As the new curriculum is rolled out, there are many things to get our heads around. There are several changes to the internal assessment.
First, there are changes in the nature of the report.
Secondly, there are changes in the way that the internal assessment will be assessed.
Below you will see the changes to expect in the new curriculum. Remember, this will be for the students that will submit IAs for the May 2019 session. For your current students, it is business as usual.
Changes in the writing of the report
- SL and HL write the same report and are assessed the same way. All reports have a maximum of 2200 words.
- The required report headings have been changed to: Introduction, Exploration, Analysis, Evaluation, References
- All students must replicate a study. They are not allowed to make significant changes to a study or create their own research study.
- Students must work in a group. The must be a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 4 group members. Students may also choose to collaborate virtually with another student or students in other IB World Schools.
- Children under 12 may not be used as participants.
- There will no longer be a review of literature. The study to be replicated and the theory upon which that study is based must be explained.
- The importance of the study must be explained.
- The choice of participants must be described and explained.
- Students must explain how materials were developed and why those choices were made.
- Controls must be explained.
- All students must have a null & research hypothesis.
- All students must apply both descriptive and inferential statistics.
- Students no longer have to justify their choice of statistics. It is also recognized that the t-test is a robust test and may be used to determine the significance of the data.
- Calculations of descriptive statistics are no longer required in the appendices. Students are still required to have the calculations of their inferential stats in the appendices of the report.
- A discussion of the data should appear in the analysis section.
- The findings must be linked to the theory in the introduction.
- Strengths of the student's study must be discussed.
- There is more clarity in the teacher support materials regarding limitations. If a student makes a mistake, it is not a limitation - and the study should be rerun. It is not acceptable for students to include limitations such as: we forgot to read the standardized directions in one of the groups; we did not accurately measure the time it took because of poor equipment; there was a lot of distraction because we did the study in a hallway. These will earn no credit.
Changes in the assessment of the IA
- Ethics are no longer assessed. They only need to be met. The ethical considerations must be in the organization section and there must be evidence of meeting those requirements in the appendices. If these are lacking, the report may earn zero marks.
- Since all team members must use a standardized procedure which should be approved by the teacher, it is no longer assessed. It must be included to inform the reader of how the research was carried out. It may be in bullet form or written as a paragraph.
- There are no presentation marks. Students are expected to follow formatting standards, but they are not assessed on this.
- Citation is not assessed. However, not attributing ideas of others included in the report is academic misconduct. If there are not citations or it is clear that citation is lacking, the student may not be awarded a grade for the subject.
IB Psychology IA Guide: HL
Why does the IA matter?
The Internal Assessment (IA) is a critical, but very doable, part of IB Psychology. You cannot pass IB Psychology without completing it. The IA is worth 25% of the grade for SL and 20% for HL.
Before you freak out or give up (depending on the student), we want to let you know that it’s actually a fun and interesting experience. It’s kind of like baking cookies: if you follow the instructions step by step, you’ll end up with great results; but if you leave out ingredients (like sugar) or add unnecessary ones (like sardines), it may not be as pleasant.
So what is the IA?
The IA is simply a replication of a published study. In other words, you’re going to find a study that was already done and go out into the world, do it yourself, and write up what you did. However, HL students have the option of modifying the original study. For example, if the study uses a car crash as a means to test memory construction, you may choose to use a fight or a dance instead. Either way, there are a few rules you have to follow:
- You can only manipulate one independent variable (IV), and must keep other variables constant.
- You can only measure the effect of the independent variable (IV) on one dependent variable (DV).
- You must conduct an ethical study, defined as one that:
ü Does not cause participants harm or distress,
ü Does not use young children (anyone under 18 must receive parental permission through a consent form),
ü Debriefs participants afterwards and gives them the right to withdraw their own personal data and responses, and
ü Guarantees anonymity for each participant.
Which studies can you replicate?
Technically, you can choose any study you want (so long as it only manipulates ONE independent variable), but we strongly advise you to choose one of the following options:
TOPIC #1: THE CHAMELEON EFFECT
Chartrand and Bargh, “The Chameleon Effect as Social Glue: Evidence for the Evolutionary Significance of Nonconscious Mimicry,” 1999.
