Each question is worth 1 point. Write your response in the box, then click Show Answer to reveal the key points for full credit. Check each bullet against your response before moving on. Pay close attention to the action word — identify, describe, explain, and propose each require different response types.
✍ FRQ Practice · Research method + operational definition
Researchers wanted to know whether the size of a group affects how much individuals contribute to a shared task. They recruited 80 college students and randomly assigned each to work on a brainstorming task either alone, in a group of three, or in a group of six. Each student wore a small microphone, and researchers counted the number of distinct ideas each student personally contributed during the 10-minute session. Solo participants contributed an average of 14.6 ideas; participants in groups of three contributed 9.2 ideas each; participants in groups of six contributed 5.7 ideas each.
Adapted study, Unit 4: Social loafing
Identify the research method used in this study and state the operational definition of individual contribution as used by the researchers.
Key Points for Full Credit
Identifies the method as an experiment (random assignment to solo, group of 3, or group of 6)
Operational definition of individual contribution = number of distinct ideas each student personally contributed during the 10-minute session
Must be specific and measurable
Rubric note: Award the point only if the response (1) identifies the method as an experiment (random assignment to three group-size conditions confirms this), AND (2) gives a measurable definition of individual contribution referencing the number of distinct ideas a student personally contributed during the 10-minute session. A vague answer like 'how much they helped' does NOT earn the point.
✍ FRQ Practice · Interpret a statistic
A psychologist tested how performing a behavior changes attitudes. Participants wrote a persuasive essay arguing for a position they originally disagreed with. Before writing, the mean agreement rating was 2.3 (on a 1-7 scale). After writing, the mean was 4.6. The difference was statistically significant (p < 0.01).
Adapted study, Unit 4: Cognitive dissonance
Describe what the difference in mean agreement ratings before and after writing the essay indicates in relation to the study.
Key Points for Full Credit
Mean agreement increased from 2.3 to 4.6 after writing the essay
Indicates that performing the behavior (writing) shifted attitudes toward the position
Must interpret — not just list the numbers
Rubric note: Award the point only if the response interprets the means in context. A correct response describes that participants' agreement INCREASED from 2.3 to 4.6 after writing the essay, indicating that performing the behavior shifted their attitudes. Simply listing the numbers without interpretation does NOT earn the point.
✍ FRQ Practice · Identify ethical guideline
Researchers studying obedience asked participants to deliver what they believed were uncomfortable noise blasts at an authority's request. Before the study, every participant signed a form indicating they understood the procedure could be stressful and could stop at any time. After the session, researchers explained that no one had been harmed, the 'other person' was a confederate, and provided contact information for free counseling.
Adapted study, Unit 4: Obedience
Identify at least one ethical guideline applied by the researchers in this study.
OR informed consent (signed form about potential stress before the study)
OR right to withdraw (could stop at any time without penalty)
Must connect to a specific feature of THIS study
Rubric note: Award the point if the response identifies an ethical guideline actually applied in the study. Acceptable: informed consent (signed form about stress), right to withdraw (could stop at any time), debriefing (post-session explanation), or protection from harm (counseling provided). Must connect to a specific feature of THIS study.
✍ FRQ Practice · Generalizability
A psychologist tested whether collectivist or individualist orientations affect conformity. The study recruited 60 women, all aged 18-22, all U.S. citizens from suburban communities in the Pacific Northwest. Each completed a conformity task in which group members gave clearly wrong answers. 42% of participants conformed to the wrong answer at least once.
Adapted study, Unit 4: Conformity
Explain the extent to which the findings of this study can be generalized, using specific evidence about the participants.
Key Points for Full Credit
Makes a claim that findings cannot be generalized to the wider population
Cites specific evidence: all women, aged 18–22, suburban Pacific Northwest communities only
Explains why: men, older adults, or people from collectivist cultures might show different conformity rates
Rubric note: Award the point if the response makes a claim about generalizability AND backs it up with specific participant evidence from the stimulus. Acceptable evidence: all women, all 18-22, all from suburban communities in the Pacific Northwest. Must reference a relevant population. A vague answer like 'the study is generalizable because 60 people participated' does NOT earn the point.
✍ FRQ Practice · Argumentation: support/refute
Researchers staged a scenario where a confederate appeared in distress in a public hallway. When only one bystander was present, 78% offered help within 30 seconds. When five bystanders were present, only 24% offered help.
Adapted study, Unit 4: Bystander effect
Explain how the research findings support or refute the bystander effect.
Key Points for Full Credit
Uses specific finding: 78% helped when alone vs. 24% helped with five bystanders present
Connects it to the bystander effect — responsibility becomes diffused among multiple bystanders
Must link the finding to the concept
Rubric note: Award the point only if the response (1) uses a specific finding (78% helped when alone vs. 24% with five bystanders), AND (2) accurately connects it to the bystander effect (people are less likely to help when other bystanders are present due to diffusion of responsibility). Mentioning only the finding OR only the concept does NOT earn the point.
✍ FRQ Practice · Propose a defensible claim
A school counselor wants to advise teachers on motivating students to complete reading homework. Studies show students paid for every page often stop reading once payments end, while students whose effort is verbally praised continue. Students who choose their own books also read significantly more.
Unit 4: Motivation
Propose a specific and defensible claim, based in psychological science, about how teachers should motivate students to complete reading homework.
Key Points for Full Credit
Takes a specific, defensible position grounded in psychological science
Recommends student choice in reading and praise over tangible rewards
Grounds it in intrinsic motivation research: choice and praise sustain motivation; tangible rewards stop working when removed
Rubric note: Award the point only if the response proposes a SPECIFIC, defensible claim grounded in psychological science. Acceptable: 'Teachers should support intrinsic motivation by giving students choice and using praise rather than tangible rewards.' NOT acceptable: 'Motivation is important.' / 'Different students respond differently.' / Restating the question.
✍ FRQ Practice · Research method + statistic interpretation
A researcher surveyed 400 adults about Big Five personality traits and job satisfaction (1-10 scale). Adults high in conscientiousness reported mean job satisfaction of 7.6; those low in conscientiousness reported mean 6.1.
Adapted study, Unit 4: Big Five personality
Identify the research method used in this study and describe what the difference in mean job satisfaction scores indicates in the context of the study.
Key Points for Full Credit
Identifies the method as correlational / survey (personality traits cannot be experimentally manipulated)
Interprets the difference (7.6 vs. 6.1) as a positive association between conscientiousness and job satisfaction — not causation
Must NOT call this an experiment
Rubric note: Award the point only if the response (1) correctly identifies this as a correlational or survey study (NOT an experiment — personality traits cannot be manipulated), AND (2) interprets the difference (7.6 vs 6.1) as a positive association between conscientiousness and job satisfaction. Should not claim causation. Identifying the method as 'experiment' does NOT earn the point.
✍ FRQ Practice ·
Key Points for Full Credit
Uses specific finding: 71% attributed stranger's behavior to personality; 68% attributed their own behavior to the situation
Connects it to the fundamental attribution error — overestimating personality, underestimating the situation for OTHERS