incorrect. Surveys and correlational studies provide valuable data but cannot establish cause and effect.

    Some confuse control with control group. This is partially correct. Control means keeping variables constant and may include a control group for comparison.

    Making It Stick: Use this simple framework when analyzing any study. (i) What did they change? That’s the IV. (ii) What did they measure? That’s the DV. (iii) What did they control? Those are the other variables. (iv.) Can we claim causation? Only if it’s a true experiment.

    The experimental method’s beauty lies in its logical simplicity. Change one variable, control all others, measure the outcome. If the outcome changes, you’ve found your cause. This simple logic is psychology’s most powerful tool for understanding the mechanisms of human behavior.

    Here’s a powerpoint presentation that you can use for teaching a lesson on the true and quasi experiment.

    True and Quasi Experiments in PsychologyDownload

  • The Ultimate PowerPoint Bundle

    We’ve created the complete PowerPoint teaching bundle to perfectly complement Tom Coster’s IB Diploma Psychology – The Textbook. Whether you’re a new teacher navigating the updated syllabus (first exams in 2027) or an experienced educator looking to save precious prep time, this resource is built with you in mind.

    Our DP Psychology Powerpoint bundle will save teachers HOURS of time

    What’s in the box? This all-in-one package includes 16 fully editable .pptx files (Apple’s Keynote will open and read them), carefully designed to align with every part of the IB Psychology syllabus:

    • Critical Thinking & Core Concepts
      Bias, Causality, Change, Measurement, Perspective, Responsibility
    • The Three Approaches
      Biological, Cognitive, Sociocultural
    • Research Methodology
    • Real-World Contexts
      Health & Well-being, Human Development, Human Relationships, Cognition & Learning
    • Student Success Tools
      Internal Assessment, The Examination, How to do well in IBDP Psychology

    Why teachers love the package: Complete coverage – Every aspect of the syllabus is ready to teach.
    Engaging visuals – Slides are clean, appealing, and logically structured.
    Time-saving – Spend less time preparing and more time teaching.
    Fully customizable – Tailor each presentation to your own teaching style and your students’ needs.
    Exam-ready focus – Dedicated materials for IA and exam prep ensure your students are set up for success.

    Ready to use from day one: Open, display, teach—it’s that simple. Or, if you prefer, edit and adapt the slides to make them your own. Either way, you’ll have a professional, syllabus-aligned resource library at your fingertips.

    Give your students the best chance to succeed in IB Psychology. With this bundle, you’re not just getting PowerPoints—you’re getting confidence, clarity, and consistency in your teaching.

  • Moving from research studies to real-world examples

    One of the most noticeable shifts in the new course is the emphasis in assessment on examples rather than memorised research studies. In Paper 1, Section A, those short 10-minute questions are marked against just two descriptors:

    1. The response demonstrates detailed knowledge relevant to the question.
    2. The example is relevant and explained.

    Note that word — example — not research study. In fact, the only time assessment criteria explicitly require reference to a research study is when it’s mentioned in the question itself (Paper 2, Section B).

    Over the years, I’ve enjoyed teaching the finer details of Henri Molaison (Scoville & Milner), Baby Albert (Watson & Rayner), Milgram, Odden & Rochat, Caspi et al… These classic studies are fascinating and still worth knowing, but the new Guide is clear: it’s example, not studies.

    Research will always be a valid and robust part of a Psychology course.

    Students often memorise outlines of these studies and then regurgitate them in the exam. That’s not the same as demonstrating real knowledge and understanding.

    This isn’t to say we should stop teaching research studies — I certainly won’t. I’ll continue to speak lovingly of the Dunedin Study, the HM case, and several others. But students and I won’t be getting anxious about memorising the number of participants in the HM case study (eh hem, that’s a little psychology research joke there), or the nationality of Dunedin Study participants, or the socioeconomic status of Kahneman and Tversky’s samples. We can still use research studies — and we should — but students won’t have to memorise the details.

    The real focus is transfer of knowledge. Taking Social Identity Theory and applying it to a bullying case in a school or an international conflict. Using Social Learning Theory to describe how a public health campaign could reduce teenage alcohol consumption. Even if the example is fictional, applying the theory to a fresh, unseen situation shows depth of understanding far better than rattling off participant numbers and procedure details.

    This shift isn’t about discarding research — it’s about using it. The research is the foundation. But in assessment, it’s the bridge from theory to application that earns top marks. And that’s a far better reflection of what it means to understand psychology.

    Discuss the role of Social Identity Theory in explaining a conflict.