To investigate the occurrence of a chameleon effect in an interview situation
Independent Variable (IV)
Presence/absence of foot-tapping and face-rubbing mannerisms in interviewer (condition 1: interviewer exhibits foot-tapping and face rubbing mannerisms; condition 2: interviewer does not exhibit foot-tapping and face-rubbing mannerisms)
Dependent Variable (DV)
Frequency of foot-tapping and face-rubbing mannerisms in participants/interviewees
The frequency of participants’/interviewees’ foot-tapping and face-rubbing mannerisms will be greater when with an interviewer who taps their foot and rubs their face than with an interviewer who does not demonstrate these behaviors.
TOPIC #2: SOCIAL FACILITATION
Triplett, “The Dynamogenic Factors in Pace-Making and Competition,” 1898.
Triplett Explained in simple terms
To investigate the effect of co-actors on competitive performance of a task
Independent Variable (IV)
The presence/absence of co-actors (condition 1: co-actors present; condition 2: co-actors absent)
Dependent Variable (DV)
Time taken to reel in fishing line through a 4 m course
The time taken to reel in fishing line through a 4 m course is reduced by the presence of co-actors.
TOPIC #3: MEMORY RECONSTRUCTION
TOPIC #4: MEMORY RECONSTRUCTION AND WORDING EFFECTS
What does the IA look like?
Here’s an outline…
· Student name and number
· Subject and level
· Date, month and year of submission
· Number of words
Table of Contents
· List of parts and pages
· Statement of aim
· Summary of methods
· Summary of results
· Aim of the study
· Operationalized null hypothesis
(sub-section headings are in bold)
1. Title Page
This page should have your title in the top center of the page.
In the bottom left corner, you should put your:
2. IB ID number (ask us and we will provide it)
3. Subject (IB Psychology HL or SL)
4. Month and year of submission (March 2016)
5. Word Count (1000-1500 words), which does NOT include the title page, abstract, references, or appendices
This is a summary of your whole IA. You CANNOT write this until you have finished the IA in its entirety. The reader should understand the basis of the whole experiment from your abstract. You should start out by identifying the study you’re replicating, state your aim (“to investigate X”), write two to three sentences on how you went about the study, state the results (give the actual numbers that you found), and note what you concluded from the study. The whole abstract should not be more than 200 words. Give the word count for the abstract below the abstract itself. The abstract (and its word count) should be the only thing on the page.
For the abstract and the entire IA, you must:
- Use the past tense (since the experiment already happened)
- Use the third person (refer to yourself as “the experimenter” – DO NOT use “I,” “me,” “my,” “we,” etc.)
3. Table of Contents
- This must be the last page you create. It should include all the sections listed in the IA outline.
- From this page forward, you should also have your IB Student ID in the top right of each page, and the page number in the bottom right.
The introduction should be about 600 words, and include background theory and research which logically leads into the aim and hypothesis of your study.
Discuss your topic area in context: Start off by identifying the particular aspect of the discipline of psychology in which your study takes place (e.g., memory reconstruction in the cognitive level of analysis, social facilitation in the sociocultural level, etc.). BRIEFLY explain the nature of this area of psychology; what is the cognitive level of analysis really about? Define this area of psychology, if necessary.
Next, talk about the particular topic that your study addressed, such as memory.
Review the background material relevant to your study: This is NOT an exhaustive list of all the research available. Include two or three studies that directly relate to your research question. You will refer to these studies again in the Discussion section.
Outline the precise problem you chose to investigate and describe the way you went about investigating it: Give clear justification as to why your topic is important to study. Give your reader the general idea of how you went about doing your study.
Outline the results predicted by your research hypothesis: What did you think would happen? Clarify WHY and HOW your study tested this.
State your research (H1) and null (H0) hypotheses.
You do NOT need to put the introduction on a separate page from the sections that follow. The rest of the paper can share pages until you get to the reference page.
The methods section is meant to tell the reader HOW you went about actually doing your experiment. It’s broken down into 4 subsections:
· Design: Did you use independent or repeated measures in your experiment? Why did you use this design? How did it help research the aim of your experiment? How did the design help you control for confounding variables? Was it a single- or double-blind study? What steps did you take to make sure the experiment was ethical? Finally, clearly state the operationalized independent and dependent Variables.
· Participants: How did you find your sample? Was it an opportunity sample, random, snowball? Justify why you used that type of sampling. Include the size of the sample (a participant sample of 20 is recommended) and information on how the participants were selected and assigned to experimental conditions (that is, explain how you put them into the experimental and control groups)
· Materials: What physical materials did you use in your experiment? This can include any standardized instructions, informed consent forms, tests, word lists, debriefing notes, etc. The list can be bulleted, and you’ll need to attach the actual forms in the appendix.
· Procedures: How did you actually go about doing the experiment? In paragraph form, state step by step how you read the debriefing script, handed out your materials, and debriefed the participants.
State your findings in this section. As an HL student, you will present TWO types of results: descriptive and inferential.
Descriptive results just describe where the middle of your data is (e.g., mean, median, range, or standard deviation). When writing the descriptive section, you should start out with a table that compares your two groups using mean, range, and/or standard deviation. Next, present your data in a bar graph comparing the two groups (not individual results). Make sure the graphs are clearly and specifically labeled.
You will then write a paragraph that includes the following:
• Statement of the measure(s) of central tendency, as appropriate
• Statement of the measure(s) of dispersion, as appropriate
• Justification of choice of descriptive statistic
You should give a narrative presentation of the results related to the aim and hypotheses of the experiment.
Inferential statistics enable us to draw conclusions about the likelihood of the hypothesis being accepted. There are different tests you can use depending on what type of data you collected. Before you pick a test, you must know whether your data is nominal or ordinal. Nominal data is where you assign a number to a condition (like “blue equals 1” and “brown equals 2”). Ordinal data is when the data can be ranked or given a rating scale (e.g., when rating Mr. Gino’s attractiveness, you give him a 1 for “homely,” a 2 for “normal,” and a 3 for “gorgeous”).
In general, consult the following explanations to decide which test to use.
· The Chi Square test is used for nominal data in an independent samples design when the experiment tests a difference between two conditions.
· The Mann-Whitney U test is used for ordinal data in an independent samples design when the experiment tests a difference between two conditions.
· The Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test is used for ordinal data in a repeated measures design when the experiment tests a difference between two conditions.
Once you do your test, you’ll look up the critical value of your results and state its p value. If p is less than or equal to .05, you’ll reject the null hypothesis. If it’s higher than .05, you’ll reject the experimental hypothesis. Present this information in a short paragraph at the end of the Results section.
You should include the actual work for the tests in an appendix, presented in a readable form with all headings clearly explained. Don’t include personal details, such as the participants’ names, which are confidential. Don’t include the participants’ actual answer sheets, either.
This section is worth the most points, so give this the most attention.
The discussion should address 4 ideas:
1. Explanation of findings: The word, “explain,” means to give a detailed account, including reasons or causes. (Explanations should include reference to descriptive and inferential statistics.) In other words, why did you get the results that you got?
2. Relationship to background research: This is your opportunity to explain your results in relation to the study you replicated. No new research should be included here, and avoid repeating material from the intro. Did your work support or contradict the original study’s findings?
3. Limitations, modifications, and suggestions for further research: Even a well-designed study will have flaws. You should note your own experimental flaws and problems that may have affected the results, such as lack of sampling controls and problems with the procedure, materials, and design. Next, suggest modifications that would avoid these problems. Modifications need to be clearly stated and could include other ways of investigating the aim. Avoid obvious suggestions like “testing more people.” Refer to any ideas you have for further or follow-up research.
4. Conclusion: You should finish with a brief, focused summing up of your findings, relating back to the aim and hypotheses.
This section should be a list of all the material you’ve referred to in the Introduction and Discussion sections of the IA.
References should follow a recognized format and be consistent throughout. The recommended style is MLA or APA.
If you don’t have the original source material, you can find all the necessary details in the “References” section at the back of the book that referred to the source.
This should be where you attach everything you referred to in the Materials and Results sections. Examples are: