Consumer decision-making — Paper 3 · A Level Psychology (from 2018) 9990

3 (a) Explain what is meant by ‘utility theory’ in consumer decision making. [2] (b) Describe system 1 (fast-type) and system 2 (slow-type) thinking of a consumer (Shleifer, 2012). [4] (c) Explain two weaknesses of system 1 (fast-type)/system 2 (slow-type) thinking as categorised by Shleifer, 2012. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Explain what is meant by ‘utility theory’ in consumer decision making. 2 Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation of the term/concept. For example: Consumers make decisions based on expected outcomes. The better the outcome for the consumer the more likely it is they will want to purchase an item. The higher the utility use for the consumer, the more likely they will decide to make a purchase. To be considered detailed the candidate must explain both sides of the theory (the expected outcome and the eventual decision to purchase or not). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Describe system 1 (fast-type) and system 2 (slow-type) thinking of a 4 consumer (Shleifer, 2012). Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: System 1 involves thinking fast. System 1 thinking is emotional, automatic, unconscious and effortless. Questions are answered quickly. This usually involves quick decision making for everyday products (e.g. milk and bread). System 2 involves thinking slow. System 2 thinking is calculating, conscious, slow, controlled, effortful and lazy. This type of thinking is done by consumers buying more expensive items (such as a car or a house). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Explain two weaknesses of system 1 (fast-type)/system 2 (slow-type) 6 thinking as categorised by Shleifer, 2012. Likely weaknesses will be: • If you use system 1 or 2 in the incorrect type of situation this will lead to a poor decision being made (e.g. using system 1 to buy a car) • Reductionist – assumes just one type of thinking is used when making a purchase (the consumer may use system 1 for one part of the purchase – colour of the car but system 2 for the other part – model of car to be purchased, • difficult to assess what type of thinking is being used as difficult for consumers to explain their thought processes involved with making intuitive decisions as they may be unaware of some or all of these thoughts • Difficult to measure in an objective manner what type of thinking is taking place. • If a measurement is done it could lack validity and/or reliability. [This needs to be explained in order to be creditable.] • Deterministic. Assumes that if the product is a fast purchase, not much thought will have gone into it and the consumer will quickly decide what to buy. It is possible that a consumer may give a quick purchase quite a bit of thought (e.g. someone may decide to be more environmentally aware and research which companies that produce everyday consumables do so in the most environmentally friendly manner) Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain two appropriate weaknesses. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one appropriate weakness in detail or two in less detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation of weaknesses. There could be a brief explanation of one weakness. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Feb/March 2018

3 (a) Explain what is meant by ‘attention and shelf position’ and its effect on product choice. [2] (b) Describe the ‘consumer decision model’ for buying a product. [4] (c) Explain one strength and one weakness of the ‘consumer decision model’ for buying a product. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Explain what is meant by ‘attention and shelf position’ and its effect on 2 product choice. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation of the term/concept. For example: This is investigating the effect of gaze on product choice. Evidence shows that consumers are more likely to gaze for longer at products in the middle of an array of goods and therefore more likely to then buy this product. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Describe the ‘consumer decision model’ for buying a product. 4 Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: The model is structured around a seven point decision process: need recognition followed by a search of information both internally and externally, the evaluation of alternatives, purchase, post purchase reflection and finally, divestment. These decisions are influenced by two main factors. Firstly stimuli is received and processed by the consumer in conjunction with memories of previous experiences, and secondly, external variables in the form of either environmental influences or individual differences. The environmental influences identified include: culture; social class; personal influence; family and situation. While the individual influences include: consumer resource; motivation and involvement; knowledge; attitudes; personality; values and lifestyle Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Explain one strength and one weakness of the ‘consumer decision 6 model’ for buying a product. Strengths Holistic nature of the model Application/usefulness to companies to improve sales Techniques/advertising that take into account the consumer decision making process Weaknesses Unrealistic nature of the model Cultural bias Deterministic nature of the model Reductionist nature of the model Lack of evidence to support the model Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will outline one strength and one weakness. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will outline one appropriate weakness in detail or one appropriate strength in detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an outline of either a strength or a weakness. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) • No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2018

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about menu design psychology. [8] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about menu design psychology, including a discussion on validity. [10] Psychology and health Answer all questions.

18 marks

Mark scheme: 4(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about menu design 8 psychology. Menu design psychology, including the following: • eye movement patterns, framing and common menu mistakes (Pavesic, 2005) • primacy, recency and menu item position (Dayan and Bar-Hillel, 2011) • sensory perception and food name (Wansink et al., 2005) Eye movement patterns, framing and common menu mistakes (Pavesic, 2005) A review article that outlines how customers use menus and how restaurants can design better menus (use of ‘eye magnets’). Common menu mistakes such as hard to read and overemphasising pricing also discussed. Primacy, recency and menu item position (Dayan and Bar-Hillel, 2011) Two studies – study 1 – 240 Hebrew students given four different pizza menu designs. Found selected items at extremes (top/bottom) rather than in the middle but no primacy-recency effect found. Study 2 was a field experiment over 30 days and confirmed the findings with items being selected more frequently if they were on the beginning or end of the category options. Sensory perception and food name (Wansink et al., 2005) 6 week experiment in a cafeteria with 140 customers. Foods with descriptive and evocative names had more positive comments and rated as more appealing than those with more regular names. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table A. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about menu design 10 psychology, including a discussion on validity. A range of issues could be used for evaluation here. These include: • Named issue – Validity – The three studies have good face validity as they are all measuring various aspects of how consumer behaviour is influenced by different menu designs. The study by Wansink has good validity as it was done in a realistic environment of a cafeteria in America. The menu design conditions were very realistic and these type of menus exist in restaurants. In addition, these participants did not know they were in a study so would have made more natural choices. In contrast, the study by Dayan has lower validity as it was a lab experiment and although the participants were making real choices from realistic menus, it was not, in fact, to really purchase and eat any of the food. The participants in this study may have taken the choices less seriously and also responded to the unrealistic lab environment which would lower the validity of the study. They did, however, then go on to replicate the results in the real restaurant which shows higher validity. • Strengths and weaknesses of the methods used in research – Wansink is a field study and Dayan is lab. • sampling and generalisations including cultural bias – restaurant customers used in Wansink. • usefulness/practical applications – useful as helps the restaurant owner to design a better menu to increase sales. • reliability/validity of research • Ethics of the two studies • Deterministic nature of the theories about menu design psychology – Assumes all customers look at menus in the same way • Reductionist nature of the theories about menu design psychology – doesn’t take into account other factors that affect choice of food in a restaurant (e.g. taste preference, dietary restriction, etc.). Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table B. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Psychology and health

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2018

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about ‘buying the product’. [8] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about ‘buying the product’, including a discussion of usefulness. [10] Psychology and health Answer all questions.

18 marks

Mark scheme: 4(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about ‘buying the 8 product’. Buying the product, including the following: • Purchase decisions: theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) • Black box (stimulus-response) model • Consumer decision model. Theory of planned behaviour – the consumer’s behaviour is a function of intention to perform the behaviour in question; the intention is based on attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control with respect to the behaviour; and these factors are determined, respectively, by behavioural, normative, and control beliefs. The theory allows us to predict intentions and behaviour with respect to the purchase or use of a single brand or product as well as in relation to choice among different brands or products. Black-box model – Behaviourist theory that assumes consumers respond to the stimuli in the retail environment (for example). The black box refers to the consumers thinking and this is effected by the stimuli of the environment, personal characteristics of the consumer and the price (for example). The retailer can try to design a pleasant environment to encourage the consumer to respond positively and purchase the product. Consumer decision model – The model is structured around a seven point decision process: need recognition followed by a search of information both internally and externally, the evaluation of alternatives, purchase, post purchase reflection and finally, divestment. These decisions are influenced by two main factors. Firstly stimuli is received and processed by the consumer in conjunction with memories of previous experiences, and secondly, external variables in the form of either environmental influences or individual differences. The environmental influences identified include: Culture; social class; personal influence; family and situation. While the individual influences include: Consumer resource; motivation and involvement; knowledge; attitudes; personality; values and lifestyle. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table A. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about ‘buying the 10 product’, including a discussion of usefulness. A range of issues could be used for evaluation here. These include: • Named issue – Usefulness. All of the models are useful to an extent as they explain the decision making processes of the consumer. Companies will find this useful as they can find ways to influence these decisions and attempt to make their product/service more attractive to the consumer. However they are less useful as they provide little evidence to back up the model and also suggest there are many personal factors that influence the consumer that the company has no control over. • Less reductionist (holistic) nature of the models. • Little evidence to back up the models. • Lacks cultural bias (or has cultural bias) – could be argued either way. • Nature vs nurture debate • Individual vs situational explanations Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table B. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 May/June 2019

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about ‘buying the product’. [8] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about ‘buying the product’, including a discussion of usefulness. [10] Psychology and health Answer all questions.

18 marks

Mark scheme: 4(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about ‘buying the 8 product’. Buying the product, including the following: • Purchase decisions: theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) • Black box (stimulus-response) model • Consumer decision model. Theory of planned behaviour – the consumer’s behaviour is a function of intention to perform the behaviour in question; the intention is based on attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control with respect to the behaviour; and these factors are determined, respectively, by behavioural, normative, and control beliefs. The theory allows us to predict intentions and behaviour with respect to the purchase or use of a single brand or product as well as in relation to choice among different brands or products. Black-box model – Behaviourist theory that assumes consumers respond to the stimuli in the retail environment (for example). The black box refers to the consumers thinking and this is effected by the stimuli of the environment, personal characteristics of the consumer and the price (for example). The retailer can try to design a pleasant environment to encourage the consumer to respond positively and purchase the product. Consumer decision model – The model is structured around a seven point decision process: need recognition followed by a search of information both internally and externally, the evaluation of alternatives, purchase, post purchase reflection and finally, divestment. These decisions are influenced by two main factors. Firstly stimuli is received and processed by the consumer in conjunction with memories of previous experiences, and secondly, external variables in the form of either environmental influences or individual differences. The environmental influences identified include: Culture; social class; personal influence; family and situation. While the individual influences include: Consumer resource; motivation and involvement; knowledge; attitudes; personality; values and lifestyle. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table A. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about ‘buying the 10 product’, including a discussion of usefulness. A range of issues could be used for evaluation here. These include: • Named issue – Usefulness. All of the models are useful to an extent as they explain the decision making processes of the consumer. Companies will find this useful as they can find ways to influence these decisions and attempt to make their product/service more attractive to the consumer. However they are less useful as they provide little evidence to back up the model and also suggest there are many personal factors that influence the consumer that the company has no control over. • Less reductionist (holistic) nature of the models. • Little evidence to back up the models. • Lacks cultural bias (or has cultural bias) – could be argued either way. • Nature vs nurture debate • Individual vs situational explanations Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table B. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 May/June 2019

3 (a) Explain what is meant by the term ‘choice heuristics’ in consumer decision-making. [2] (b) Outline two aims of the study by Wansink et al. (1998) on consumer decision-making. [4] (c) Explain the validity of the study by Wansink et al. (1998). [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Explain what is meant by the term ‘choice heuristics’ in consumer 2 decision-making. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation of the term/concept. For example: These are mental shortcuts that enable the consumer to decide what to buy quickly (1), e.g. availability (likelihood of product being available and also free from fault) (1) and representativeness (making comparisons between similar, available products) (1). Other types can also be credited e.g. anchoring. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Outline two aims of the study by Wansink et al. (1998) on consumer 4 decision-making. Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: Aims Study 1 – To investigate whether multiple-unit pricing (or an example 2 for $1.50) increased sales in a supermarket (2). Study 2 – To investigate whether giving consumers high purchase quantity limits (e.g. limit 3 per customer) increase sales (2). Study 3 – To investigate whether suggestive selling anchor (e.g. slogans – ‘Snickers – buy for freezer’) and discount level increased sales (2). Study 4 – To investigate whether internal/self-generated anchors moderate/limit the impact of anchor-based promotions (2). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Explain the validity of the study by Wansink et al. (1998). 6 Points could include: Study 1 – Good ecological validity as a one-week study in a supermarket but cannot generalise to other types of shops/products. Good population validity as in 86 supermarkets. Good internal validity as each store randomly assigned to one of two conditions (single or multiple promotion condition). Study 2 – Good ecological validity as in 3 supermarkets but cannot generalise to the types of shops/products. Good population validity 914 customers in 3 supermarkets (but all from Iowa, USA – lowers the population validity). Study 3 – Lower ecological validity as a shopping scenario study. Some population validity as 120 participants but all undergraduates from one university. Study 4 – Some population validity as 139 participants but all undergraduates from a large university. Lower ecological validity as a shopping scenario study. All 4 studies – Good face validity as investigating anchoring in all four studies Poor temporal validity as supermarket shopping has changed and many customers now purchase their products online. Poor validity as just uses quantitative data so no reasoning behind consumer choice is given – just the increase in sales (studies 1 and 2) or intended purchase quantities (studies 3 and 4). Although a small amount of qualitative data was collected in study 4, it was not for the purpose of analysing purchasing decisions. Credit any explanation of the validity of any of the four studies by Wansink et al. 3(c) Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain at least two points regarding validity. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one point about validity in detail or two or more in less detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 Oct/Nov 2019

3 (a) Explain what is meant by the term ‘choice heuristics’ in consumer decision-making. [2] (b) Outline two aims of the study by Wansink et al. (1998) on consumer decision-making. [4] (c) Explain the validity of the study by Wansink et al. (1998). [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Explain what is meant by the term ‘choice heuristics’ in consumer 2 decision-making. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation of the term/concept. For example: These are mental shortcuts that enable the consumer to decide what to buy quickly (1), e.g. availability (likelihood of product being available and also free from fault) (1) and representativeness (making comparisons between similar, available products) (1). Other types can also be credited e.g. anchoring. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Outline two aims of the study by Wansink et al. (1998) on consumer 4 decision-making. Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: Aims Study 1 – To investigate whether multiple-unit pricing (or an example 2 for $1.50) increased sales in a supermarket (2). Study 2 – To investigate whether giving consumers high purchase quantity limits (e.g. limit 3 per customer) increase sales (2). Study 3 – To investigate whether suggestive selling anchor (e.g. slogans – ‘Snickers – buy for freezer’) and discount level increased sales (2). Study 4 – To investigate whether internal/self-generated anchors moderate/limit the impact of anchor-based promotions (2). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Explain the validity of the study by Wansink et al. (1998). 6 Points could include: Study 1 – Good ecological validity as a one-week study in a supermarket but cannot generalise to other types of shops/products. Good population validity as in 86 supermarkets. Good internal validity as each store randomly assigned to one of two conditions (single or multiple promotion condition). Study 2 – Good ecological validity as in 3 supermarkets but cannot generalise to the types of shops/products. Good population validity 914 customers in 3 supermarkets (but all from Iowa, USA – lowers the population validity). Study 3 – Lower ecological validity as a shopping scenario study. Some population validity as 120 participants but all undergraduates from one university. Study 4 – Some population validity as 139 participants but all undergraduates from a large university. Lower ecological validity as a shopping scenario study. All 4 studies – Good face validity as investigating anchoring in all four studies Poor temporal validity as supermarket shopping has changed and many customers now purchase their products online. Poor validity as just uses quantitative data so no reasoning behind consumer choice is given – just the increase in sales (studies 1 and 2) or intended purchase quantities (studies 3 and 4). Although a small amount of qualitative data was collected in study 4, it was not for the purpose of analysing purchasing decisions. Credit any explanation of the validity of any of the four studies by Wansink et al. 3(c) Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain at least two points regarding validity. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one point about validity in detail or two or more in less detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2019

3 (a) Explain what is meant by the term ‘choice heuristics’ in consumer decision-making. [2] (b) Outline two aims of the study by Wansink et al. (1998) on consumer decision-making. [4] (c) Explain the validity of the study by Wansink et al. (1998). [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Explain what is meant by the term ‘choice heuristics’ in consumer 2 decision-making. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation of the term/concept. For example: These are mental shortcuts that enable the consumer to decide what to buy quickly (1), e.g. availability (likelihood of product being available and also free from fault) (1) and representativeness (making comparisons between similar, available products) (1). Other types can also be credited e.g. anchoring. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Outline two aims of the study by Wansink et al. (1998) on consumer 4 decision-making. Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: Aims Study 1 – To investigate whether multiple-unit pricing (or an example 2 for $1.50) increased sales in a supermarket (2). Study 2 – To investigate whether giving consumers high purchase quantity limits (e.g. limit 3 per customer) increase sales (2). Study 3 – To investigate whether suggestive selling anchor (e.g. slogans – ‘Snickers – buy for freezer’) and discount level increased sales (2). Study 4 – To investigate whether internal/self-generated anchors moderate/limit the impact of anchor-based promotions (2). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Explain the validity of the study by Wansink et al. (1998). 6 Points could include: Study 1 – Good ecological validity as a one-week study in a supermarket but cannot generalise to other types of shops/products. Good population validity as in 86 supermarkets. Good internal validity as each store randomly assigned to one of two conditions (single or multiple promotion condition). Study 2 – Good ecological validity as in 3 supermarkets but cannot generalise to the types of shops/products. Good population validity 914 customers in 3 supermarkets (but all from Iowa, USA – lowers the population validity). Study 3 – Lower ecological validity as a shopping scenario study. Some population validity as 120 participants but all undergraduates from one university. Study 4 – Some population validity as 139 participants but all undergraduates from a large university. Lower ecological validity as a shopping scenario study. All 4 studies – Good face validity as investigating anchoring in all four studies Poor temporal validity as supermarket shopping has changed and many customers now purchase their products online. Poor validity as just uses quantitative data so no reasoning behind consumer choice is given – just the increase in sales (studies 1 and 2) or intended purchase quantities (studies 3 and 4). Although a small amount of qualitative data was collected in study 4, it was not for the purpose of analysing purchasing decisions. Credit any explanation of the validity of any of the four studies by Wansink et al. 3(c) Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain at least two points regarding validity. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one point about validity in detail or two or more in less detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 Oct/Nov 2019

3 (a) Explain what is meant by the ‘disrupt-then-reframe’ sales technique investigated by Kardes et al. (2007). [2] (b) Describe how consumers would make purchase decisions according to the ‘theory of planned behaviour’ (Ajzen, 1991). [4] (c) Explain two practical applications of the theory of planned behaviour that would help a company to sell products. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Explain what is meant by the ‘disrupt-then-reframe’ sales technique 2 investigated by Kardes et al. (2007). Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation of the term/concept. For example: This is where the potential customer is first distracted/disrupted by a slightly confusing piece of information (e.g. ‘the price is now 100 eurocents’). (1) The customer is then given a positive piece of information about the item (e.g. ‘that’s a euro, what a bargain’) (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Describe how consumers would make purchase decisions according 4 to the ‘theory of planned behaviour’ (Ajzen, 1991). Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: The consumer’s purchasing decision is a function of intention to perform the behaviour in question (1); the intention is based on attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control with respect to the purchase (1); and these factors are determined, respectively, by behavioural, normative, and control beliefs (1). The theory allows us to predict intentions and behaviour with respect to the purchase or use of a single brand or product as well as in relation to choice among different brands or products (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Explain two practical applications of the theory of planned behaviour 6 that would help a company to sell products. Points could include: • Companies need to discover their (potential) customers’ intensions and attitudes toward their products. Once the company understands why a customer might want their product (e.g. it fulfils a specific need or aspiration) they can advertise their product to show how it might meet this need. • The company can alter the product in order to better meet the needs of their customers (e.g. making the food product more portable so that customers can take it with them) • Subjective norms – Companies could advertise the product showing that its brand is the most popular brand on the market. This would help to convince consumers to buy it as others perceive the product as being popular. • The model also explains that the consumer will consider their perceived control. Companies could make sure their products are available for purchase in the places that their consumers frequent (or online if appropriate) • Perceived control – one of the issues could be a lack of money for the product. The company could also provide financial solutions to purchase their product and make these known to their customer (e.g. through advertising) • Perceived control – if the product is too expensive for their customer the company could attempt to produce the product using cheaper materials so they can lower the price. • The company could target their advertising more closely to their customer base (e.g. if it is mainly parents who buy a product, it could be advertised when they are likely to be watching television) Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will discuss at least two points regarding application. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will discuss one point about application in detail or two or more in less detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt a discussion. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Feb/March 2020

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have learned about consumer decision-making (models, strategies, marketing theories). [8] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have learned about consumer decision-making (models, strategies, marketing theories), including a discussion about reductionism. [10] Psychology and health Answer all questions.

18 marks

Mark scheme: 4(a) Describe what psychologists have learned about consumer decision- 8 making (models, strategies, marketing theories). The syllabus covers: • models: utility theory, satisficing, prospect theory • strategies: compensatory, non-compensatory and partially compensatory • marketing theories: consideration and involvement (Richarme, 2005) Models: utility theory, satisficing, prospect theory Utility theory – Consumers make rational decisions based on expected outcomes. The better the outcome for the consumer the more likely it is they will want to purchase an item. The higher the utility use for the consumer, the more likely they will decide to make a purchase. Satisficing – this is where the consumer satisfies their needs and searches amongst available products until they find an acceptable product. The get approximately where they want to go and then stop. If you were shopping for a new dress, you would try on a few and then buy the one that seems ‘good enough’. Prospect theory – added the ideas of value and endowment. Consumers value gains and losses in different ways and make their decision on the likelihood of gain rather than likelihood of loss. Endowment is when a product is more precious when you own it rather than someone else. Strategies: compensatory, non-compensatory and partially compensatory Compensatory – the consumer weighs up the various features of a product and decides to buy the one that has the most features that they want. For example, some consumers might value miles per litre for a car over appearance of the car while others might feel the opposite. Purchasing all depends on which attributes of a product are valued more by the individual consumer. Non-compensatory – This suggests that each feature of the product is evaluated individually by the consumer rather than allowing one to compensate for the other. Strategies used include satisficing (first product meeting basic requirements is chosen), elimination by aspects (considers any product that has the most important feature and then assesses those that remain under the next most important feature until a decision is reached) and lexigraphic (most important feature is evaluated and the item that is the most superior on that feature is selected, if some products are equal, then the second most important feature is considered). Partially compensatory – Majority of conforming dimensions – evaluate two products against all relevant features and chose the best one to purchase. Frequency of Good and Bad features – All potential products are compared and the one that is the most positive so long as it meets the minimum requirement, it is chosen. 4(a) Marketing theories: consideration and involvement (Richarme, 2005) Consideration – the consumer will create a short-list of products for consideration (a subset of brands) and then make the decision about which product to buy. For example, the consumer won’t consider all available restaurants but will make a short-list of restaurants and make their decision using this short-list. Involvement – This theory deals with the amount of effort applied to decision- making. This is directly related to the level of importance the consumer places on acquiring a specific product. The degree of involvement is not necessarily a function of price, but is instead related to the perceived impact the purchasing of the product will have on the quality of life of the consumer. For example – chewing gum purchase will not have much involvement but the purchase of a new mobile/cell phone will. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table A. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4(b) Evaluate what psychologists have learned about consumer decision- 10 making (models, strategies, marketing theories), including a discussion about reductionism. • Named issue – Reductionism Utility theory is mainly reductionist. It offers a simplistic explanation of consumer decision-making that the customer just weighs up the utility/benefits of every product available to them and then makes the purchase. The theory does not consider that many consumers make impulse purchases that are not rational, and the consumer later regrets the purchase. The other theories, satisficing and prospect theory, are more complex as they add in the ideas of value and endowment to the consumer decision-making strategy. The compensatory strategy is the most reductionist with the other two strategies being less reductionist\more complex as they taken into account that consumers may do different things when making a decision to buy a product. The theories do not tell us if consumers generally follow one strategy for purchases, if it is different depending on the product bought (e.g. pint of milk versus a new car) or if the consumer follows one strategy in all of their purchasing decisions. Takes into account other factors and individual differences amongst consumers and is therefore less reductionist. Some consumers will just buy the first product available to them that meets their minimum needs. A range of other issues could be used for evaluation here. These include: • Generalisability • Practical applications • Determinism • Individual differences. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table B. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Psychology and health

This question in 9990/33 May/June 2020

3 (a) Explain what is meant by a ‘competitor-focused’ sales technique. [2] (b) Describe two findings from the study by Kardes et al. (2007) on the disrupt-then-reframe technique to sell a product. [4] (c) Discuss two advantages of field experiments, using examples from the study by Kardes et al. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Explain what is meant by ‘competitor-focused’ sales technique. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation of the term/concept. For example: This technique focuses on the competition rather than the product itself (1). For example, the salesperson emphasises why their product is better than the competitor’s product (e.g. a better price or better features) (1). DelVecchio et al. (2003) identify a number of features of competitor-focused sales techniques including: • Assuming no individual differences between buyers • Salesperson already knows customer needs (no need to ask questions) • Salesperson uses examples of other customers to persuade • As price is same as other stores, salespersons emphasises advantages of their store (guarantees, extras, after-sales service) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Question Answer Marks 3(b) Describe two findings from the study by Kardes et al. (2007) on the disrupt-then-reframe technique to sell a product. Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: 1 First experiment – Field experiment – Overall, 54% of participants bought candy. In the disrupt-then-reframe (DTR) condition (‘the price is now 100 eurocents (2s pause)…. That’s 1 euro. It’s a bargain’) 65% of participants bought candy compared to 44% in the reframe-only condition (‘the price is now 1 euro. It’s a bargain’). 2 Second experiment – Field experiment – Overall 22% of participants agreed to join the group. Those in the DTR condition (‘You can now become a member for half a year for 300 eurocents (2s pause)….that’s 3 euro. That’s a really small investment!’) 30% of participants wanted to join compared to 13% of the reframe-only condition (‘You can now become a member for half a year for 3 euros. That’s a really small investment!’). Disrupt-then-reframe (DTR) works for both sales of goods and getting people to purchase less tangible things like group membership. 3 Third experiment – Lab experiment – When need for cognitive closure (NFCC) was low, the DTR manipulation had no effect on perceived ambiguity but when NFCC was high, DTR manipulation decreased ambiguity. When NFCC was high, more favourable attitudes towards rise in tuition costs were formed in the DTR than the reframe-only condition. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4 Question Answer Marks 3(c) Discuss two advantages of field experiments, using examples from the study by Kardes et al. Advantages are likely to refer to experiments in general or field experiments specifically: • High control over the IV in order to find cause and effect. • Higher EV than lab experiment. The participants were genuine customers in experiments one and two – supermarket customers in the first and students on the campus of a university in the second. The third experiment was a lab experiment. • Reduction in demand characteristics for field experiment as participants were not selected specifically for the study but were an opportunity sample of genuine customers. • IMD means that participants do not get bored/knowledgeable about the study (so performing to demand characteristics). This can improve validity. Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will discuss two or more appropriate advantages. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one appropriate advantage in detail or two in less detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt to explain one advantage. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 6

This question in 9990/31 Oct/Nov 2020

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about intuitive thinking and its imperfections in consumer decision-making (thinking fast and thinking slow, choice blindness, advertising and false memory). [8] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about intuitive thinking and its imperfections in consumer decision-making (thinking fast and thinking slow, choice blindness, advertising and false memory), including a discussion of reliability. [10] Psychology and health Answer all questions.

18 marks

Mark scheme: 4(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about intuitive thinking and its imperfections in consumer decision- making (thinking fast and thinking slow, choice blindness, advertising and false memory). Intuitive thinking and is imperfections in consumer-decision making, including the following: • thinking fast and thinking slow/system 1 and system 2 (Shleifer, 2012); • choice blindness (Hall et al., 2010); • advertising and false memory (Braun-LaTour et al., 2004); Thinking fast and thinking slow/system 1 and system 2 (Shleifer, 2012) System 1 involves thinking fast. System 1 thinking is emotional, automatic, unconscious and effortless. Questions are answered quickly. This usually involves quick decision-making for everyday products (e.g. milk and bread). System 2 involves thinking slow. System 2 thinking is calculating, conscious, slow, controlled, effortful and lazy. This type of thinking is done by consumers buying more expensive items (such as a car or a house). Choice blindness (Hall et al., 2010) Took place in a supermarket in Sweden with 180 customers. Participants were asked to taste jam and tea. Rated each on a 1–10 scale and were then given the jam/tea they did not show a preference for as the one they did prefer on the first tasting. Most participants did not detect that their preference had been swapped. They were blind to their first choice and accepted the alternative as their first choice on a second tasting. Advertising and false memory (Braun-LaTour et al., 2004) Study 1 – Lab study with 66 undergraduates assigned to either a truthful (shaking hands with Mickey Mouse) or a false advertisement condition (shaking hands with Bugs Bunny). Rated attitude, affect and likelihood of visiting Disneyland in the future. Also reported on memories of having visited Disneyland in the past. More participants remembered the false handshake as a true memory than the true handshake group. Post-event false information does influence memory. Study 2 – 100 participants were given information verbally, pictorially or both. The pictorial information recalled more false information than the other two groups. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table A. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Question Answer Marks 4(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about intuitive thinking and its imperfections in consumer decision- making (thinking fast and thinking slow, choice blindness, advertising and false memory), including a discussion of reliability. A range of issues could be used for evaluation here. These include: • Named issue – Reliability – Despite being a field experiment, the Hall et al. study has a highly standardised procedure, leading to high levels of reliability. In the study by Braun-LaTour et al. again, in all of the experiments a highly standardised procedure was adopted. Consistent results produced in this lab study means that the reliability is high. When reliability is high the carefully designed procedures are then easy to replicate. • Experimental method • Sampling and generalisations • Usefulness/practical applications • Situational/individual explanations • Ethics • Use of questionnaires/self-reports Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table B. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 10

This question in 9990/31 Oct/Nov 2020

3 (a) Identify two common menu design mistakes, as outlined by Pavesic (2005). [2] (b) Describe two findings of the study by Gil et al. (2009) on shopper movement patterns. [4] (c) Explain one strength and one weakness of the study by Gil et al. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Identify two common menu design mistakes, as outlined by Pavesic (2005). Award 1 mark for each For example: • Menu is hard to read because of font or colour choices (especially in low light); • Prices over-emphasised; • Poor sales technique because it does not emphasise products the restaurant wants to sell the most; • Menu incongruent with design/décor of restaurant; • Lack of investment in menu, demonstrating a lack of commitment; • Menu is too large. If it takes a long time to read so takes longer for customer to make a choice. As a result turn-over is lower; • Poor use of space; Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 2 3(b) Describe two findings of the study by Gil et al. (2009) on shopper movement patterns. Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area For example: The researchers found that there were 4 distinct special patterns of movement (1). These were short trip, round trip, central trip and wave trip, with wave and round trips being the most common (2). The results of the other data together with the shoppers’ movement pattern meant the researchers could identify 5 different types of shopper (1) – the explorer (almost always female, regular shopping doing their main shop), the tourist (top up shop but still regular, covering a lot of the floor space) (2), the native (this is the most common, shorter than the explorer duration, regular and similar coverage to explorer), the specialist (higher proportion of males than the others mentioned so far, coverage is most limited to particular areas), and the raider (again, more men represented than the others, large floor area covered but short duration, almost always alone) (2). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4 Question Answer Marks 3(c) Explain one strength and one weakness of the study by Gil et al. Likely strengths will be: • Large sample size – 480 shoppers – many factors examined so data should be pretty representative; • Objective – measure of the movement pattern, leading to high validity and reducing need for individual to follow shopper around as carried out remotely. Self-report responses in distinct categorises; • High ecological validity – a very natural situation. All participants would have been expecting to shop on that particular occasion, reducing demand characteristics; • Reliability/Validity – all shoppers treated similarly; • Useful – Allows stores to think about the importance of product placement within shop, displays, and layout, to maximise purchasing opportunities; Likely weaknesses will be: • Reductionist – assumes all shoppers fit into these categories all of the time. However, shoppers may be an explorer one day and then a raider the next day or combine two or more types on one trip; • Lack of generalisability – only one shop at one time and done in UK on adults; • Demand characteristics – shoppers do know they are being tracked so this may change their shopping behaviour; • Cultural bias – only applies to one culture (although, as it relates to shopping patterns then this may be all that researchers are interested in); • Self-report – in interview shoppers may give socially desirable answers. They may want to appear more affluent or more frugal in their shopping habits than then really are, reducing validity; • Gynocentric – most of the shoppers were female. This may represent the shoppers in general or it may be that fewer males were willing to be interviewed and take part. 6 Question Answer Marks 3(c) Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will discuss one appropriate strength and one appropriate weakness; • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail; Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one appropriate strength/weakness in detail or a strength and a weakness in less detail; • Candidates will provide a good explanation; Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt to explain one strength/weakness; • Candidates will provide a limited explanation; Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2020

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about choice heuristics in consumer decision-making (availability/representativeness, anchoring and purchase quantity decisions, pre-cognitive decisions). [8] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about choice heuristics in consumer decision-making (availability/representativeness, anchoring and purchase quantity decisions, pre-cognitive decisions), including a discussion of ecological validity. [10] Psychology and health Answer all questions.

18 marks

Mark scheme: 4(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about choice heuristics in consumer decision-making (availability/ representativeness, anchoring and purchase quantity decisions, pre-cognitive decisions). The syllabus covers: • Availability and representativeness of choice heuristics; • Study by Wansink et al. (1998) on Anchoring and purchase quantity decisions; • Study by Knutson et al. (2007) on Pre-cognitive decisions; Availability and Representativeness of choice heuristics A heuristic is a mental shortcut helping us to make quick decisions. Availability heuristics refers to how easy it is to bring things to mind, often of benefit but based on faulty thinking in some cases. For example, you buy a particular brand of car that keeps breaking down and so in future you look unfavourably on that brand even in the absence of statistics to the contrary – our own car experience is more available to us. Representative heuristics allow us to make our choices by comparing with best known (most representative) examples. For example, a new smartphone is released and we compare it to the market leader. The more similar the new product is the more likely we are to believe it to be a quality item too. This may even go so far as companies releasing products in very similar packaging to the market leader. Wansink et al. An investigation into what makes people buy a certain number of units in a series of field and lab experiments. 1 A field experiment in 86 different shops for one week. 13 products put on sale either as single units ‘On sale – 50c each’ or as multiple-unit pricing ‘6 for $3’. It was found that the multiple pricing increased sales by 32% across the shops. 2 A field experiment in 3 supermarkets in Iowa over 3 days. A small discount of 12% on Campbells soup. Over the 3 evenings there were various limits on the number people could purchase – no limit, 4 max, and 12 max. Of the 914 shoppers, observers noted how many cans they put in their trollies. It was found that the no limit yielded an average 3.3 cans, 4 max 3.7 cans and 12 max 7 cans. 3 Lab experiments using 120 undergraduates using ‘selling anchors’. 6 well-known products were offered for sale at 3 price levels – usual price, 20% discount, or 40% discount. In addition they were given a selling anchors. In the 3rd experiment this was e.g. ‘grab 6 for studying’ (suggested selling). It was found that intention to purchase indicators increased across all discount levels. In the final experiment using an expansion anchor (e.g. ‘buy for all your friends’) increased sale intentions across a range of purchase-quantity limits. Question Answer Marks 4(a) Knutson et al. A total of 26 participants underwent an fMRI scan whilst being presented with various images. They had $20 to ‘spend’. The images were 4s of the product, 4s of product and its price, 4s to make a choice to buy, and 2s of blank screen. This enabled researchers to see which regions of the brain were active at various parts of the decision-making procedure. It was found that preference for the product was correlated with activation in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc), the mesial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) activation related to price differentials (the participant felt the produced was suitably priced) but deactivated if they felt the price was too high. Purchasing the product was correlated with deactivation of the insula, and prices perceived as too high were activated. This enables purchasing decisions to be tracked neurally. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table A. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about choice heuristics in consumer decision-making (availability/ representativeness, anchoring and purchase quantity decisions, pre-cognitive decisions), including a discussion of ecological validity. A range of issues could be used for evaluation here. These include: • Named issue – ecological validity – in the Knutson et al. study participants were in an artificial setting of an fMRI machine, but were being shown genuine products. However, decisions to purchase do not actually take place within such a setting. In the Wansink field studies EV is very high. These are actual customers choosing products. EV is lower in the lab experiments as participants may not actually choose to buy the various products in ‘real life’; • Self-reports; • Usefulness/practical applications; • Situational/individual explanations; • Ethics; Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table B. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 10

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2020

3 (a) Explain what is meant by a ‘competitor-focused’ sales technique. [2] (b) Describe two findings from the study by Kardes et al. (2007) on the disrupt-then-reframe technique to sell a product. [4] (c) Discuss two advantages of field experiments, using examples from the study by Kardes et al. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Explain what is meant by ‘competitor-focused’ sales technique. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation of the term/concept. For example: This technique focuses on the competition rather than the product itself (1). For example, the salesperson emphasises why their product is better than the competitor’s product (e.g. a better price or better features) (1). DelVecchio et al. (2003) identify a number of features of competitor-focused sales techniques including: • Assuming no individual differences between buyers • Salesperson already knows customer needs (no need to ask questions) • Salesperson uses examples of other customers to persuade • As price is same as other stores, salespersons emphasises advantages of their store (guarantees, extras, after-sales service) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Question Answer Marks 3(b) Describe two findings from the study by Kardes et al. (2007) on the disrupt-then-reframe technique to sell a product. Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: 1 First experiment – Field experiment – Overall, 54% of participants bought candy. In the disrupt-then-reframe (DTR) condition (‘the price is now 100 eurocents (2s pause)…. That’s 1 euro. It’s a bargain’) 65% of participants bought candy compared to 44% in the reframe-only condition (‘the price is now 1 euro. It’s a bargain’). 2 Second experiment – Field experiment – Overall 22% of participants agreed to join the group. Those in the DTR condition (‘You can now become a member for half a year for 300 eurocents (2s pause)….that’s 3 euro. That’s a really small investment!’) 30% of participants wanted to join compared to 13% of the reframe-only condition (‘You can now become a member for half a year for 3 euros. That’s a really small investment!’). Disrupt-then-reframe (DTR) works for both sales of goods and getting people to purchase less tangible things like group membership. 3 Third experiment – Lab experiment – When need for cognitive closure (NFCC) was low, the DTR manipulation had no effect on perceived ambiguity but when NFCC was high, DTR manipulation decreased ambiguity. When NFCC was high, more favourable attitudes towards rise in tuition costs were formed in the DTR than the reframe-only condition. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4 Question Answer Marks 3(c) Discuss two advantages of field experiments, using examples from the study by Kardes et al. Advantages are likely to refer to experiments in general or field experiments specifically: • High control over the IV in order to find cause and effect. • Higher EV than lab experiment. The participants were genuine customers in experiments one and two – supermarket customers in the first and students on the campus of a university in the second. The third experiment was a lab experiment. • Reduction in demand characteristics for field experiment as participants were not selected specifically for the study but were an opportunity sample of genuine customers. • IMD means that participants do not get bored/knowledgeable about the study (so performing to demand characteristics). This can improve validity. Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will discuss two or more appropriate advantages. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one appropriate advantage in detail or two in less detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt to explain one advantage. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 6

This question in 9990/33 Oct/Nov 2020

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about intuitive thinking and its imperfections in consumer decision-making (thinking fast and thinking slow, choice blindness, advertising and false memory). [8] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about intuitive thinking and its imperfections in consumer decision-making (thinking fast and thinking slow, choice blindness, advertising and false memory), including a discussion of reliability. [10] Psychology and health Answer all questions.

18 marks

Mark scheme: 4(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about intuitive thinking and its imperfections in consumer decision- making (thinking fast and thinking slow, choice blindness, advertising and false memory). Intuitive thinking and is imperfections in consumer-decision making, including the following: • thinking fast and thinking slow/system 1 and system 2 (Shleifer, 2012); • choice blindness (Hall et al., 2010); • advertising and false memory (Braun-LaTour et al., 2004); Thinking fast and thinking slow/system 1 and system 2 (Shleifer, 2012) System 1 involves thinking fast. System 1 thinking is emotional, automatic, unconscious and effortless. Questions are answered quickly. This usually involves quick decision-making for everyday products (e.g. milk and bread). System 2 involves thinking slow. System 2 thinking is calculating, conscious, slow, controlled, effortful and lazy. This type of thinking is done by consumers buying more expensive items (such as a car or a house). Choice blindness (Hall et al., 2010) Took place in a supermarket in Sweden with 180 customers. Participants were asked to taste jam and tea. Rated each on a 1–10 scale and were then given the jam/tea they did not show a preference for as the one they did prefer on the first tasting. Most participants did not detect that their preference had been swapped. They were blind to their first choice and accepted the alternative as their first choice on a second tasting. Advertising and false memory (Braun-LaTour et al., 2004) Study 1 – Lab study with 66 undergraduates assigned to either a truthful (shaking hands with Mickey Mouse) or a false advertisement condition (shaking hands with Bugs Bunny). Rated attitude, affect and likelihood of visiting Disneyland in the future. Also reported on memories of having visited Disneyland in the past. More participants remembered the false handshake as a true memory than the true handshake group. Post-event false information does influence memory. Study 2 – 100 participants were given information verbally, pictorially or both. The pictorial information recalled more false information than the other two groups. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table A. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Question Answer Marks 4(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about intuitive thinking and its imperfections in consumer decision- making (thinking fast and thinking slow, choice blindness, advertising and false memory), including a discussion of reliability. A range of issues could be used for evaluation here. These include: • Named issue – Reliability – Despite being a field experiment, the Hall et al. study has a highly standardised procedure, leading to high levels of reliability. In the study by Braun-LaTour et al. again, in all of the experiments a highly standardised procedure was adopted. Consistent results produced in this lab study means that the reliability is high. When reliability is high the carefully designed procedures are then easy to replicate. • Experimental method • Sampling and generalisations • Usefulness/practical applications • Situational/individual explanations • Ethics • Use of questionnaires/self-reports Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table B. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 10

This question in 9990/33 Oct/Nov 2020

3 (a) Explain what is meant by a ‘partially compensatory’ strategy in consumer decision-making. [2] (b) Describe the procedure of the study by Knutson et al. (2007) on pre-cognitive decisions in consumer decision-making. [4] (c) Explain the effectiveness of the controls used in the study by Knutson et al. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Explain what is meant by a ‘partially compensatory’ strategy in 2 consumer decision-making. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation of the term/concept. For example: Majority of conforming dimensions (1) – two competing products are evaluated by the consumer across all relevant attributes/features and the one which is the best is retained. (1) The retained product and a new comparison product are compared until one product is left which is purchased. (1) OR Frequency of good and bad features (1) – all products are compared at the same time (1) and the product with the most ‘good’ features that exceeds the cut-off values (minimum required features) is purchased. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Describe the procedure of the study by Knutson et al. (2007) on pre- 4 cognitive decisions in consumer decision-making. Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: There were 26 participants (12f and 14m) Given $20 to participate. Told one trial would count for real and they would have to purchase the product (which would be shipped to them) The participants did a SHOP task (Save Holdings or Purchase) while having an fMRI scan. The participants saw a labelled product for 4 seconds, they then saw the product’s price for 4 seconds. They could choose to purchase the product or not. They then fixated on a crosshair for two seconds before the next trial began. 80 products were shown to the participants. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Explain the effectiveness of the controls used in the study by Knutson 6 et al. Points could include • Make the study more reliable. The same procedure was done for all participants in the study. This meant all experienced exactly the same during the study. Therefore procedural differences do not affect the results. • Reduces individual differences. The participants were screened for use of psychotropic drugs, ibuprofen, substance abuse and any history of psychiatric disorders prior to the study. • Increases validity as unclear readings were excluded e.g. 8 participants were excluded due to excessive head movements or 6 excluded due to purchasing fewer than four items. • Reduces ecological validity as the study is not like real life due to the highly controlled environment (e.g. fMRI and SHOP task) • fMRI consistent scanning device for all participants. Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain at least two points regarding controls. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one point about control in detail or two or more in less detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will • attempt an explanation about controls. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Feb/March 2021

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about menu design psychology. [8] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about menu design psychology, including a discussion about ecological validity. [10] Psychology and health Answer all questions.

18 marks

Mark scheme: 4(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about menu design 8 psychology. Menu design psychology, including the following: • eye movement patterns, framing and common menu mistakes (Pavesic, 2005) • primacy, recency and menu item position (Dayan and Bar-Hillel, 2011) • sensory perception and food name (Wansink et al., 2005) Eye movement patterns, framing and common menu mistakes (Pavesic, 2005) A review article that outlines how customers use menus and how restaurants can design better menus (use of ‘eye magnets’) such as a box around the appetiser or different coloured font to a menu description. Common menu mistakes such as hard to read and overemphasising pricing also discussed. Average time spent looking at a menu 109 seconds. Primacy, recency and menu item position (Dayan and Bar-Hillel, 2011) Two studies – study 1 – 240 Hebrew students given four different pizza menu designs. Found selected items at extremes (top/bottom) rather than in the middle but no primacy-recency effect found. Study 2 was a field experiment over 30 days and confirmed the findings with items being selected more frequently if they were on the beginning or end of the category options. Suggested putting healthier items at the top and bottom of the menu and less healthy items in the middle. Sensory perception and food name (Wansink et al., 2005) 6 week experiment in a cafeteria with 140 customers. Foods with descriptive and evocative names had more positive comments (such as ‘Succulent Italian Seafood Filet’) and rated as more appealing, tasty and caloric than those with more regular names (e.g. ‘Seafood Fillet’). Open ended comments revealed more favourable comments about the product when the descriptive label was used compared to the regular label. The researchers concluded, the use of descriptive names may help improve perceptions of foods in institutional settings, and it may help facilitate the introduction of unfamiliar foods. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table A. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about menu design 10 psychology, including a discussion about ecological validity. • Named issue – ecological validity – The study by Wansink does have good ecological validity as it was done in a realistic environment of a cafeteria in America. The menu design conditions were very realistic and these types of menus do exist in restaurants. In addition, these participants did not know they were in a study so would have made more natural choices. In contrast, the study by Dayan has lower ecological validity as it was a lab experiment and although the participants were making real choices from realistic menus, it was not, in fact, to really purchase and eat any of the food. The participants in this study may have taken the choices less seriously and also responded to the unrealistic lab environment which would lower the validity of the study. They did, however, then go onto to replicate the results in the real restaurant which shows higher ecological validity. • Strengths and weaknesses of the methods used in research • Generalisations including cultural bias • Usefulness/practical applications • Ethics of the two studies • Deterministic nature of the theories about menu design psychology • Reductionist nature of the theories about menu design psychology Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table B. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Psychology and health

This question in 9990/32 May/June 2021

3 (a) One stage in the consumer decision model when buying a product is ‘recognition of need’. Identify two other stages from this model. [2] (b) Describe two ways to close a sale. [4] (c) For one of the ways you described in (b): Explain one advantage and one disadvantage of this way to close a sale. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) One stage in the consumer decision model when buying a product is 2 ‘recognition of need’. Identify two other stages from this model. Award 1 mark for each correctly identified stage up to a maximum of 2 marks. For example: • Informational search • Evaluation of alternatives • Purchase decisions • Post-purchase reflection • Disposing of the product Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Describe two ways to close a sale. 4 Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: 1 Reciprocity including giving free samples 2 Commitment including signing up to a newsletter 3 ‘Liking’ including salesperson being friendly, store environment being inviting or celebrity product (e.g. perfumes) 4 Authority including advertisement of, for example, scientist in lab coat 5 Social proof including saying that it is the most popular product 6 Scarcity including using ‘last few days’ to encourage people to buy or Black Friday. 7 Salesperson to remain seated when customer is signing up for large purchase 8 Clear communication 9 Body language including making eye contact and smiling 10 Use of humour 11 Demeanour including confidence and positive 12 Use indirect closed questions – e.g. Do you think this is a good offer? Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) For one of the ways you described in (b): 6 Explain one advantage and one disadvantage of this way to close a sale. Answers given will depend upon the method chosen but could include the following: Advantages • Customer feels valued and listened to • Customer leaves the salesperson with a product that meets their need • Customer is better informed about the product • Salesperson listening to the consumer’s needs and helping them to construct a list of pros and cons so that they purchase the product they really want and need and will trust the salesperson/store in the future – issues of consent • Following up the purchase so acting as a debrief. Disadvantages • Customer’s need not being met as salesperson is more interested in closing the sale than whether the product/service is suitable • Customer may feel uncomfortable by salesperson appearing ‘pushy’ or overly-friendly, potentially losing sale • Social pressures (social norms) preventing customer given consent to repeated sales techniques being used on them • Social pressures stopping customer withdrawing from the encounter. • Manipulation of customer by pressuring them by, for example, using techniques that encourage them to spend more money than they can afford so that their product is the most popular one in the range Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain one advantage and one disadvantage. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one appropriate advantage in detail or one appropriate disadvantage in detail. OR one advantage and one disadvantage in less detail. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation of either an advantage or a disadvantage. They could include both but just as an attempt. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 Oct/Nov 2021

3 (a) One stage in the consumer decision model when buying a product is ‘recognition of need’. Identify two other stages from this model. [2] (b) Describe two ways to close a sale. [4] (c) For one of the ways you described in (b): Explain one advantage and one disadvantage of this way to close a sale. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) One stage in the consumer decision model when buying a product is 2 ‘recognition of need’. Identify two other stages from this model. Award 1 mark for each correctly identified stage up to a maximum of 2 marks. For example: • Informational search • Evaluation of alternatives • Purchase decisions • Post-purchase reflection • Disposing of the product Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Describe two ways to close a sale. 4 Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: 1 Reciprocity including giving free samples 2 Commitment including signing up to a newsletter 3 ‘Liking’ including salesperson being friendly, store environment being inviting or celebrity product (e.g. perfumes) 4 Authority including advertisement of, for example, scientist in lab coat 5 Social proof including saying that it is the most popular product 6 Scarcity including using ‘last few days’ to encourage people to buy or Black Friday. 7 Salesperson to remain seated when customer is signing up for large purchase 8 Clear communication 9 Body language including making eye contact and smiling 10 Use of humour 11 Demeanour including confidence and positive 12 Use indirect closed questions – e.g. Do you think this is a good offer? Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) For one of the ways you described in (b): 6 Explain one advantage and one disadvantage of this way to close a sale. Answers given will depend upon the method chosen but could include the following: Advantages • Customer feels valued and listened to • Customer leaves the salesperson with a product that meets their need • Customer is better informed about the product • Salesperson listening to the consumer’s needs and helping them to construct a list of pros and cons so that they purchase the product they really want and need and will trust the salesperson/store in the future – issues of consent • Following up the purchase so acting as a debrief. Disadvantages • Customer’s need not being met as salesperson is more interested in closing the sale than whether the product/service is suitable • Customer may feel uncomfortable by salesperson appearing ‘pushy’ or overly-friendly, potentially losing sale • Social pressures (social norms) preventing customer given consent to repeated sales techniques being used on them • Social pressures stopping customer withdrawing from the encounter. • Manipulation of customer by pressuring them by, for example, using techniques that encourage them to spend more money than they can afford so that their product is the most popular one in the range Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain one advantage and one disadvantage. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one appropriate advantage in detail or one appropriate disadvantage in detail. OR one advantage and one disadvantage in less detail. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation of either an advantage or a disadvantage. They could include both but just as an attempt. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 Oct/Nov 2021

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about choice heuristics in consumer decision-making (availability/representativeness, anchoring and purchase quantity decisions, pre-cognitive decisions). [8] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about choice heuristics in consumer decision-making (availability/representativeness, anchoring and purchase quantity decisions, pre-cognitive decisions), including a discussion about generalisability. [10] Psychology and health Answer all questions.

18 marks

Mark scheme: 4(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about choice heuristics in consumer decision-making (availability/representativeness, anchoring and purchase quantity decisions, pre-cognitive decisions). The syllabus covers  Availability and representativeness of choice heuristics  Study by Wansink et al. (1998) on Anchoring and purchase quantity decisions  Study by Knutson et al. (2007) on Pre-cognitive decisions Availability and Representativeness of choice heuristics A heuristic is a mental shortcut helping us to make quick decisions. Availability heuristics refers to how easy it is to bring things to mind, often of benefit but based on faulty thinking in some cases. For example, you buy a particular brand of car that keeps breaking down and so in future you look unfavourably on that brand even in the absence of statistics to the contrary – our own car experience is more available to us. Representative heuristics allow us to make our choices by comparing with best know (most representative) examples. For example, a new smartphone is released, and we compare it to the market leader. The more similar the new product is the more likely we believe it to be a quality item too. This may even go so far as companies releasing products in very similar packaging to the market leader. Wansink et al. An investigation into what makes people buy a certain number of units in a series of field and lab experiments. 1 A field experiment in 86 different shops for one week. 13 products put on sale either as single units “On sale – 50 c each” or as multiple-unit pricing “6 for $3”. It was found that the multiple pricing increased sales by 32 across the shops. 2 A field experiment in 3 supermarkets in Iowa over 3 days. A small discount of 12 on Campbells soup. Over the 3 evenings there were various limits on the number of tins of soup customers could purchase – no limit, 4 max, and 12 max. Of the 914 shoppers, observers noted how many cans they put in their trollies. It was found that the no limit yielded an average 3.3 cans, 4 max 3.7 cans and 12 max 7 cans. 3 Lab experiments using 120 undergraduates using “selling anchors”. 6 well-known products were offered for sale at 3 price levels – usual price, 20 discount, or 40 discount. In addition, they were given selling anchors. In the 3rd experiment this was “grab 6 for studying” (suggested selling). It was found that intention to purchase indicators increased across all discount levels. In the final experiment using an expansion anchor (e.g., “buy for all your friends”) increased sale intentions across a range of purchase-quantity limits. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Question Answer Marks 4(a) Knutson et al. A total of 26 participants underwent an fMRI scan whilst being presented with various images. They had $20 to ‘spend’. The images were 4 s of the product, 4 s of product and its price, 4 s to make a choice to buy, and 2 s of blank screen. This enabled researchers to see which regions of the brain were active at various parts of the decision-making procedure. It was found that preference for the product was correlated with activation in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc). The mesial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) activation related to price differentials (the participant felt the produced was suitably priced) but deactivated if they felt the price was too high. Purchasing the product was correlated with deactivation of the insula. Reaction times were no different between products that were purchased and those not purchased. Reaction times were lower where there was a low preference for the item e.g., participants spent longer when the participant had a weak preference for it. When participants had a strong preference for an item reactions times were faster. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table A. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Question Answer Marks 4(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about choice heuristics in consumer decision-making (availability/representativeness, anchoring and purchase quantity decisions, pre-cognitive decisions), including a discussion about generalisability. A range of issues could be used for evaluation here. These include:  Named issue – Generalisability Only one culture used across the studies – USA. However, in Wansink there are a large number of genuine shoppers in the field experiments so generalisation is high. Wansink’s lab study used under-graduates. Small sample in Knutson (26), age 18–26. Weaknesses – there could be cultural bias as both studies use American participants which is a wealthy, consumer-driven society. Results may not be generalisable to poorer countries where there is less availability of products. In Wansink’s lab study there were undergraduates which might not be generalisable to older participants who might have more/less disposable income for shopping and engage in different types of shopping. E.g young people tend to purchase more non-essential items such as clothing. Knutson’s study used a small number of participants aged 18–26. Brain continues to change as we age and older participants might have had different results. Strengths – Good sample size in Wansink and genuine shoppers from a wide range of stores so more generalisable. As Knutson’s research is investigating brain activation it could be argued that regions of the brain which activate during shopping is similar throughout the adult population. Allow evaluation of ecological validity (generalisability to everyday life) as covering named issue.  Ecological validity  Self-reports  Usefulness / practical applications  Situational/individual explanations  Ethics Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table B. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 10

This question in 9990/32 May/June 2022

3 (a) Outline an associative learning explanation for consumers’ preference for product colour (Grossman and Wisenblit, 1999). [2] (b) Outline two methods used to collect data in the study by Porublev et al. (2009) on gift-wrapping. [4] (c) Explain one strength and one weakness of the study by Porublev et al. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Outline an associative learning explanation for consumers’ preference 2 for product colour (Grossman and Wisenblit, 1999). Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed outline of the term/concept. With classical conditioning, we form associations between favourable experiences and a colour, leading to colour preferences, or we may learn to associate certain colours with certain products and therefore against some other products (2). In addition, associations could have been formed early in human history when people first associated blue with night (passivity) and yellow with sunlight (arousal) (1). We tend to assume cool colours like green and blue are calming but warmer colours like red and orange are arousing (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Outline two methods used to collect data in the study by Porublev et 4 al. (2009) on gift-wrapping. For each method: Award 1 mark for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 2 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. Two from: • Observation (1) of a Christmas gift-wrapping stall (1) (to see different wrappings and how gifts are wrapped) • In depth interviews (1) with 20 participants from Victoria, Australia aged 25–35 (to reflect on gift-wrapping) with questions regarding gift- wrapping preferences (1) • Six projective workshops where participants in pairs were asked to wrap two gifts, one for someone they are close to and the other for an acquaintance, and have a discussion about gift-wrapping while doing so (2) Researchers photographed the wrapped gifts (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Explain one strength and one weakness of the study by Porublev et al. 6 Likely strengths include: • Use of multiple ways of gathering data (observation, interview etc.) means findings are more comprehensive so increasing validity • Standardised procedures in interview and methods of gathering qualitative data increases reliability. Study could easily be carried out elsewhere for comparison • Qualitative data gathered leading to high validity as participants can express views in own words and observers can record detail (for example photographs were taken of the wrapped gifts produced in the workshops) • Although the study was carried out at Christmas time, the expectation of the researchers was that the information gathered would apply to all types of gifts – birthdays, baby shower, Valentine’s etc., so widening the generalisability • Ethical study as participants were aware of taking part in the interview and workshop, giving informed consent and in the case of the observation, participants could reasonably expect to be observed while shopping Likely weaknesses include: • The study centred around Christmas gifts, which may not have an equivalent in other cultures. In other religious festivals where gifts are given, they may be of a different type or not wrapped and expectations about wrapping could be different too • Lack of quantitative data means that it would be more difficult to make comparisons between either different shops or different age groups • Narrow age range / culture of participants so lacking in generalisations. Researchers acknowledge this, but selection made deliberately to get information from those most likely to engage with gifting Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain one strength and one weakness. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one appropriate weakness in detail or one appropriate strength in detail. OR • one weakness and one strength in less detail. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation of either a strength or a weakness. They could include both but just as an attempt. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. 3(c) Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 Oct/Nov 2022

3 (a) Explain what is meant by ‘satisficing’ in consumer decision-making. [2] (b) Describe ‘prospect theory’ in consumer decision-making. [4] (c) Explain two weaknesses of prospect theory in consumer decision-making. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Explain what is meant by ‘satisficing’ in consumer decision-making. 2 Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation of the term/concept. For example: Satisficing is when the consumer chooses the first product encountered that meets their basic requirements (1) and no further considerations are needed (1). For example, if a basic household item like a toaster needs to be replaced, the consumer may simply buy the first one they see (1). Satisficing is a non-compensatory strategy (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Describe ‘prospect theory’ in consumer decision-making. 4 Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: Prospect theory states that decision-making is based on weighing up costs and benefits and that value (or utility) is not a single entity. Costs and benefits can be seen differently so if there are alternatives, the one presented in terms of benefits will be chosen over the one presented in terms of possible losses (loss aversion). In addition, people put more value on things they own (endowment effect). The theory involves 4 stages: 1 Editing – using ‘rules of thumb’ / shortcuts such as availability heuristics 2 Coding – setting a reference point for outcome to be measured 3 Value – costs and benefits 4 Weighting and risk assessment e.g. ‘framing’ so 80% prefer this compared to 20% do not Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Explain two weaknesses of prospect theory in consumer decision- 6 making. Possible weaknesses: • It is very complex compared to other decision-making models and so quite difficult to apply practically. A person may employ some of the aspects but not all, for example • It would only apply to certain purchases by some individuals and not to all consumer decision-making, so limiting its validity and usefulness. For example, decision to purchase of a household item such as a kettle may be due to prospect theory as the consumer needs to quickly purchase this item as they use it everyday. In addition, the product is not expensive so if the consumer does make a poor decision, it does not cost much to purchase a better product. There are individual differences in terms of what is considered expensive. However, consumers may spend much longer researching and shopping for expensive items such as cars, mobile phones, televisions. It is also not relevant to products where there is not much difference between brands (e.g. milk) • It is a theory and has no specific research backup. Furthermore, research would be difficult to carry out as we can only know decision- making processes by self-report and individuals may not be aware of the processes going on when they decide to make a purchase • It suggests that decision-making is cognitive and rational when it may rely on ‘gut-feeling’ and emotional reaction. What an individual may choose today may not be the same item as tomorrow Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will discuss two strengths in detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will discuss one strength in detail or two in less detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt a discussion of strengths. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2022

3 (a) Outline an associative learning explanation for consumers’ preference for product colour (Grossman and Wisenblit, 1999). [2] (b) Outline two methods used to collect data in the study by Porublev et al. (2009) on gift-wrapping. [4] (c) Explain one strength and one weakness of the study by Porublev et al. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Outline an associative learning explanation for consumers’ preference 2 for product colour (Grossman and Wisenblit, 1999). Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed outline of the term/concept. With classical conditioning, we form associations between favourable experiences and a colour, leading to colour preferences, or we may learn to associate certain colours with certain products and therefore against some other products (2). In addition, associations could have been formed early in human history when people first associated blue with night (passivity) and yellow with sunlight (arousal) (1). We tend to assume cool colours like green and blue are calming but warmer colours like red and orange are arousing (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Outline two methods used to collect data in the study by Porublev et 4 al. (2009) on gift-wrapping. For each method: Award 1 mark for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 2 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. Two from: • Observation (1) of a Christmas gift-wrapping stall (1) (to see different wrappings and how gifts are wrapped) • In depth interviews (1) with 20 participants from Victoria, Australia aged 25–35 (to reflect on gift-wrapping) with questions regarding gift- wrapping preferences (1) • Six projective workshops where participants in pairs were asked to wrap two gifts, one for someone they are close to and the other for an acquaintance, and have a discussion about gift-wrapping while doing so (2) Researchers photographed the wrapped gifts (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Explain one strength and one weakness of the study by Porublev et al. 6 Likely strengths include: • Use of multiple ways of gathering data (observation, interview etc.) means findings are more comprehensive so increasing validity • Standardised procedures in interview and methods of gathering qualitative data increases reliability. Study could easily be carried out elsewhere for comparison • Qualitative data gathered leading to high validity as participants can express views in own words and observers can record detail (for example photographs were taken of the wrapped gifts produced in the workshops) • Although the study was carried out at Christmas time, the expectation of the researchers was that the information gathered would apply to all types of gifts – birthdays, baby shower, Valentine’s etc., so widening the generalisability • Ethical study as participants were aware of taking part in the interview and workshop, giving informed consent and in the case of the observation, participants could reasonably expect to be observed while shopping Likely weaknesses include: • The study centred around Christmas gifts, which may not have an equivalent in other cultures. In other religious festivals where gifts are given, they may be of a different type or not wrapped and expectations about wrapping could be different too • Lack of quantitative data means that it would be more difficult to make comparisons between either different shops or different age groups • Narrow age range / culture of participants so lacking in generalisations. Researchers acknowledge this, but selection made deliberately to get information from those most likely to engage with gifting Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain one strength and one weakness. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one appropriate weakness in detail or one appropriate strength in detail. OR • one weakness and one strength in less detail. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation of either a strength or a weakness. They could include both but just as an attempt. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. 3(c) Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 Oct/Nov 2022

3 (a) Outline the black box (stimulus-response) model of buying a product. [2] (b) Atalay et al. (2012) carried out three studies on attention and shelf position (Study 1A, Study 1B and Study 2). Describe one of these studies. [4] (c) Discuss the reliability of the study by Atalay et al. that you described in part (b). [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Outline the black box (stimulus-response) model of buying a product. 2 Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed outline of the term/concept in the context of shoppers. For example: Buyers respond to stimuli in the environment such as marketing, price, the store environment. (1) The black box is how the consumer thinks about / is effected by this stimuli depending on the personal characteristics of the consumer. This leads the consumer to make the decision to purchase or not (response). (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Atalay et al. (2012) carried out three studies on attention and shelf 4 position (Study 1A, Study 1B and Study 2). Describe one of these studies. Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: Study 1A involved 67 undergraduates in France, average age 20. (1) Using eye-tracking, participants viewed 2 product categories – vitamin supplements and meal replacement bars (1), each with 3 fictitious names and displayed in a 3 x 3 matrix on a computer screen. (1) Participants indicated which product they would like to purchase (1) Brands in the centre received more frequent eye fixations, looked at for longer and chosen for purchase more frequently. (2) 1B extended 1A by considering horizontal centrality. (1) Participants were 64 undergraduate students in Paris. (1) The set up was similar to 1A (credit details listed above) but with the matrix shifted away from the centre of the computer screen. (1) Products in the centre gazed at for longer, received more frequent eye fixations and chosen more frequently by the participants. (2) Study 2 – in a more realistic setting by placing the products on a shelf rather than a screen. (1) 84 students at Concordia University took part. (1) The products used were fictitious brands of energy drinks. (1) Each brand had a feature attribute: high intensity, extended endurance or muscle recovery but these attributes were rotated around the brands to eliminate effects. (1) Items were displayed in categories of 3 so that each product could be centre, left or right. (1) Participants were tested one at a time and positioned so that the category they had to choose from was to their left or right and never exactly in the centre of their visual field. (1) Results found the centrally located brand is more often chosen even when it is not in the centre of the visual field. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Discuss the reliability of the study by Atalay et al. that you described 6 in part (b). Likely points could include: • Study could be replicated using the same procedure used by Atalay et al. e.g. could show the same products, use the same eye tracking equipment, etc. • All participants were from the same university so were of a similar age and background so reliable comparisons can be made between these similar participants. • The same instructions were given to the participants throughout the study. • The same products were used throughout the study. • Carried out in a controlled laboratory setting. • Although the products have fictious names, some of the participants may use these types of products which could affect how these participants respond to them compared to those who do not regularly use them. This would reduce reliability. Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will discuss at least two points regarding reliability. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will discuss one point about reliability in detail or two or more in less detail. • Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt a discussion. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Feb/March 2023

3 (a) Identify two shopper movement patterns from the study by Gil et al. (2009). [2] (b) Dayan and Bar‑Hillel (2011) conducted a laboratory study and a field study on primacy, recency and menu item position. Outline any two results from these studies by Dayan and Bar‑Hillel. [4] (c) Discuss the validity of these studies by Dayan and Bar‑Hillel. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Identify two shopper movement patterns from the study by Gil et al. 2 (2009). Award 1 mark for each shopper movement pattern identified. For example: 5 spatial behaviour patterns were also identified: the specialist, native, tourist, explorer, and raider. Four patterns of movement were identified: short trip, 'round trip', 'central trip', and the 'wave trip'. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Dayan and Bar-Hillel (2011) conducted a laboratory study and a field 4 study on primacy, recency and menu item position. Outline any two results from these studies by Dayan and Bar-Hillel. Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: Study 1 – Participants more likely to select menu items at the extremes of the menu (1). This is the beginning and end of the menu rather than the middle. (1) This was found even for unpopular items. (1) The advantage of being placed at the beginning or end of the menu was 56%. (2) Unpopular items had an advantage of being selected of 54%. (2) Study 2 – There was a larger gain when an item moved from the exact middle to the extreme end (55%), than when it moved from the near-middle to the near- end (51%; not significant). (2 − % results not needed for full marks for this result. There was an advantage of being in the top half of the category (59%) (2) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Discuss the validity of these studies by Dayan and Bar-Hillel. 6 Points could include (can refer to either of the two studies)  Ecological validity − study 1 was a laboratory experiment so poor ecological validity but study 2 was done in the natural environment so good ecological validity.  Population validity − Good sample size (240 and customers at Tel Aviv café – good range of people) but study 1 just students and study 2 from one café in one city in Israel.  Validity of data collection – although participants knew they were in a study in study 1 it is unlikely they were aware of the aim of the study so lower social desirability / demand characteristics. They would have known the study was about menu choice but unlikely to figure out it was about menu position. Study 2 was in the natural environment so the participants did not know they were in a study – good validity  Quantitative data was collected − no reasons given for menu choice − lowers validity. Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain at least two points regarding validity. Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one point about validity in detail or two or more in less detail. Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation. Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 May/June 2023

3 (a) Identify two shopper movement patterns from the study by Gil et al. (2009). [2] (b) Dayan and Bar‑Hillel (2011) conducted a laboratory study and a field study on primacy, recency and menu item position. Outline any two results from these studies by Dayan and Bar‑Hillel. [4] (c) Discuss the validity of these studies by Dayan and Bar‑Hillel. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Identify two shopper movement patterns from the study by Gil et al. 2 (2009). Award 1 mark for each shopper movement pattern identified. For example: 5 spatial behaviour patterns were also identified: the specialist, native, tourist, explorer, and raider. Four patterns of movement were identified: short trip, 'round trip', 'central trip', and the 'wave trip'. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Dayan and Bar-Hillel (2011) conducted a laboratory study and a field 4 study on primacy, recency and menu item position. Outline any two results from these studies by Dayan and Bar-Hillel. Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: Study 1 – Participants more likely to select menu items at the extremes of the menu (1). This is the beginning and end of the menu rather than the middle. (1) This was found even for unpopular items. (1) The advantage of being placed at the beginning or end of the menu was 56%. (2) Unpopular items had an advantage of being selected of 54%. (2) Study 2 – There was a larger gain when an item moved from the exact middle to the extreme end (55%), than when it moved from the near-middle to the near- end (51%; not significant). (2 − % results not needed for full marks for this result. There was an advantage of being in the top half of the category (59%) (2) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Discuss the validity of these studies by Dayan and Bar-Hillel. 6 Points could include (can refer to either of the two studies)  Ecological validity − study 1 was a laboratory experiment so poor ecological validity but study 2 was done in the natural environment so good ecological validity.  Population validity − Good sample size (240 and customers at Tel Aviv café – good range of people) but study 1 just students and study 2 from one café in one city in Israel.  Validity of data collection – although participants knew they were in a study in study 1 it is unlikely they were aware of the aim of the study so lower social desirability / demand characteristics. They would have known the study was about menu choice but unlikely to figure out it was about menu position. Study 2 was in the natural environment so the participants did not know they were in a study – good validity  Quantitative data was collected − no reasons given for menu choice − lowers validity. Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain at least two points regarding validity. Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one point about validity in detail or two or more in less detail. Candidates will provide a good explanation. Level 1 (1–2 marks) Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation. Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 May/June 2023

3 (a) Outline ‘behaviour constraint’ in consumer theories of personal space. [2] (b) Describe Study 2 (the field experiment) by Dayan and Bar-Hillel (2011) about primacy, recency and menu item position. [4] (c) Explain two strengths of the study by Dayan and Bar-Hillel. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Outline ‘behaviour constraint’ in consumer theories of 2 For full marks candidate must relate to consumer behaviour personal space. Behaviour constraints could include inability to browse so as Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the term/concept. to make careful choices, lack of access to items, leaving the Award 2 marks for a detailed outline of the term/concept. shop. For example: 1 mark to what is causing the behavioural constraint – invasion of personal space. Behaviour constraint allows people to protect themselves from the stress caused by crowding (1). Many behaviours are not possible if others are invading one’s personal space (ease of movement, browsing, etc.) (1). This could lead to aggressive behaviour (1) such as those seen in store ‘sales’ (large discounts) when the store is very busy when the sale begins and the lack of personal space could lead to some of this increase in aggressive behaviour (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Describe Study 2 (the field experiment) by Dayan and 4 1 mark for the location/sample Bar-Hillel (2011) about primacy, recency and menu item 2 marks for procedure – length of study, types of menus and position. DV 1 mark for results Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. For full marks must state the result. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. No mark for just stating ‘field experiment’ • A field experiment in small café in Tel Aviv catering to No credit for the aim. students and young professionals). • IV was type of menu varied over 15 days. The base No difference between popular and unpopular items in terms menu and ‘inside-out’ menu (where items within a of choice – still preferred if at beginning/end of menu category were changed from extremes to middle positions and vice versa) were applied to 20 items in 56% advantage for items on beginning/end of menu 3 categories – Coffee with alcohol, soft drinks and desserts. • DV was number of orders placed from each menu type (recorded by the waiters). • Approx the same number of orders were made from each menu (459 from base and 492 from ‘inside-out’). • Results found that items placed at the beginning or the end of the list (primacy and recency) were up to twice as popular as when they were in the centre of the list. This supported the results from Study 1. 3(c) Explain two strengths of the study by Dayan and Bar- 6 If more than two strengths are given, credit the best two. Hillel. The response could refer to Study 1 or Study 2 or both studies. Likely strengths could include: • High levels of control (items on menu identical) (studies 1 and 2) • Generalisable as large amount of data collected (140 participants in study 1, over 900 items chosen in study 2) • Data gathered by waiters not researchers (less biased) (study 2) • High levels of ecological validity as real customers (study 2) • Baseline menu was the regular menu of the café (study 2) • Good agreement between the two studies as results supported one another (studies 1 and 2) Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain two strengths. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. 3(c) Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one strength in detail. OR two strengths in less detail. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation of one strength. They could include two but just as an attempt. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 Oct/Nov 2023

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about consumer decision-making (models, strategies, marketing theories). [8] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about consumer decision-making (models, strategies, marketing theories), including a discussion of generalisations. [10] Psychology and health Answer all questions.

18 marks

Mark scheme: 4(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about 8 Can also credit 4Ps and 4Cs (one level) consumer decision-making (models, strategies, And marketing theories). communication and advertising models The syllabus covers • changing attitudes and models of communication (source, message, etc.) • models: utility theory, satisficing, prospect theory • AIDA model (and updates of it) • strategies: compensatory, non-compensatory and • hierarchy of effects model partially compensatory • marketing theories: consideration and involvement No credit to ways to close a sale (Richarme, 2005) Models: utility theory, satisficing, prospect theory Utility theory – Consumers make rational decisions based on expected outcomes. The better the outcome for the consumer the more likely it is they will want to purchase an item. The higher the utility use for the consumer, the more likely they will decide to make a purchase. Satisficing – this is where the consumer satisfies their needs and searches amongst available products until they find an acceptable product. The get approximately where they want to go and then stop. If you were shopping for a new dress you would try on a few and then buy the one that seems ‘good enough’. Prospect theory – added the ideas of value and endowment. Consumers value gains and losses in different ways and make their decision on the likelihood of gain rather than likelihood of loss. Endowment is when a product is more precious when you own it rather than someone else. 4(a) Strategies: compensatory, non-compensatory and partially compensatory Compensatory – the consumer weighs up the various features of a product and decides to buy the one that has the most features that they want. For example, some consumers might value miles per litre for a car over appearance of the car while others might feel the opposite. Purchasing all depends on which attributes of a product are valued more by the individual consumer. Non-compensatory – This suggests that each feature of the product is evaluated individually by the consumer rather than allowing one to compensate for the other. Strategies used include satisficing (first product meeting basic requirements is chosen), elimination by aspects (considers any product that has the most important feature and then assesses those that remain under the next most important feature until a decision is reached) and lexigraphic (most important feature is evaluated and the item that is the most superior on that feature is selected, if some products are equal, then the second most important feature is considered). Partially compensatory – Majority of conforming dimensions – evaluate two products against all relevant features and chose the best one to purchase. Frequency of Good and Bad features – All potential products are compared and the one that is the most positive so long as it meets the minimum requirement, it is chosen. 4(a) Marketing theories: consideration and involvement (Richarme, 2005) Consideration – the consumer will create a short-list of products for consideration (a subset of brands) and then make the decision about which product to buy. For example, the consumer won’t consider all available restaurants but will make a short-list of restaurants and make their decision using this short-list. Involvement – This theory deals with the amount of effort applied to decision-making. This is directly related to the level of importance the consumer places on acquiring a specific product. The degree of involvement is not necessarily a function of price, but is instead related to the perceived impact the purchasing of the product will have on the quality of life of the consumer. For example – chewing gum purchase will not have much involvement but the purchase of a new mobile/cell phone will. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table A. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about 10 consumer decision-making (models, strategies, marketing theories), including a discussion of generalisations. A range of issues could be used for evaluation here. These include: • Named issue – Generalisations of theories Western cultures/developed countries have a wide variety of the same product available for consumers to purchase. Decision making may be different when income is much more limited and also when fewer products are available or the supply of products is severely limited. Can also be argued that regardless of the availability of products the consumer can still weigh up the pros and cons of a purchase and will use this to make a decision. • Reductionism • Practical applications • Determinism • Individual differences Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table B. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Psychology and health

This question in 9990/31 Oct/Nov 2023

3 (a) Outline ‘involvement’ as a marketing theory (Richarme, 2005). [2] (b) Outline two of the findings from the study by Hall et al. (2010) on choice blindness. [4] (c) Explain one strength and one weakness of the study by Hall et al. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Outline ‘involvement’ as a marketing theory (Richarme, 2 2005). Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the term/concept. Award 2 marks for a detailed outline of the term/concept. For example: The amount of cognitive effort applied to the decision- making process (1) is directly related to the level of importance the consumer places on acquiring the product (1). For example, low involvement in purchasing a pack of chewing gum but high involvement in the purchase of a cell phone (1). It is not necessarily to do with price but more to do with impact on the quality of life of the consumer (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Outline two of the findings from the study by Hall et al. 4 (2010) on choice blindness. For each finding: Award 1 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. Award 2 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. For example: In the manipulated trials – Counting across all pairings • concurrent detection was approx. 14% for both jam and tea • retrospective detection was 6–7% for both jam and tea • sensory change was approx. 12% for both jam and tea • Different detection types had ratings that were consistent across jam and tea In total • 32–33% total detection rate for both jam and tea • No difference in ease of distinguishing between the two samples in either the non-manipulated trials or the non- detected manipulated trials • No difference in rated confidence of participant’s ability to distinguish between the two samples in either the non-manipulated trials or the non-detected manipulated trials • No order defects on any of the measures uses as a result of the participants choosing the first or second sample when evaluation the products. 3(b) Differences • Significant differences in detection rate between the most and least similar jam and tea pairs but no differences between other pairs • Rated discrepancy of preference within a pair was higher for detected (as opposed to undetected) jam trials but not the case for detected tea trials • Lower detection rate (20%) in those with gift incentive compared to those without (46%) in tea condition but not in jam condition Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(c) Explain one strength and one weakness of the study by 6 If more than two strengths given, credit the best two. Hall et al. Likely strengths could be: • Highly controlled procedures – same ratings asked for, same jam and tea flavours, manipulation done in the same way • Reasonably large sample size (180 customers) • High in mundane realism as ‘tasting’ is something customers in a supermarket are often asked to do and cover story (quality control) is realistic • Ethics – debriefing and written consent given at the end. Regional Swedish Ethics Board approved the study. • Many IVs (jam, tea, flavour combinations, manipulated or not) so that results can be seen to be down to manipulation, increasing validity • A lot of measures for DV – rating of taste/smell for each (10-point scale), indication of preference (quantitative data), why preference (qualitative data), difficulty of discrimination, confidence and asked if anything was odd or unusual (to see if manipulation detected) • Quantitative and qualitative data collected so lots to analyse and some detail as to why results given. Likely weakness could be: • Biased sample (118 f to 62 m) although this is probably representative of supermarket customers • With the many IVs, not many participants in each condition making valid conclusions harder to draw • Problems with self-reporting particularly in terms of social desirability (wanting to please experimenters) 3(c) • Ethics – deception and informed consent not obtained in advance (although not possible if study were to be successful; and written consent was given after the experiment) • Only took place in one supermarket in Sweden so results may not be generalisable outside of this setting/culture Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain one strength and one weakness. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one appropriate weakness in detail or one appropriate strength in detail. OR one weakness and one strength in less detail. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation of either a strength or a weakness. They could include both but just as an attempt. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2023

3 (a) Outline ‘behaviour constraint’ in consumer theories of personal space. [2] (b) Describe Study 2 (the field experiment) by Dayan and Bar-Hillel (2011) about primacy, recency and menu item position. [4] (c) Explain two strengths of the study by Dayan and Bar-Hillel. [6]

12 marks

Mark scheme: 3(a) Outline ‘behaviour constraint’ in consumer theories of 2 For full marks candidate must relate to consumer behaviour personal space. Behaviour constraints could include inability to browse so as Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the term/concept. to make careful choices, lack of access to items, leaving the Award 2 marks for a detailed outline of the term/concept. shop. For example: 1 mark to what is causing the behavioural constraint – invasion of personal space. Behaviour constraint allows people to protect themselves from the stress caused by crowding (1). Many behaviours are not possible if others are invading one’s personal space (ease of movement, browsing, etc.) (1). This could lead to aggressive behaviour (1) such as those seen in store ‘sales’ (large discounts) when the store is very busy when the sale begins and the lack of personal space could lead to some of this increase in aggressive behaviour (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 3(b) Describe Study 2 (the field experiment) by Dayan and 4 1 mark for the location/sample Bar-Hillel (2011) about primacy, recency and menu item 2 marks for procedure – length of study, types of menus and position. DV 1 mark for results Award 1–2 marks for a basic answer with some understanding of the topic area. For full marks must state the result. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed answer with clear understanding of the topic area. No mark for just stating ‘field experiment’ • A field experiment in small café in Tel Aviv catering to No credit for the aim. students and young professionals). • IV was type of menu varied over 15 days. The base No difference between popular and unpopular items in terms menu and ‘inside-out’ menu (where items within a of choice – still preferred if at beginning/end of menu category were changed from extremes to middle positions and vice versa) were applied to 20 items in 56% advantage for items on beginning/end of menu 3 categories – Coffee with alcohol, soft drinks and desserts. • DV was number of orders placed from each menu type (recorded by the waiters). • Approx the same number of orders were made from each menu (459 from base and 492 from ‘inside-out’). • Results found that items placed at the beginning or the end of the list (primacy and recency) were up to twice as popular as when they were in the centre of the list. This supported the results from Study 1. 3(c) Explain two strengths of the study by Dayan and Bar- 6 If more than two strengths are given, credit the best two. Hillel. The response could refer to Study 1 or Study 2 or both studies. Likely strengths could include: • High levels of control (items on menu identical) (studies 1 and 2) • Generalisable as large amount of data collected (140 participants in study 1, over 900 items chosen in study 2) • Data gathered by waiters not researchers (less biased) (study 2) • High levels of ecological validity as real customers (study 2) • Baseline menu was the regular menu of the café (study 2) • Good agreement between the two studies as results supported one another (studies 1 and 2) Mark according to the levels of response criteria below: Level 3 (5–6 marks) • Candidates will show a clear understanding of the question and will explain two strengths. • Candidates will provide a good explanation with clear detail. 3(c) Level 2 (3–4 marks) • Candidates will show an understanding of the question and will explain one strength in detail. OR two strengths in less detail. Level 1 (1–2 marks) • Candidates will show a basic understanding of the question and will attempt an explanation of one strength. They could include two but just as an attempt. • Candidates will provide a limited explanation. Level 0 (0 marks) No response worthy of credit. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 Oct/Nov 2023

4 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about consumer decision-making (models, strategies, marketing theories). [8] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about consumer decision-making (models, strategies, marketing theories), including a discussion of generalisations. [10] Psychology and health Answer all questions.

18 marks

Mark scheme: 4(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about 8 Can also credit 4Ps and 4Cs (one level) consumer decision-making (models, strategies, And marketing theories). communication and advertising models The syllabus covers • changing attitudes and models of communication (source, message, etc.) • models: utility theory, satisficing, prospect theory • AIDA model (and updates of it) • strategies: compensatory, non-compensatory and • hierarchy of effects model partially compensatory • marketing theories: consideration and involvement No credit to ways to close a sale (Richarme, 2005) Models: utility theory, satisficing, prospect theory Utility theory – Consumers make rational decisions based on expected outcomes. The better the outcome for the consumer the more likely it is they will want to purchase an item. The higher the utility use for the consumer, the more likely they will decide to make a purchase. Satisficing – this is where the consumer satisfies their needs and searches amongst available products until they find an acceptable product. The get approximately where they want to go and then stop. If you were shopping for a new dress you would try on a few and then buy the one that seems ‘good enough’. Prospect theory – added the ideas of value and endowment. Consumers value gains and losses in different ways and make their decision on the likelihood of gain rather than likelihood of loss. Endowment is when a product is more precious when you own it rather than someone else. 4(a) Strategies: compensatory, non-compensatory and partially compensatory Compensatory – the consumer weighs up the various features of a product and decides to buy the one that has the most features that they want. For example, some consumers might value miles per litre for a car over appearance of the car while others might feel the opposite. Purchasing all depends on which attributes of a product are valued more by the individual consumer. Non-compensatory – This suggests that each feature of the product is evaluated individually by the consumer rather than allowing one to compensate for the other. Strategies used include satisficing (first product meeting basic requirements is chosen), elimination by aspects (considers any product that has the most important feature and then assesses those that remain under the next most important feature until a decision is reached) and lexigraphic (most important feature is evaluated and the item that is the most superior on that feature is selected, if some products are equal, then the second most important feature is considered). Partially compensatory – Majority of conforming dimensions – evaluate two products against all relevant features and chose the best one to purchase. Frequency of Good and Bad features – All potential products are compared and the one that is the most positive so long as it meets the minimum requirement, it is chosen. 4(a) Marketing theories: consideration and involvement (Richarme, 2005) Consideration – the consumer will create a short-list of products for consideration (a subset of brands) and then make the decision about which product to buy. For example, the consumer won’t consider all available restaurants but will make a short-list of restaurants and make their decision using this short-list. Involvement – This theory deals with the amount of effort applied to decision-making. This is directly related to the level of importance the consumer places on acquiring a specific product. The degree of involvement is not necessarily a function of price, but is instead related to the perceived impact the purchasing of the product will have on the quality of life of the consumer. For example – chewing gum purchase will not have much involvement but the purchase of a new mobile/cell phone will. Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table A. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about 10 consumer decision-making (models, strategies, marketing theories), including a discussion of generalisations. A range of issues could be used for evaluation here. These include: • Named issue – Generalisations of theories Western cultures/developed countries have a wide variety of the same product available for consumers to purchase. Decision making may be different when income is much more limited and also when fewer products are available or the supply of products is severely limited. Can also be argued that regardless of the availability of products the consumer can still weigh up the pros and cons of a purchase and will use this to make a decision. • Reductionism • Practical applications • Determinism • Individual differences Mark according to the levels of response descriptors in Table B. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Psychology and health

This question in 9990/33 Oct/Nov 2023

8 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about: • choice blindness, and • consumer memory for advertising including how retroactive and proactive interference affect memory. [6] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about: • choice blindness, and • consumer memory for advertising including how retroactive and proactive interference affect memory, including a discussion about experiments. Evaluation in your answer can include strengths, weaknesses and a discussion of issues and debates. [10] Section C: Health Psychology Answer all questions.

16 marks

Mark scheme: 8(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about: 6 Award up to 4 marks where the response • choice blindness, and has described only part of the question even • consumer memory for advertising including how retroactive and if the response otherwise meets the criteria proactive interference affect memory. for level 3. Use Table A: AO1 Knowledge and understanding to mark candidate responses Proactive – can’t recall the new, but can to this question. recall the old Retroactive – can’t recall the old, but can Candidates must discuss both choice blindness and consumer memory for recall the new advertising including retroactive/proactive interference, but they do not need to use the Burke and Srull example from the syllabus. Answers may include: Syllabus content • choice blindness, preferences and defending a choice. Key study for choice blindness when tasting food items: Hall et al. (2010). • consumer memory for advertising including how retroactive and proactive interference affect memory, including a study, e.g. Burke and Skrull (1988) Choice blindness Unconscious processes can influence consumer behaviour. Consumer decisions are made based on situational influences as well as past memories. Consumers can experience choice blindness where the customer is unaware of their preferences and choices. When asked, the customer will be able to give reasons for their choice. Hall et al., 2010 Took place in a supermarket in Sweden with 180 customers. Participants were asked to taste jam and tea to decide which they preferred out of a pair. Given jam/tea to taste (jam) or smell (tea) and rated how much they liked it on a 1–10 scale. Given second taste/smell and the jam/tea has been switched to a different flavour/scent while the participant is distracted by one of the experimenters. They then tasted/smelled the item and rated on 10 point scale. Then asked which alternative they preferred and asked to sample a second time. 8(a) Half of participants told they would receive tea/jam chosen as thank you gift. Results – 33% of manipulated jam trials were detected (32% of tea) Detected more frequently in the least similar pairs for jam eg Cinnamon Apple vs Grapefruit- but not tea compared with the most similar pairs. Those offered jam as free gift less likely to detect manipulation. Those offered tea as free gift or not – no difference in detection. Concluded there was considerable choice blindness. Consumer memory for advertising Consumers are presented with a huge volume of adverts, many of which are similar to each other leading to retroactive (new memories influence old) and proactive (old memories influence new) interference. Retroactive interference, for example, where a consumer sees a new advertisement may change the memory of an older one. They could remember the brand name for the old advert incorrectly as the brand name of the newer one. Burke and Srull, 1988 Experiment 1 – Participants exposed to 12 magazine adverts and asked how likely it is that they would purchase the particular brand of product. The results of Experiment 1 demonstrate that brand information learned in the past tends to get forgotten or confused under newly learned facts. Consequently, the participants had difficulty remembering the original material. Experiment 2 – Similar to procedure to experiment 1 but investigated proactive interference with adverts for similar products. The results of Experiment 2 demonstrate that advertising for competitive brands can have a detrimental effect, not just on consumer memory for a brand's past advertising, but also on the consumer's ability to learn and remember distinctive brand information presented in future advertising. However, the results of this study did not show such an interaction, possibly because of the short time interval between ad exposure and testing. 8(a) Experiment 3 – Participants exposed to 22 full-colour magazine adverts (rather than just text) and asked to rate the inherent value of the adverts. Results showed competitive advertising had a significant inhibitory effect on cued recall of brand information. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 8(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about: 10 • choice blindness, and • consumer memory for advertising including how retroactive and proactive interference affect memory, including a discussion about experiments. Evaluation in your answer can include strengths, weaknesses and a discussion of issues and debates. Use Table B: AO3 Analysis and evaluation to mark candidate responses to this question. A range of issues could be used for evaluation. These include: Named issue – experiments Hall et al. did a field experiment and Burke and Srull did lab experiments. Strengths of field experiments: • Good control of variables • Good ecological validity • Lack of demand characteristics Weaknesses of field experiments: • Lack of control over extraneous variables • Less reliable. Strengths of lab experiments: • Good control of variables • Control over extraneous variables • Reliable • More ethical as participants aware they are in a study Weaknesses of lab experiments: • Lack of ecological validity • Demand characteristics 8(b) • individual versus situational – Both are situational as the choice blindness is due to the previous choice made by the participant and a lack of awareness of the change made in the situation. For interference, the variables affecting the participant is the order the adverts are presented and the content of the adverts. Burke and Skrull did have an individual explanation as motivation of the participant/customer at time of exposure to the advert affected memory. Motivation is individual to each customer (e.g. how much interest the customer has in the advert/product). • Determinism versus free-will – Choice blindness is deterministic as the blindness is out of the control of the participant/customer. Interference is somewhat deterministic as the type and order of adverts can determine memory but also personal choices/free-will can also determine memory which is due to the free-will of the participant/customer. • Interviews – Hall et al. conducted interviews which allows for participants to ask for further clarification and also the experimenter can ask follow up questions. • Reliability – Both studies had a standardised procedure. Burke and Skrull is more reliable as these are laboratory studies. Other issues could include: • Generalisations from findings • validity (including ecological validity) • ethics Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Section C: Health Psychology

This question in 9990/32 Feb/March 2024

6 (a) Outline ‘satisficing’ as a model of consumer decision-making. [2] (b) Explain how satisficing as a model of consumer decision-making is reductionist. [2]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 6(a) Outline ‘satisficing’ as a model of consumer decision- making. Award 2 marks for an outline of the term/concept in context. Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the term/concept. Example: This is where the consumer satisfies their needs and searches amongst available products until they find an acceptable product. (1) This product is then purchased. (1) They get approximately where they want to go and then stop and decide to purchase the product. (1) If you were shopping for a new dress you would try on a few and then buy the one that seems ‘good enough’. (2) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Question Answer Marks Guidance 6(b) Explain how satisficing as a model of consumer decision-making is reductionist. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation. Likely answers:  Just considers the cognitive level of explanation – the consumer decides what is ‘good enough’ based on their attitude about the product and the comparison to a few other similar alternatives.  Does not take into account other levels such as environmental (store environment).  The cognitive level of explanation of being ‘good enough’ does not explain why customers will spend extensive amount of time researching alternative products, read reviews, etc. especially when it is a high value item that the customer might have for a long time e.g. car.  Does not consider environmental explanation/influences – a good marketing campaign will increase sales of the products.  Does not explain why consumers purchase products that are luxury, high end, branded products that are expensive and are more than ‘good enough’.  Does not consider societal and cultural explanations – products that are endorsed by ‘influencers’ who are convincing the customers that they want a product as the influencer is ‘selling’ a lifestyle’ rather than fulfilling a need in the consumer. Consumers want these products as they are marketed as being more than good enough. 2 Question Answer Marks Guidance 6(b) For example, This model is reductionist as it does not consider other levels of explanation such as environmental factors. (1) Some consumers may decide to purchase a product due to the layout and atmosphere of the store. (1) The model does not explain impulse purchases where the consumer doesn’t consider any alternatives so there is no opportunity for them to believe that the product they are about to purchase is good enough as there is no product to compare it to. (2) Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 May/June 2024

7 Zahra works in a large store that sells a wide range of goods. She notices that customers in the store spend a long time looking at the computers, comparing prices and asking questions. She also notices that when customers select grocery items they only briefly look at what they put into their shopping trolley. (a) (i) Explain one reason why the customers shopping for computers are using system 2 for decision-making. [2] (ii) Explain one reason why the customers shopping for groceries are using system 1 for decision-making. [2] (b) Explain one problem with identifying whether a customer is using system 1 or system 2 for decision-making. [2]

6 marks

Mark scheme: 7(a)(i) Explain one reason why the customers shopping for computers are using system 2 for decision-making. Award 2 marks for an explanation with relation to the context. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation with relation to the context. Example: Definition system 2 (can be contextualised definition or not): The customers shopping for computers are using system 2 thinking as it involves effort and is thoughtful. (1) Why using system 2 for decision-making for computer: Computers are an expensive purchase so the customer will want to spend time thinking about their purchase and comparing prices. (1) There are a lot of different types of computers and the customer will want to put in effort to make sure the computer they purchase meets their needs (e.g. has sufficient storage, software the customer needs). (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. shopping for groceries. What is system 2 thinking = 1 mark Link to why use system 2 for computers decision = 1 mark Question Answer Marks Guidance 7(a)(ii) Explain one reason why the customers shopping for groceries are using system 1 for decision-making. Award 2 marks for an explanation with relation to the context. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation with relation to the context. Example: Definition system 1 (can be contextualised definition or not): The customers selecting their groceries are using thinking fast/system 1 as it is automatic and unconscious. (1) Why using system 1 for decision-making for groceries: The customer doesn’t need to put effort into choosing groceries as these are items they frequently purchase so they know which groceries they want. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 2 Context = large store, shopping for computer versus shopping for groceries. What is system 1 thinking = 1 mark Link to why use system 1 for groceries decision = 1 mark Question Answer Marks Guidance 7(b) Explain one problem with identifying whether a customer is using system 1 or system 2 for decision- making. Award 2 marks for an explanation of one problem with identifying system 1/system 2 used by a customer. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of one problem with identifying system 1/system 2 used by a customer. Likely problems:  Intuitive thinking/system 1 and 2 are cognitive processes so cannot be seen and have to be inferred.  If the customer is observed to determine intuitive thinking, the behaviour of the customer may not match their type of thinking (e.g. they may be spending a long time looking at a product, but they are distracted and are thinking about something other than whether to buy the product).  Customers can be asked in either an interview or questionnaire about their thinking about a product prior to purchase but this is subjective data and open to social desirability (might not want to admit system 1 thinking for an expensive product).  If the responses are qualitative, it is open to bias/misunderstanding/difficulties with explaining thoughts.  All lower the validity of identifying the correct type. 2 Question Answer Marks Guidance 7(b) Example: One problem with identifying whether the customer is using system 1 or 2 is that these thoughts are private and to access them inferences must be made from what the customer says and/or does. (1) Responses from customers as well as their behaviour can be misinterpreted, and the incorrect thinking style applied. (1) For example, a customer is seen to spend a long time looking at similar products before purchasing one but in fact they were distracted while browsing and just selected the first product that looked good to them. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 May/June 2024

8 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about: • the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts, and • the effect of food name on menu item choice. [6] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about: • the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts, and • the effect of food name on menu item choice, including a discussion about generalisations from findings. Evaluation in your answer can include strengths, weaknesses and a discussion of issues and debates. [10] Section C: Health Psychology Answer all questions.

16 marks

Mark scheme: 8(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about:  the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts, and  the effect of food name on menu item choice. Use Table A: AO1 Knowledge and understanding to mark candidate responses to this question. Candidates must discuss both features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts, including the use of eye tracking and the effect of food name on menu item choice films, but they do not need to use the Pavesic or Lockyer example from the syllabus. Answers may include: Syllabus content  Menu design focusing on the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts and ways to study this, including the use of eye-tracking, e.g. Pavesic (2005).  The effect of food name on menu item choice, including a study, e.g. Lockyer (2006). 6 Award up to 4 marks where the response has described only part of the question even if the response otherwise meets the criteria for Level 3. Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(a) Menu design focusing on the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts and ways to study this, including the use of eye-tracking, e.g. Pavesic (2005). Menus help the customer decide what to order but they are also very important for the branding and image of the restaurant. They can direct customers to order food that the restaurant prepares the best/has the best profit margin. They communicate the overall dining experience. The menu should complement the décor and style of the restaurant. Menus can use highlighting to direct the attention of the diners. Common negative features of menus include being hard to read, overemphasising pricing, poor use of space, monotonous design and too big. Eye-tracking - customers don’t read a menu from start to finish but instead scan the mean. Attention can be drawn using boxes, images and different fonts. Other parts of the menu can be de- emphasized by using smaller fonts, no highlighting, etc. Pavesic is a review article that outlines how customers use menus and how restaurants can design better menus (use of ‘eye magnets’) such as a box around the appetiser or different coloured font to a menu description. Attention should be paid to style, colour, artwork and illustrations. Put the entrees first in your menu as most of your diners will order this whereas appetisers/desserts are ordered by a smaller number of customers. Average time spent looking at a menu 109 seconds. Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(a) Effect of food name on menu item choice, including a study, e.g. Lockyer (2006) Research has shown that foods with descriptive and evocative names had more positive comments (such as ‘‘Succulent Italian Seafood Fillet’’) and rated as more appealing, tasty and caloric than those with more regular names. (e.g. ‘Seafood Fillet’). Lockyer (2006) study investigated the impact of menu item names on selection of menu items. Four focus groups (48 participants, self-selected from Hamilton, New Zealand) examined the responses to five menus, each with the same menu items but using different wording. In addition, a survey was randomly distributed in the local area to which 200 people responded. Open and closed questions were used. Rated how appealing each menu item was and were then asked why they had given this rating. Used content analysis to analyse the qualitative data. Results did show large individual differences with different participants showing a preference for different menus. Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(a) The participants showed a preference for items they would not normally eat at home. The highest appeal was for the seasonal menu and the lowest the French style menu. Strongest preference was shown to the elaborate style menu for the participants that were surveyed which used words such as delicious, flavourful and perfection. Participants were also given four dining experiences (romantic, business, mother-in-law and family reunion). From focus group discussion clear differences in what menu items would be selected based on the occasion of the dining experience. When describing the most popular menu the participants used words such as ‘fresh’, ‘clear explanation’ and ‘tasty’. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about:  the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts, and  the effect of food name on menu item choice, including a discussion about generalisations from findings. Evaluation in your answer can include strengths, weaknesses and a discussion of issues and debates. Use Table B: AO3 Analysis and evaluation to mark candidate responses to this question. Depending on the examples studied by candidates their answers may vary. A range of issues could be used for evaluation. These include:  Named issue – generalisations from findings Pavesic reviewed a large variety of menu designs so his suggestions are generalisable. Lockyer had five menu designs in his study which makes it less generalisable than Pavesic. However, Lockyer does consider five different types, so it is not without any generalisability. Pavesic’s had a large sample (48 in focus groups and 200 randomly sampled for the self-report) but all from one city in New Zealand. More females than males in the study. It could be that sample of men used in the study could not be generalisable to the target population given the small numbers. Wide range of ages, fairly good range of ethnicities and socioeconomic groups were included. 10 Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(b) Lockyer’s study has some issues with ecological validity (generalisations from the findings to everyday life) as the study used focus groups answering questions and discussing menus which isn’t something that happens in everyday life. However, the menus were realistic and based on menus that Lockyer had researcher. On the other hand, the participants were imagining different dining scenarios rather than experiencing these scenarios in everyday life. For example, the participants may have felt differently if they were in a restaurant at a business meeting.  Applications to everyday life – Both studies and topic areas have good application to everyday life. Pavesic gives clear and detailed recommendations for both good menu design and mistakes to avoid. There is a lot of focus in the review article on increasing sales, which further improves the application of the research. The Lockyer study did find one of the menus was the most popular, but this was different for the focus group as opposed to the group of participants surveyed. There were also individual differences which suggests there is quite a bit of variety in terms of the wording preferences for menu items. Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(b)  Validity – Lockyer has good validity as he did the survey after the focus group to measure the validity of the results from the focus group. However, self-reports were used which means the data could be open to socially desirable responses, demand characteristics, etc. In addition, the qualitative data had to be interpreted but this was done through content analysis.  Objective versus subjective – The data collected from the rating scales is somewhat more objective as the researchers can’t misinterpret the ratings given to the menus by the participants. However, participants could have interpreted the rating scale differently. However, the data from the focus groups and the response to the open questions is subjective. But Lockyer used a computer programme to analyse the focus group discussion. A computer is objective and not open to any bias. Additional issues candidates may include:  Reliability  Ethics  Quantitative and qualitative data Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 May/June 2024

5 A pizza restaurant is redesigning its menu to encourage more purchases of mushroom pizza. Suggest two menu design features that could help to sell more mushroom pizzas. [4]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 5 A pizza restaurant is redesigning its menu to encourage more purchases of mushroom pizza. Suggest two menu design features that could help to sell more mushroom pizzas. For each suggestion: Award 2 marks for an outline of the application linked to the context of selling more mushroom pizzas. Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the application. Likely content:  Eye magnets – box around the mushroom pizza or different coloured font to the other menu items to attract the customers attention.  Put the mushroom pizza at the top/bottom of the menu as research has shown that items at the beginning or end of their category options were up to twice as likely to be chosen.  Change the name of the pizza on the menu from ‘Mushroom pizza’ to something more descriptive that gives a sensory label (or geographic/nostalgia). For example, ‘Moorish Munchy Mushroom Moment Pizza’. Example: The restaurant should create an ‘eye magnet’ on their menu featuring the mushroom pizza. (1) They should put a picture of the mushroom pizza in a box as this will attract the customers attention to it and make them more likely to order it. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 4 Do not credit general changes to the menu such as making it smaller, changing font, not making the price too obvious unless the response explains why this would lead to an increase in sales of the mushroom pizza (rather than a general increase in sales of all pizzas). Idea = 1 mark Why increase sale/interest or memory of mushroom pizza = 1 mark 1 mark max to eye magnet, top/bottom and change of name if not linked to mushroom pizza. Anecdotal – no credit

This question in 9990/32 May/June 2024

7 Customers at a supermarket frequently purchase one tin of tomatoes at a time. The manager of the supermarket wants to encourage customers to buy multiple tins of tomatoes. (a) Suggest one way the manager could use her understanding of ‘point of purchase decisions’ to encourage customers to purchase multiple tins of tomatoes. [2] (b) (i) For the suggestion you gave in part (a): Explain how this could change the customers’ thinking so that they purchase multiple tins of tomatoes. [2] (ii) For the suggestion you gave in part (a): Explain one problem with this suggestion. [2]

6 marks

Mark scheme: 7(a) Suggest one way the manager could use her understanding of ‘point of purchase decisions’ to encourage customers to purchase multiple tins of tomatoes. Award 2 marks for an outline of the suggestion with relation to the context. Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the suggestion. Likely suggestions:  Point of purchase promotion/multiple-unit promotion – e.g. ‘Tomatoes on sale – buy 5 cans for £2.00  Purchase quantity limit - ‘Tomatoes - limit 5 per customer’  Explicit product quantity anchor in advertising ‘Tins of tomatoes – buy 5 for your cupboard’  Suggestive selling – customer has something suggested to them to encourage sales e.g. suggest a meal for dinner tonight that requires multiple tins of tomatoes. Example: The manager could encourage their customers to buy multiple tins of tomatoes by putting signs up near the tins of tomatoes advertising multiple-unit promotion. (1) The signs would say ‘Tomatoes on sale – buy 5 cans for £2.00’ Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 2 Context = encouraging purchase of multiple tins of tomatoes. Point of purchase promotion – ‘Buy 5 and save £1’ Just state offering discount = 0 marks 1 mark identifying way e.g. purchase quantity limit or outlining it. 1 mark link to tomatoes as an example. Do not credit explaining why this will lead to purchasing multiple tins – answers b(i). Question Answer Marks Guidance 7(b)(i) For the suggestion you gave in part (a): Explain how this could change the customers’ thinking so that they purchase multiple tins of tomatoes. Award 2 marks for an explanation of why this suggestion would change customers’ thinking so they purchase multiple tins/cans of tomatoes. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of why this suggestion would change customers’ thinking so they purchase multiple tins/cans of tomatoes. Likely explanations:  Multiple-unit promotion – customers believe that the only way to get the discount is by purchasing multiple units or the promotion makes the customers see a larger than normal purchase as attractive.  Purchase quantity limit – This gives the impression that the tins of tomatoes are scarce and that is why the store has set a limit. The customer may believe that it could be difficult to purchase tomatoes in the future so purchases more tins than they need.  Product quantity anchor – This is suggestive selling and suggests to the customer that they should consider purchasing more for their cupboard in order to stock up. It is giving the customer a specific number of tins to purchase which will anchor this cognition in the mind of the customer and encourage some to purchase this number of tins. Example Multiple-unit promotion would encourage customers to purchase more tins of tomatoes as it is suggesting to the customer that a larger than normal purchase is attractive. (1) The customer believes they are getting a discount by purchasing 5 tins rather than 1 so many of the customers will want this discount and purchase more tins. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 2 Credit responses that outline the results of Wansink’s study as evidence to show that the suggestion will work. Needs to be linked to suggestion from part (a) for 2 marks. Need to include what customer is thinking and why would this lead to purchase of multiple tins for 2 marks. Question Answer Marks Guidance 7(b)(ii) For the suggestion you gave in part (a): Explain one problem with this suggestion. Award 2 marks for an explanation of the problem with suggestion from 7(a). Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the problem with suggestion from 7(a). Likely problems:  Customers may feel manipulated/tricked by the supermarket and shop elsewhere.  In order to afford the multiple tins, the customer may not purchase other items so the overall sales at the supermarket will not increase.  Customers can use self-generated (internal) anchors such as having a fixed budget/shopping list for the shopping and no promotion/suggestive selling will convince the customer to purchase more tins of tomatoes.  The customer will look at the individual price of a tins of tomatoes and realise they are not saving any money so they do not purchase multiple tins. Example: One problem with multiple unit promotions is it is not possible to know if the customer was confused by the promotion and thought they had to purchase 5 tins in order to get the discount. (1) If this isn’t true and the discount is available when purchasing 1 tin, the customer may realise this when they are next shopping. They may feel manipulated by the supermarket and start shopping elsewhere. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 2 Individual differences/may not work for everyone is creditworthy.

This question in 9990/32 May/June 2024

6 (a) Outline ‘satisficing’ as a model of consumer decision-making. [2] (b) Explain how satisficing as a model of consumer decision-making is reductionist. [2]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 6(a) Outline ‘satisficing’ as a model of consumer decision- making. Award 2 marks for an outline of the term/concept in context. Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the term/concept. Example: This is where the consumer satisfies their needs and searches amongst available products until they find an acceptable product. (1) This product is then purchased. (1) They get approximately where they want to go and then stop and decide to purchase the product. (1) If you were shopping for a new dress you would try on a few and then buy the one that seems ‘good enough’. (2) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Question Answer Marks Guidance 6(b) Explain how satisficing as a model of consumer decision-making is reductionist. Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation. Likely answers:  Just considers the cognitive level of explanation – the consumer decides what is ‘good enough’ based on their attitude about the product and the comparison to a few other similar alternatives.  Does not take into account other levels such as environmental (store environment).  The cognitive level of explanation of being ‘good enough’ does not explain why customers will spend extensive amount of time researching alternative products, read reviews, etc. especially when it is a high value item that the customer might have for a long time e.g. car.  Does not consider environmental explanation/influences – a good marketing campaign will increase sales of the products.  Does not explain why consumers purchase products that are luxury, high end, branded products that are expensive and are more than ‘good enough’.  Does not consider societal and cultural explanations – products that are endorsed by ‘influencers’ who are convincing the customers that they want a product as the influencer is ‘selling’ a lifestyle’ rather than fulfilling a need in the consumer. Consumers want these products as they are marketed as being more than good enough. 2 Question Answer Marks Guidance 6(b) For example, This model is reductionist as it does not consider other levels of explanation such as environmental factors. (1) Some consumers may decide to purchase a product due to the layout and atmosphere of the store. (1) The model does not explain impulse purchases where the consumer doesn’t consider any alternatives so there is no opportunity for them to believe that the product they are about to purchase is good enough as there is no product to compare it to. (2) Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 May/June 2024

7 Zahra works in a large store that sells a wide range of goods. She notices that customers in the store spend a long time looking at the computers, comparing prices and asking questions. She also notices that when customers select grocery items they only briefly look at what they put into their shopping trolley. (a) (i) Explain one reason why the customers shopping for computers are using system 2 for decision-making. [2] (ii) Explain one reason why the customers shopping for groceries are using system 1 for decision-making. [2] (b) Explain one problem with identifying whether a customer is using system 1 or system 2 for decision-making. [2]

6 marks

Mark scheme: 7(a)(i) Explain one reason why the customers shopping for computers are using system 2 for decision-making. Award 2 marks for an explanation with relation to the context. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation with relation to the context. Example: Definition system 2 (can be contextualised definition or not): The customers shopping for computers are using system 2 thinking as it involves effort and is thoughtful. (1) Why using system 2 for decision-making for computer: Computers are an expensive purchase so the customer will want to spend time thinking about their purchase and comparing prices. (1) There are a lot of different types of computers and the customer will want to put in effort to make sure the computer they purchase meets their needs (e.g. has sufficient storage, software the customer needs). (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. shopping for groceries. What is system 2 thinking = 1 mark Link to why use system 2 for computers decision = 1 mark Question Answer Marks Guidance 7(a)(ii) Explain one reason why the customers shopping for groceries are using system 1 for decision-making. Award 2 marks for an explanation with relation to the context. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation with relation to the context. Example: Definition system 1 (can be contextualised definition or not): The customers selecting their groceries are using thinking fast/system 1 as it is automatic and unconscious. (1) Why using system 1 for decision-making for groceries: The customer doesn’t need to put effort into choosing groceries as these are items they frequently purchase so they know which groceries they want. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 2 Context = large store, shopping for computer versus shopping for groceries. What is system 1 thinking = 1 mark Link to why use system 1 for groceries decision = 1 mark Question Answer Marks Guidance 7(b) Explain one problem with identifying whether a customer is using system 1 or system 2 for decision- making. Award 2 marks for an explanation of one problem with identifying system 1/system 2 used by a customer. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of one problem with identifying system 1/system 2 used by a customer. Likely problems:  Intuitive thinking/system 1 and 2 are cognitive processes so cannot be seen and have to be inferred.  If the customer is observed to determine intuitive thinking, the behaviour of the customer may not match their type of thinking (e.g. they may be spending a long time looking at a product, but they are distracted and are thinking about something other than whether to buy the product).  Customers can be asked in either an interview or questionnaire about their thinking about a product prior to purchase but this is subjective data and open to social desirability (might not want to admit system 1 thinking for an expensive product).  If the responses are qualitative, it is open to bias/misunderstanding/difficulties with explaining thoughts.  All lower the validity of identifying the correct type. 2 Question Answer Marks Guidance 7(b) Example: One problem with identifying whether the customer is using system 1 or 2 is that these thoughts are private and to access them inferences must be made from what the customer says and/or does. (1) Responses from customers as well as their behaviour can be misinterpreted, and the incorrect thinking style applied. (1) For example, a customer is seen to spend a long time looking at similar products before purchasing one but in fact they were distracted while browsing and just selected the first product that looked good to them. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 May/June 2024

8 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about: • the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts, and • the effect of food name on menu item choice. [6] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about: • the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts, and • the effect of food name on menu item choice, including a discussion about generalisations from findings. Evaluation in your answer can include strengths, weaknesses and a discussion of issues and debates. [10] Section C: Health Psychology Answer all questions.

16 marks

Mark scheme: 8(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about:  the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts, and  the effect of food name on menu item choice. Use Table A: AO1 Knowledge and understanding to mark candidate responses to this question. Candidates must discuss both features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts, including the use of eye tracking and the effect of food name on menu item choice films, but they do not need to use the Pavesic or Lockyer example from the syllabus. Answers may include: Syllabus content  Menu design focusing on the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts and ways to study this, including the use of eye-tracking, e.g. Pavesic (2005).  The effect of food name on menu item choice, including a study, e.g. Lockyer (2006). 6 Award up to 4 marks where the response has described only part of the question even if the response otherwise meets the criteria for Level 3. Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(a) Menu design focusing on the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts and ways to study this, including the use of eye-tracking, e.g. Pavesic (2005). Menus help the customer decide what to order but they are also very important for the branding and image of the restaurant. They can direct customers to order food that the restaurant prepares the best/has the best profit margin. They communicate the overall dining experience. The menu should complement the décor and style of the restaurant. Menus can use highlighting to direct the attention of the diners. Common negative features of menus include being hard to read, overemphasising pricing, poor use of space, monotonous design and too big. Eye-tracking - customers don’t read a menu from start to finish but instead scan the mean. Attention can be drawn using boxes, images and different fonts. Other parts of the menu can be de- emphasized by using smaller fonts, no highlighting, etc. Pavesic is a review article that outlines how customers use menus and how restaurants can design better menus (use of ‘eye magnets’) such as a box around the appetiser or different coloured font to a menu description. Attention should be paid to style, colour, artwork and illustrations. Put the entrees first in your menu as most of your diners will order this whereas appetisers/desserts are ordered by a smaller number of customers. Average time spent looking at a menu 109 seconds. Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(a) Effect of food name on menu item choice, including a study, e.g. Lockyer (2006) Research has shown that foods with descriptive and evocative names had more positive comments (such as ‘‘Succulent Italian Seafood Fillet’’) and rated as more appealing, tasty and caloric than those with more regular names. (e.g. ‘Seafood Fillet’). Lockyer (2006) study investigated the impact of menu item names on selection of menu items. Four focus groups (48 participants, self-selected from Hamilton, New Zealand) examined the responses to five menus, each with the same menu items but using different wording. In addition, a survey was randomly distributed in the local area to which 200 people responded. Open and closed questions were used. Rated how appealing each menu item was and were then asked why they had given this rating. Used content analysis to analyse the qualitative data. Results did show large individual differences with different participants showing a preference for different menus. Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(a) The participants showed a preference for items they would not normally eat at home. The highest appeal was for the seasonal menu and the lowest the French style menu. Strongest preference was shown to the elaborate style menu for the participants that were surveyed which used words such as delicious, flavourful and perfection. Participants were also given four dining experiences (romantic, business, mother-in-law and family reunion). From focus group discussion clear differences in what menu items would be selected based on the occasion of the dining experience. When describing the most popular menu the participants used words such as ‘fresh’, ‘clear explanation’ and ‘tasty’. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about:  the features of menu design which have positive and negative impacts, and  the effect of food name on menu item choice, including a discussion about generalisations from findings. Evaluation in your answer can include strengths, weaknesses and a discussion of issues and debates. Use Table B: AO3 Analysis and evaluation to mark candidate responses to this question. Depending on the examples studied by candidates their answers may vary. A range of issues could be used for evaluation. These include:  Named issue – generalisations from findings Pavesic reviewed a large variety of menu designs so his suggestions are generalisable. Lockyer had five menu designs in his study which makes it less generalisable than Pavesic. However, Lockyer does consider five different types, so it is not without any generalisability. Pavesic’s had a large sample (48 in focus groups and 200 randomly sampled for the self-report) but all from one city in New Zealand. More females than males in the study. It could be that sample of men used in the study could not be generalisable to the target population given the small numbers. Wide range of ages, fairly good range of ethnicities and socioeconomic groups were included. 10 Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(b) Lockyer’s study has some issues with ecological validity (generalisations from the findings to everyday life) as the study used focus groups answering questions and discussing menus which isn’t something that happens in everyday life. However, the menus were realistic and based on menus that Lockyer had researcher. On the other hand, the participants were imagining different dining scenarios rather than experiencing these scenarios in everyday life. For example, the participants may have felt differently if they were in a restaurant at a business meeting.  Applications to everyday life – Both studies and topic areas have good application to everyday life. Pavesic gives clear and detailed recommendations for both good menu design and mistakes to avoid. There is a lot of focus in the review article on increasing sales, which further improves the application of the research. The Lockyer study did find one of the menus was the most popular, but this was different for the focus group as opposed to the group of participants surveyed. There were also individual differences which suggests there is quite a bit of variety in terms of the wording preferences for menu items. Question Answer Marks Guidance 8(b)  Validity – Lockyer has good validity as he did the survey after the focus group to measure the validity of the results from the focus group. However, self-reports were used which means the data could be open to socially desirable responses, demand characteristics, etc. In addition, the qualitative data had to be interpreted but this was done through content analysis.  Objective versus subjective – The data collected from the rating scales is somewhat more objective as the researchers can’t misinterpret the ratings given to the menus by the participants. However, participants could have interpreted the rating scale differently. However, the data from the focus groups and the response to the open questions is subjective. But Lockyer used a computer programme to analyse the focus group discussion. A computer is objective and not open to any bias. Additional issues candidates may include:  Reliability  Ethics  Quantitative and qualitative data Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 May/June 2024

6 (a) Outline one example of how psychologists can use children in psychological research when investigating the topic of brand awareness and recognition. [2] (b) Explain one strength of using children in psychological research when investigating the topic of brand awareness and recognition. [2]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 6(a) Outline one example of how psychologists can use children in psychological 2 Max 1 mark if no link made to research using an example from brand awareness and recognition. brand recognition/awareness or advertising. Award 2 marks for an outline of the term/concept in context. Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the term/concept. How make study suitable for children. Must be about brand Example: awareness to be creditworthy. Children can be investigated to find out if advertising strategies work successfully. (1) Children are exposed to advertisements in magazines, TV, social media and so will Outline of how the Fischer et al. potentially recognise some brands better than others (1). Psychologists could make use study was carried out can of this when finding out when suitable advertising strategies work with a correct target achieve full marks. audience. (1) Need to get informed consent Candidates can receive credit if they directly refer to a study on brand awareness and from parent/school first before recognition e.g., study by Fischer et al. (1991) using children in research. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 1 = how to use with children 1 = linked to brand awareness/ recognition. 6(b) Explain one strength of using children in psychological research, using an 2 example from brand awareness and recognition. Award 2 marks for an explanation linked to brand awareness and recognition Award 1 mark for a basic explanation. Likely answers: • Children are not so subject to demand characteristics and likely to give more honest answers than adults • Children are future consumers so research on them informs us about future choices they may make • Can see potential effects of advertising products that are unsuitable for children, e.g. how it may impact on them or be remembered by them (so that such examples could potentially be outlawed in the future). • Useful as can use branding in advertising for products aimed at children as they do remember them and will influence their carer to purchase the product. Make sure the branding is in advert and on product so that child can see the association when they see product in store. Example: One strength of using children in psychological research is that it can yield useful results. For example, if a child recognises a brand that is targeted at adults (1) this could potentially make that child more likely to want to acquire that product if the brand seems attractive (1). Advertisers can make use of this information by ensuring that products that are only suitable for adults are branded in less child-appealing ways (e.g., avoiding cartoon characters, like Joe the Camel) (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 Oct/Nov 2024

6 (a) Outline the reductionism versus holism debate. [2] (b) Explain one reason why a competitor‑focused sales technique can be considered reductionist. [2]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 6(a) Outline the reductionism versus holism debate. 2 Can award 1 mark for two poorly outlined definitions. Award 2 marks for an outline of both sides of the debate. Award 1 mark for a basic/incomplete outline of the debate Example: Reductionism occurs when concepts are broken down into small units to enable a more basic/elemental level of explanation/investigation (1) Holism occurs when behaviour is considered as a whole, taking into account all of the person’s influences – biological, cognitive, behavioural – in order to understand the individual better (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 6(b) Explain one reason why a competitor-focused sales technique can be 2 1 mark = definition of competitor-focused considered reductionist. sales technique 1 mark = why reductionist Award 2 marks for an explanation in context. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation. Syllabus reference: Selling the product: Sales techniques focusing on customer-focused, competitor-focused, product-focused techniques including effect of each on buyer-seller relationship. Competitor-focused sales are those which draw comparisons with other products or sellers (best price or customer service). Example: A competitor-focused sales technique ignores the quality of the product and the specific needs of the individual customer and instead focuses primarily on comparing itself to other competitors’ products, which is a reductionist idea (1). This means that by changing the way they make comparisons, companies can investigate the best way to increase sales (1). The ability to change just one variable is a scientific approach, which is thus reductionist (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2024

7 Mariyah’s car has broken down and she needs to buy a new car. (a) Describe two stages Mariyah would go through in buying a new car, using the Engel Kollat Blackwell model of buyer decision‑making. [4] (b) Explain one strength of the Engel Kollat Blackwell model of buyer decision‑making. [2]

6 marks

Mark scheme: 7(a) Mariyah’s car has broken down and she needs to buy a new car. 4 Context = car Describe two stages Mariyah would go through in buying a new car, using the Engel Kollat Blackwell model of buyer decision-making. For each stage: Award 2 marks for a description of how the stage applies to buying a car Award 1 mark for a basic outline of how the stage applies to buying a car Syllabus content: Buying the product The Engel Kollat Blackwell model of buyer decision-making Stages in buyer decision-making: 1 Problem recognition 2 Search for alternatives 3 Alternate evaluation 4 Purchase decision 5 Post-purchase behaviour Examples: Mariyah could undertake an information search and visit two or three garages to see what is available (1) This will lead to her having a number of alternative cars that she is interested in purchasing (1) Mariyah could compare the potential cars to one another in terms of features that are important to her (1) These could include the age of the car, mileage it has done, price (is it within her budget), aftersales service by the garage, size of car, manufacturing brand and its reputation for reliability (1) This would be evaluation of alternatives. 7(a) The comparison of alternative cars could lead Mariyah to choosing which one is more favourable to her (1) this could be due to a number of features such as size of the car and it’s price (1) and she will purchase it (purchase decision) (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 7(b) Explain one strength of the Engel Kollat Blackwell model of buyer 2 Not necessary to contextualise decision-making. No marks for just stating can help to Award 2 marks for an explanation of a strength of the model. increase sales/satisfy customers – must Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the strength of the model. link directly to Engel Kollat Blackwell model to be credited. Likely strengths • Comprehensive and detailed – accounts for many variables involved • Has good face validity • Applicable for expensive/important items such as a car • Based on assumption that customer acts rationally Example: One strength of the Engel Kollat Blackwell model of buyer decision-making is that it is very comprehensive (1) It takes into account that customers will have alternatives to weigh up and that there are a number of factors that may affect the decision to purchase (1) These factors include budget, specific needs, availability, sustainability (1) All of these are accounted for within the model (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2024

6 (a) Outline one example of how psychologists can use children in psychological research when investigating the topic of brand awareness and recognition. [2] (b) Explain one strength of using children in psychological research when investigating the topic of brand awareness and recognition. [2]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 6(a) Outline one example of how psychologists can use children in psychological 2 Max 1 mark if no link made to research using an example from brand awareness and recognition. brand recognition/awareness or advertising. Award 2 marks for an outline of the term/concept in context. Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the term/concept. How make study suitable for children. Must be about brand Example: awareness to be creditworthy. Children can be investigated to find out if advertising strategies work successfully. (1) Children are exposed to advertisements in magazines, TV, social media and so will Outline of how the Fischer et al. potentially recognise some brands better than others (1). Psychologists could make use study was carried out can of this when finding out when suitable advertising strategies work with a correct target achieve full marks. audience. (1) Need to get informed consent Candidates can receive credit if they directly refer to a study on brand awareness and from parent/school first before recognition e.g., study by Fischer et al. (1991) using children in research. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 1 = how to use with children 1 = linked to brand awareness/ recognition. 6(b) Explain one strength of using children in psychological research, using an 2 example from brand awareness and recognition. Award 2 marks for an explanation linked to brand awareness and recognition Award 1 mark for a basic explanation. Likely answers: • Children are not so subject to demand characteristics and likely to give more honest answers than adults • Children are future consumers so research on them informs us about future choices they may make • Can see potential effects of advertising products that are unsuitable for children, e.g. how it may impact on them or be remembered by them (so that such examples could potentially be outlawed in the future). • Useful as can use branding in advertising for products aimed at children as they do remember them and will influence their carer to purchase the product. Make sure the branding is in advert and on product so that child can see the association when they see product in store. Example: One strength of using children in psychological research is that it can yield useful results. For example, if a child recognises a brand that is targeted at adults (1) this could potentially make that child more likely to want to acquire that product if the brand seems attractive (1). Advertisers can make use of this information by ensuring that products that are only suitable for adults are branded in less child-appealing ways (e.g., avoiding cartoon characters, like Joe the Camel) (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 Oct/Nov 2024

6 (a) Outline what is meant by free-will, including an example from thinking slow (system 2) in consumer decision-making. [2] (b) Explain one problem a psychologist may have when they investigate whether consumers use free-will when deciding to purchase products. [2]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 6(a) Outline what is meant by free-will, including an example 2 Context = thinking slow/system 2 thinking from thinking slow (system 2) in consumer decision- making. 1 mark = definition of free-will 1 mark = how thinking slow/system 2 shows free-will. Award 2 marks for an outline of the concept in context Award 1 mark for a basic outline/identification of the concept. Likely answers: Free-will is where behaviour is due to individual choice (behaviour is self-determining) Thinking slow/system 2 thinking can be seen to be due to free will as the consumer can choose to spend a long time considering their purchase of an item. Consumers can choose to spend time • Shopping around for an item • Researching different products to purchase. Example: Free-will is where behaviour is due to the person’s individual choice and not determined by outside factors. (1). For example, thinking slow can be seen to be due to free-will as the consumer can choose to spend time shopping around for a good price for a product. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 6(b) Explain one problem a psychologist may have when 2 Needs context about purchasing a product for full marks. they investigate whether consumers use free-will when deciding to purchase products Award 2 marks for an explanation of a problem a psychologist may have when they investigate whether consumers use free-will when deciding to purchase products. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of a problem a psychologist may have when they investigate whether consumers use free-will (when deciding to purchase products). Likely answers– Difficult to know what the consumer is thinking. Difficult to determine what is due to free-will and what is due to internal/external factors outside of the consumer’s control. Difficult to isolate external factors that could be affecting the consumer and therefore determine if the decision to purchase is due to this factor and not their free-will. Example: One problem psychologists face when they investigate the free-will of consumers when making a decision to purchase a product is that it is difficult to know whether the consumer is making the decision to purchase due to their free-will or an external factor. (1) For example, if a consumer sees an advert about a product and then purchases it – it is hard to know if the purchase is due solely to seeing the advert or due to the free-will of the consumer. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 May/June 2025

7 Sally and Dan want to buy new running shoes. They go to many stores and consider lots of different shoes. Sally returns to the first shop and buys her running shoes. Even though he has seen many different brands, Dan buys the brand he has worn for the past few years. (a) (i) Outline the choice heuristic used by Sally. [2] (ii) Outline the choice heuristic used by Dan. [2] (b) Outline one problem a psychologist may have when deciding which choice heuristic consumers are using when purchasing a product. [2]

6 marks

Mark scheme: 7(a)(i) Outline the choice heuristic used by Sally. 2 1 mark = identification 1 mark = link to stem Award 2 marks for an outline of the choice heuristic used by Sally. For Sally – needs to outline something about the first piece Award 1 mark for a basic outline/identification of the choice of information/shoes are the most important (she remembers heuristic used by Sally. it better) for 1 mark link. Not enough to state that she bought them as they were first. Example – Anchoring heuristic. (1) As Sally purchased the first pair of shoes she tried on, she is being influenced the most by the first piece of information she received. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 7(a)(ii) Outline the choice heuristic used by Dan. 2 For Dan – needs to outline that the product is familiar, he knows the brand well, he trusts this brand for 1 mark link. Award 2 marks for an outline of the choice heuristic used by Not enough to state that he recognises them as this is used Dan. in the name of the heuristic. Award 1 mark for a basic outline/identification of the choice heuristic used by Dan. Example – Recognition heuristic. (1) As Dan purchased the brand he has worn for a few years, he is favouring the product that is familiar to him as he recognises it, so it has more value to him. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 7(b) Outline one problem a psychologist may have when 2 Context = deciding which choice heuristics a consumer is deciding which choice heuristic consumers are using using to purchase a product required for full marks. when purchasing a product. No credit to individual differences on its own as customers Award 2 marks for an outline of the problem a psychologist will use different heuristics. may have when deciding which choice heuristic consumers are using when purchasing a product. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the problem a psychologist may have when deciding which choice heuristic consumers are using (when purchasing a product). Likely problems – • The consumer may be using more than one choice heuristic such as both anchoring and representativeness and it is difficult to know which had the most influence. • The consumer may not be aware of why they have purchased a product. • Consumer may give a socially desirable response. Example – The consumer may give a socially desirable response when asked about why they purchased a product. (1) The consumer may say that they compared products on price/quality as this sounds better than saying they just purchased the first product they saw. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 May/June 2025

8 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about: • gift-wrapping including beliefs of giver and recipient, and • attention and shelf position. [6] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about: • gift-wrapping including beliefs of giver and recipient, and • attention and shelf position, including a discussion about generalisations from findings. Evaluation in your answer can include strengths, weaknesses and a discussion of issues and debates. [10] Section C: Health Psychology Answer all questions.

16 marks

Mark scheme: 8(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about: 6 Award up to 4 marks where the response has described • gift-wrapping including beliefs of giver and only part of the question even if the response otherwise recipient, and meets the criteria for level 3. • attention and shelf position. Daniel Howard (1992) explored how gift-wrapping influences Use Table A: AO1 Knowledge and understanding to mark recipients' perceptions of gifts. In the first experiment, 45 candidate responses to this question. university students were promised a gift for evaluating Candidates must discuss both the gift wrapping and products; half received the gift (a sheepskin bicycle seat attention and shelf position. They can include examples of cover) wrapped in decorative paper with a ribbon, while the studies either identified as examples in the syllabus or not. other half received it unwrapped. Participants rated the wrapped gift more favourably (average score of 7.14) than Details may include: the unwrapped one (average score of 6.06) on scales assessing desirability, quality, and wisdom of the gift. Gift wrapping A second experiment involved 82 students who were told Gifts are wrapped to indicate that what is being given is a the gift was either for them or for someone else. Those who gift. The giver will choose appropriate wrapping for the believed the gift was for them rated it more positively when it occasion and wrapping it shows that it is a gift and was wrapped, whereas those who thought it was for something special for the receiver of the gift. Research someone else showed no significant difference in their (Howard) has shown that receivers are happier with a evaluations based on wrapping. traditionally wrapped gift than a gift which is unwrapped or non-traditional wrapping. There are occasions where non Rixom, Mas, & Rixom (2019): wrapped gifts are seen as acceptable (such as a gift of Participants & Setup: sample of 261 adults were asked to flowers or chocolates when visiting someone). Gifts can be imagine receiving a gift at a party from either a close friend presented three ways – unwrapped, wrapped in a non- or an acquaintance, and the gift was either neatly or traditional manner and wrapped in traditional manner. sloppily wrapped Procedure: Participants viewed images of the two wrapping styles and were instructed to picture the giver as either a friend or an acquaintance, then rated their satisfaction with the gift they "received" 8(a) Example study – Porublev et al., 2009 Results: When imagining the gift was from a friend, 3 data collection techniques used were observations at a recipients reported greater satisfaction with the sloppily Christmas gift wrapping stall; 20 in-depth interviews where wrapped gift—consistent with expectation-disconfirmation. respondents reflected on gift wrapping (including questions In contrast, when the gift-giver was an acquaintance, such as ‘in what instances do you wrap gifts?’); and 6 recipients preferred the neatly wrapped gift. workshops where participants were paired and asked to Interpretation: For friends, sloppy wrapping sets low wrap two gifts – one for someone close and one for an expectations, boosting delight when the content is better acquaintance while they conversed with their partner. than anticipated (contrast effect). For acquaintances, tidy Most of the participants (who came from Victoria, Australia wrapping signals that the giver values the relationship, and were aged around 25–35 years old) preferred to receive enhancing overall appreciation via assimilation. a gift that was wrapped and that there were clear expectations of what a gift should look like. Researchers gathered qualitative data to support these findings. Attention and shelf position Where a product is placed on the shelf can have an effect on how long consumers look at the product and also whether they then purchase the product. Planograms are a diagram or drawing that shows where products should be placed in a store/on the shelf. Central gaze effect is that consumers tend to look at products in the centre of a shelf for longer and are more likely to purchase this item compared to items on left or right of shelf. This can be measured in psychological studies by using eye tracking. 8(a) Example study Atalay et al., 2012 Atalay et al. used eye tracking technology to identify customer tendency to choose the option in the centre of an array. An ‘offline’ study also confirmed that the centrally located item is chosen more often even when this is not the centre of the visual field. Several studies were conducted: 1A involved 67 undergraduates in France, average age 20. Using eye-tracking participants reviewed 2 product categories – vitamin supplements and meal replacement bars, each with 3 fictitious names and displayed in a 3  3 matrix on a computer screen. Brands in the centre received more frequent eye fixations and overall were looked at for longer. 1B extended 1A by considering horizontal centrality. Participants were 64 undergraduate students in Paris. The set up was similar to 1A but with the matrix shifted away from the centre of the computer screen. Again, products in the centre item are gazed at for longer. Study 2 was a replication in a more realistic setting by placing the products on a shelf rather than a screen. 84 students at Concordia University took part. The products used were fictitious brands of energy drinks. Each brand had a feature attribute: high intensity, extended endurance or muscle recovery but these attributes were rotated around the brands to eliminate effects. Items were displayed in categories of 3 so that each product could be centre, left or right. Participants were tested one at a time and positioned so that the category they had to choose from was to their left or right and never exactly in the centre of their visual field. They were not allowed to reposition themselves. Results found the centrally located brand is more often chosen even when it is not in the centre of the visual field. 8(a) Participants were asked to evaluate the product, and it was found that the chosen product from the centre was not always the most positively evaluated. Other appropriate responses should also be credited 8(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about: 10 Ecological validity can be used as the named issue as this is • gift-wrapping including beliefs of giver and generalising from the task in the study to everyday life. If it recipient, and has good EV than can make generalisations from the • attention and shelf position, findings. including a discussion about generalisations from findings. Evaluation in your answer can include strengths, weaknesses and a discussion of issues and debates. Use Table B: AO3 Analysis and evaluation to mark candidate responses to this question. Depending on the examples studied by candidates their answers may vary. A range of issues could be used for evaluation. These include: Named issue – Generalisations from findings Porublev used random selection of 25–35 year olds from Victoria, Australia. Sample had more female participants as viewed as having a higher involvement in gifting. Other demographic, socio-economic, hygiene and environmental factors are open to ensure a wide cross stream of Australian society Atalay has 63/64 and 84 undergraduates from Paris. Strengths (can be generalised) Porublev – good cross section of Australian society from Victoria. Representative as females more involved in gifting. Random selection so no bias in selection/choice to participate. Atalay – Good sample size. 8(b) Weaknesses (cannot be generalised). From one culture. Australia/France – culture affects how products are chosen/how gifts are wrapped/expected to be wrapped. Undergraduates only (Atalay et al.) Young age group and given extra credit for participating so may have selected a certain type of student. (Porublev) • Reductionism versus holism – Gift wrapping may be seen as somewhat holistic as it is considering different types of gifts (presents, house-warming, etc.) and different types of wrapping (traditional, unwrapped, non- traditional). Shelf position is more reductionist as just considering the product being in the centre of the shelf and not other explanations for purchase such as price, popularity of product/brand, etc. • Determinism versus free-will – The feelings of the participants about the gifts are being determined by the gift wrapping rather than the free will of the person e.g. how they feel about the person giving the gift. Shelf position is determining purchase. 8(b) • Subjective and objective data – Objective data used in shelf position with the use of eye tracking equipment. Subjective data used – Atalay used surveys in study 1A to measure brand evaluation (Participants reviewed each product on the screen as if they were on the store shelf and indicated their brand choice. Next, they were asked to complete a survey that assessed their inferences about the brands, memory-based attention, product familiarity and demographics). It is possible that the brand choice self-reported by the participants might not have been the same as what the brand choice would be in real life shopping experience. Therefore, this self-report could lack validity. Subjective data as Porublev carried out interviews to gather data. There may be bias in the way questions are asked (so lack of reliability). People may lie. • Validity – Atalay – eye tracking has good validity as measuring what the participants spent their time looking at. However, lacks ecological validity. Porublev can be seen to have good validity as collected both quantitative and qualitative data so got an in-depth understanding of feelings about gift wrapping. However, lack ecological validity as the participants are aware they are in a study and are commenting on how they wrap gifts and why. However, they are commenting on their real experiences of wrapping and giving gifts so has good ecological validity. Other issues could include: • Reliability • Ethics • Qualitative and quantitative data • Application to everyday life Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Section C: Health Psychology

This question in 9990/31 May/June 2025

5 Company B sells bicycles. An advisor has recommended that the staff at Company B use competitor‑focused sales techniques to increase sales. Suggest two ways that Company B’s staff could use competitor‑focused sales techniques to increase the sales of bicycles. [4]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 5 Company B sells bicycles. An advisor has recommended the staff at Company B use 4 Need to have at least one competitor-focused sales techniques to increase sales. of the suggestions in context (bicycles, Suggest two ways that Company B’s staff could use competitor-focused sales Company B) for 4 techniques to increase the sales of bicycles. For each suggestion- Award 2 marks for a suggestion that Company B’s staff could use competitor-focused sales techniques to increase the sales of its bicycles. Award 1 mark for a basic outline of a suggestion that Company B’s staff could use competitor- focused sales techniques to increase the sales of its bicycles. Likely suggestions – • Focus on how Company’s B’s bicycles are better than the competition in terms of price – could put comparison on the company’s website/buying page. • Focus on reviews given for the bicycles comparing the reviews of the competition to Company B. • Advertise/put on website comparison of important features of bicycle with competition (gears, quality of tyres, warranty) to show how Company B’s bicycles have more of these features. • Advertise/put on website how Company B is sustainable/ethical – using locally produced parts, paying its worker’s a fair wage, use of recycled materials. For example- Company B could put on it’s website a comparison of the important features of the bicycle with the competition (eg. number of gears, quality of tyres, etc) (1) By showing that their bicycles have more features/better quality they will attract more customers to purchase their bicycles. (1) The staff could also raise awareness in the media that Company B is a sustainable brand compared to the competition. (1) They could have articles published about how they use recycled materials to make the various components of their bicycles and mention that this is better than their competition so that customers will want to support their company through purchasing bicycles more than their competitors. (1)

This question in 9990/32 May/June 2025

6 After buying a product, consumers can be affected by post‑purchase cognitive dissonance, which can be applied to everyday life. (a) Outline what is meant by ‘post‑purchase cognitive dissonance’. [2] (b) Explain one way post‑purchase cognitive dissonance could be reduced. [2]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 6 After buying a product, consumers can be affected by post-purchase cognitive dissonance, which can be applied to everyday life. 6(a) Outline what is meant by ‘post-purchase cognitive dissonance’. 2 Award 2 marks for an outline of the concept Award 1 mark for a basic outline of the concept. Likely answers: Cognitive dissonance is when two beliefs contrast/in opposition to each other OR the customer has behaved in a certain way (purchased the product) but now has a belief that is in conflict with this (they found a lower price with the competition). These beliefs are that they have purchased the product/now they regret the purchase Regretting purchasing a product. ‘Buyer’s remorse’ Example: • Cognitive dissonance is where the customer has purchased a product but has a belief which is in conflict with this behaviour. (1) For example, they find out the product has just gone on sale and they should have waited to purchase the product. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 6(b) Explain one way post-purchase cognitive dissonance could be reduced. 2 Allow answers that the consumer does something Award 2 marks for an explanation of one way post-purchase cognitive dissonance could be to reduce their own cd. reduced. This could be returning the Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of one way post-purchase cognitive dissonance could be item. reduced. 1 mark for way Possible explanations– 1 mark for why it would • The seller/company can: reduce post-purchase – Offer a price guarantee that they will match the price of a competitor’s product within, cognitive dissonance. for example, 30 days of purchase. – Offer to help the customer find a different product that is more suitable to them, if they Can allow responses that come into the store and return an item. prevent cognitive • Good customer service at point of purchase. For example, if the customer is purchasing dissonance. an expensive item such as a computer or a car for the sales person to discuss affordability (how much are the monthly payments and for how long), suitability (getting Allow reference to the the correct product to match their needs – e.g. the hard drive of a computer is the size Nordvall study needed for the customer’s needs rather than selling them the most expensive/largest computer), • Good aftersales service – e.g. servicing agreement for a car, guarantee if there are any problems with the product – giving a replacement if the product is faulty. The consumer/customer can – • Thorough research of product prior to purchase • Budgeting for affordability of upfront cost and/or monthly payments. • Waiting to make the purchase to make sure the product is really wanted and not an impulse buy. • Giving reason for the choice of product. • Believe that the purchase is the best product compared to other choices available or not buying it. This means cognitive dissonance will decrease because the customer will be less likely to regret their purchase (linked to the way/idea given above) 6(b) Example: One way a company could reduce post purchase-cognitive dissonance is that they could offer a price guarantee, for example, that if the customer finds a lower price either in store/online or from a competitor the company will match this price and refund any difference. (1) This will reduce post-purchase cognitive dissonance because the customer will not have conflicting beliefs – that they should have purchased the product from a competitor as the price is lower as they will get this price matched by the company and receive a refund. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 May/June 2025

7 Steven and Fred sell coats. They are talking about why coat sales have increased on their website. • Steven says customers decide to purchase a coat because their website allows customers to search for useful features. • Fred says customers decide to purchase a coat because their website is the first one customers find when they search online. (a) (i) Outline which model of consumer decision‑making has been suggested by Steven. Justify your answer. [2] (ii) Outline which model of consumer decision‑making has been suggested by Fred. Justify your answer. [2] (b) Outline one problem psychologists have when deciding which model of consumer decision‑making is being used by customers. [2]

6 marks

Mark scheme: 7 Steven and Fred sell coats. They are talking about why coat sales have increased on their website. • Steven says customers decide to purchase a coat because their website allows customers to search for useful features. • Fred says customers decide to purchase a coat because their website is the first one customers find when they search online. 7(a)(i) Outline which model of consumer decision-making has been suggested by Steven. 2 Take-the-best – looks at Justify your answer. the features of different products available, makes Award 2 marks for an outline of the model of consumer decision-making has been suggested a comparison and by Steven. purchases the one that Award 1 mark for a basic outline/identification of the model of consumer decision-making has meets their needs the been suggested by Steven. most. Example – 1 mark identifying Utility theory (1) As the customers are choosing the best coat, this is a rational choice where 1 mark outlining what it is the customers weigh up the pros and cons of the products and choose the best one which the or giving an example from website allows them to do. (1) scenario. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 7(a)(ii) Outline which model of consumer decision-making has been suggested by Fred. Justify 2 Anchoring – first piece of your answer. information is the most important piece of Award 2 marks for an outline of the model of consumer-decision making has been suggested information. by Fred. Award 1 mark for a basic outline/identification of the model of consumer-decision making has 1 mark identifying been suggested by Fred. 1 mark outlining what it is or giving an example from Example – scenario. Satisficing theory. (1) As the customers are purchasing the first coat that they find – which happens to be their company’s coat it could be because they feel the coat is good enough and a good price and therefore purchase it. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 7(b) Outline one problem psychologists have when deciding which model of consumer 2 Context = deciding which decision-making is being used by customers. model of consumer- decision making is being Award 2 marks for an explanation of the problem used by customers. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the problem Likely problems psychologists may have – • knows how many products are purchased but not the reasons why. • Could read reviews for reasons for purchase but every customer does not write a review or is fully honest in the review. • Could ask customers but customers may not be honest/may not know the full reason they purchased the product. • Customers could be purchasing multiple products and returning the ones they don’t want. They could therefore use both utility theory making comparisons between some competitors products and satisficing theory as the customer chooses the one which is ‘good enough’ after some comparisons are made. Example – One problem in deciding which model is being used by customers is that they could be using more than one strategy/model when deciding to purchase the product. (1) For example, they could compare products on price and one important feature between a few different companies but then use satisficing model to purchase the one that is ‘good enough’. (1) OR the customer does purchase multiple products but then keeps the one that is ‘good enough’ and returns the others. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 May/June 2025

6 (a) Outline what is meant by free-will, including an example from thinking slow (system 2) in consumer decision-making. [2] (b) Explain one problem a psychologist may have when they investigate whether consumers use free-will when deciding to purchase products. [2]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 6(a) Outline what is meant by free-will, including an example 2 Context = thinking slow/system 2 thinking from thinking slow (system 2) in consumer decision- making. 1 mark = definition of free-will 1 mark = how thinking slow/system 2 shows free-will. Award 2 marks for an outline of the concept in context Award 1 mark for a basic outline/identification of the concept. Likely answers: Free-will is where behaviour is due to individual choice (behaviour is self-determining) Thinking slow/system 2 thinking can be seen to be due to free will as the consumer can choose to spend a long time considering their purchase of an item. Consumers can choose to spend time • Shopping around for an item • Researching different products to purchase. Example: Free-will is where behaviour is due to the person’s individual choice and not determined by outside factors. (1). For example, thinking slow can be seen to be due to free-will as the consumer can choose to spend time shopping around for a good price for a product. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 6(b) Explain one problem a psychologist may have when 2 Needs context about purchasing a product for full marks. they investigate whether consumers use free-will when deciding to purchase products Award 2 marks for an explanation of a problem a psychologist may have when they investigate whether consumers use free-will when deciding to purchase products. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of a problem a psychologist may have when they investigate whether consumers use free-will (when deciding to purchase products). Likely answers– Difficult to know what the consumer is thinking. Difficult to determine what is due to free-will and what is due to internal/external factors outside of the consumer’s control. Difficult to isolate external factors that could be affecting the consumer and therefore determine if the decision to purchase is due to this factor and not their free-will. Example: One problem psychologists face when they investigate the free-will of consumers when making a decision to purchase a product is that it is difficult to know whether the consumer is making the decision to purchase due to their free-will or an external factor. (1) For example, if a consumer sees an advert about a product and then purchases it – it is hard to know if the purchase is due solely to seeing the advert or due to the free-will of the consumer. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 May/June 2025

7 Sally and Dan want to buy new running shoes. They go to many stores and consider lots of different shoes. Sally returns to the first shop and buys her running shoes. Even though he has seen many different brands, Dan buys the brand he has worn for the past few years. (a) (i) Outline the choice heuristic used by Sally. [2] (ii) Outline the choice heuristic used by Dan. [2] (b) Outline one problem a psychologist may have when deciding which choice heuristic consumers are using when purchasing a product. [2]

6 marks

Mark scheme: 7(a)(i) Outline the choice heuristic used by Sally. 2 1 mark = identification 1 mark = link to stem Award 2 marks for an outline of the choice heuristic used by Sally. For Sally – needs to outline something about the first piece Award 1 mark for a basic outline/identification of the choice of information/shoes are the most important (she remembers heuristic used by Sally. it better) for 1 mark link. Not enough to state that she bought them as they were first. Example – Anchoring heuristic. (1) As Sally purchased the first pair of shoes she tried on, she is being influenced the most by the first piece of information she received. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 7(a)(ii) Outline the choice heuristic used by Dan. 2 For Dan – needs to outline that the product is familiar, he knows the brand well, he trusts this brand for 1 mark link. Award 2 marks for an outline of the choice heuristic used by Not enough to state that he recognises them as this is used Dan. in the name of the heuristic. Award 1 mark for a basic outline/identification of the choice heuristic used by Dan. Example – Recognition heuristic. (1) As Dan purchased the brand he has worn for a few years, he is favouring the product that is familiar to him as he recognises it, so it has more value to him. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 7(b) Outline one problem a psychologist may have when 2 Context = deciding which choice heuristics a consumer is deciding which choice heuristic consumers are using using to purchase a product required for full marks. when purchasing a product. No credit to individual differences on its own as customers Award 2 marks for an outline of the problem a psychologist will use different heuristics. may have when deciding which choice heuristic consumers are using when purchasing a product. Award 1 mark for a basic explanation of the problem a psychologist may have when deciding which choice heuristic consumers are using (when purchasing a product). Likely problems – • The consumer may be using more than one choice heuristic such as both anchoring and representativeness and it is difficult to know which had the most influence. • The consumer may not be aware of why they have purchased a product. • Consumer may give a socially desirable response. Example – The consumer may give a socially desirable response when asked about why they purchased a product. (1) The consumer may say that they compared products on price/quality as this sounds better than saying they just purchased the first product they saw. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 May/June 2025

8 (a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about: • gift-wrapping including beliefs of giver and recipient, and • attention and shelf position. [6] (b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about: • gift-wrapping including beliefs of giver and recipient, and • attention and shelf position, including a discussion about generalisations from findings. Evaluation in your answer can include strengths, weaknesses and a discussion of issues and debates. [10] Section C: Health Psychology Answer all questions.

16 marks

Mark scheme: 8(a) Describe what psychologists have discovered about: 6 Award up to 4 marks where the response has described • gift-wrapping including beliefs of giver and only part of the question even if the response otherwise recipient, and meets the criteria for level 3. • attention and shelf position. Daniel Howard (1992) explored how gift-wrapping influences Use Table A: AO1 Knowledge and understanding to mark recipients' perceptions of gifts. In the first experiment, 45 candidate responses to this question. university students were promised a gift for evaluating Candidates must discuss both the gift wrapping and products; half received the gift (a sheepskin bicycle seat attention and shelf position. They can include examples of cover) wrapped in decorative paper with a ribbon, while the studies either identified as examples in the syllabus or not. other half received it unwrapped. Participants rated the wrapped gift more favourably (average score of 7.14) than Details may include: the unwrapped one (average score of 6.06) on scales assessing desirability, quality, and wisdom of the gift. Gift wrapping A second experiment involved 82 students who were told Gifts are wrapped to indicate that what is being given is a the gift was either for them or for someone else. Those who gift. The giver will choose appropriate wrapping for the believed the gift was for them rated it more positively when it occasion and wrapping it shows that it is a gift and was wrapped, whereas those who thought it was for something special for the receiver of the gift. Research someone else showed no significant difference in their (Howard) has shown that receivers are happier with a evaluations based on wrapping. traditionally wrapped gift than a gift which is unwrapped or non-traditional wrapping. There are occasions where non Rixom, Mas, & Rixom (2019): wrapped gifts are seen as acceptable (such as a gift of Participants & Setup: sample of 261 adults were asked to flowers or chocolates when visiting someone). Gifts can be imagine receiving a gift at a party from either a close friend presented three ways – unwrapped, wrapped in a non- or an acquaintance, and the gift was either neatly or traditional manner and wrapped in traditional manner. sloppily wrapped Procedure: Participants viewed images of the two wrapping styles and were instructed to picture the giver as either a friend or an acquaintance, then rated their satisfaction with the gift they "received" 8(a) Example study – Porublev et al., 2009 Results: When imagining the gift was from a friend, 3 data collection techniques used were observations at a recipients reported greater satisfaction with the sloppily Christmas gift wrapping stall; 20 in-depth interviews where wrapped gift—consistent with expectation-disconfirmation. respondents reflected on gift wrapping (including questions In contrast, when the gift-giver was an acquaintance, such as ‘in what instances do you wrap gifts?’); and 6 recipients preferred the neatly wrapped gift. workshops where participants were paired and asked to Interpretation: For friends, sloppy wrapping sets low wrap two gifts – one for someone close and one for an expectations, boosting delight when the content is better acquaintance while they conversed with their partner. than anticipated (contrast effect). For acquaintances, tidy Most of the participants (who came from Victoria, Australia wrapping signals that the giver values the relationship, and were aged around 25–35 years old) preferred to receive enhancing overall appreciation via assimilation. a gift that was wrapped and that there were clear expectations of what a gift should look like. Researchers gathered qualitative data to support these findings. Attention and shelf position Where a product is placed on the shelf can have an effect on how long consumers look at the product and also whether they then purchase the product. Planograms are a diagram or drawing that shows where products should be placed in a store/on the shelf. Central gaze effect is that consumers tend to look at products in the centre of a shelf for longer and are more likely to purchase this item compared to items on left or right of shelf. This can be measured in psychological studies by using eye tracking. 8(a) Example study Atalay et al., 2012 Atalay et al. used eye tracking technology to identify customer tendency to choose the option in the centre of an array. An ‘offline’ study also confirmed that the centrally located item is chosen more often even when this is not the centre of the visual field. Several studies were conducted: 1A involved 67 undergraduates in France, average age 20. Using eye-tracking participants reviewed 2 product categories – vitamin supplements and meal replacement bars, each with 3 fictitious names and displayed in a 3  3 matrix on a computer screen. Brands in the centre received more frequent eye fixations and overall were looked at for longer. 1B extended 1A by considering horizontal centrality. Participants were 64 undergraduate students in Paris. The set up was similar to 1A but with the matrix shifted away from the centre of the computer screen. Again, products in the centre item are gazed at for longer. Study 2 was a replication in a more realistic setting by placing the products on a shelf rather than a screen. 84 students at Concordia University took part. The products used were fictitious brands of energy drinks. Each brand had a feature attribute: high intensity, extended endurance or muscle recovery but these attributes were rotated around the brands to eliminate effects. Items were displayed in categories of 3 so that each product could be centre, left or right. Participants were tested one at a time and positioned so that the category they had to choose from was to their left or right and never exactly in the centre of their visual field. They were not allowed to reposition themselves. Results found the centrally located brand is more often chosen even when it is not in the centre of the visual field. 8(a) Participants were asked to evaluate the product, and it was found that the chosen product from the centre was not always the most positively evaluated. Other appropriate responses should also be credited 8(b) Evaluate what psychologists have discovered about: 10 Ecological validity can be used as the named issue as this is • gift-wrapping including beliefs of giver and generalising from the task in the study to everyday life. If it recipient, and has good EV than can make generalisations from the • attention and shelf position, findings. including a discussion about generalisations from findings. Evaluation in your answer can include strengths, weaknesses and a discussion of issues and debates. Use Table B: AO3 Analysis and evaluation to mark candidate responses to this question. Depending on the examples studied by candidates their answers may vary. A range of issues could be used for evaluation. These include: Named issue – Generalisations from findings Porublev used random selection of 25–35 year olds from Victoria, Australia. Sample had more female participants as viewed as having a higher involvement in gifting. Other demographic, socio-economic, hygiene and environmental factors are open to ensure a wide cross stream of Australian society Atalay has 63/64 and 84 undergraduates from Paris. Strengths (can be generalised) Porublev – good cross section of Australian society from Victoria. Representative as females more involved in gifting. Random selection so no bias in selection/choice to participate. Atalay – Good sample size. 8(b) Weaknesses (cannot be generalised). From one culture. Australia/France – culture affects how products are chosen/how gifts are wrapped/expected to be wrapped. Undergraduates only (Atalay et al.) Young age group and given extra credit for participating so may have selected a certain type of student. (Porublev) • Reductionism versus holism – Gift wrapping may be seen as somewhat holistic as it is considering different types of gifts (presents, house-warming, etc.) and different types of wrapping (traditional, unwrapped, non- traditional). Shelf position is more reductionist as just considering the product being in the centre of the shelf and not other explanations for purchase such as price, popularity of product/brand, etc. • Determinism versus free-will – The feelings of the participants about the gifts are being determined by the gift wrapping rather than the free will of the person e.g. how they feel about the person giving the gift. Shelf position is determining purchase. 8(b) • Subjective and objective data – Objective data used in shelf position with the use of eye tracking equipment. Subjective data used – Atalay used surveys in study 1A to measure brand evaluation (Participants reviewed each product on the screen as if they were on the store shelf and indicated their brand choice. Next, they were asked to complete a survey that assessed their inferences about the brands, memory-based attention, product familiarity and demographics). It is possible that the brand choice self-reported by the participants might not have been the same as what the brand choice would be in real life shopping experience. Therefore, this self-report could lack validity. Subjective data as Porublev carried out interviews to gather data. There may be bias in the way questions are asked (so lack of reliability). People may lie. • Validity – Atalay – eye tracking has good validity as measuring what the participants spent their time looking at. However, lacks ecological validity. Porublev can be seen to have good validity as collected both quantitative and qualitative data so got an in-depth understanding of feelings about gift wrapping. However, lack ecological validity as the participants are aware they are in a study and are commenting on how they wrap gifts and why. However, they are commenting on their real experiences of wrapping and giving gifts so has good ecological validity. Other issues could include: • Reliability • Ethics • Qualitative and quantitative data • Application to everyday life Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Section C: Health Psychology

This question in 9990/33 May/June 2025

5 Abdul wants to purchase a chair from a website. The website is designed so that comparisons between items are not easy to make. Suggest two decision‑making strategies Abdul is likely to use when purchasing his chair. [4]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 5 Abdul wants to purchase a chair from a website. The website is designed so that 4 Heuristics – yes and utility comparisons between items are not easy to make. theory Suggest two decision-making strategies Abdul is likely to use when purchasing his chair. Syllabus reference: Decision-making strategies applied to internet shopping focusing on website design, including a study, e.g. Jedetski et al (2002). For each suggestion: 1 mark for naming/outlining a non-compensatory strategy 1 mark for detail including context of buying a chair Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded. Likely content: • Customers more likely to use non-compensatory strategies when comparisons are not easy to make • Non-compensatory strategies include satisficing, elimination by aspects, lexigraphic • Satisficing is when first product that meets basic requirements is chosen and no further consideration takes place. • Elimination by aspects is when the consumer uses a cut-off value for those that meet this, a second attribute is considered etc. • Lexigraphic is when the most important attribute is evaluated and if one item is seen to be superior in this attribute this stops the decision-making process. • Could also use partially compensatory strategies such as majority of conforming dimensions and frequency of good and bad features. • Anchoring – give most importance to first piece of information received. Examples: Abdul may decide that the most important feature of the chair is its design (1). When he looks on the website, he sees a chair that has the most attractive design, he selects this chair and does not consider any others (1). This is a lexigraphic non-compensatory strategy of decision-making. Abdul may think that a sturdy, comfortable-looking chair made of wood are his basic requirements (1). He sees a chair that meets these basic requirements and selects that one (1). This is satisficing (1).

This question in 9990/31 Oct/Nov 2025

6 (a) Outline what is meant by ‘determinism’, including an example from choice heuristics. [2] (b) Explain one strength of using the determinism side of the determinism versus free‑will debate to understand choice heuristics. [2]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 6(a) Outline what is meant by determinism, including an example from choice heuristics. 2 1 mark – definition of determinism 1 mark – link to a choice heuristic. Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded Example: Determinism is the extent to which behaviour is due to internal or external factors (1). For example, anchoring is a heuristic that says we pay attention to the first piece of information we receive. This is deterministic because we do not appear able to exercise free will over this heuristic (1). This could be because choice heuristics, being mental shortcuts, are beneficial for us in making decisions (1). 6(b) Explain one strength of using the determinism side of the determinism versus free-will 2 debate to understand choice heuristics. 1 mark for strength of determinism 1 mark for reference to choice heuristics. Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded Likely answers: • Determinism gives rise to causal explanations. Causal relationships can be investigated scientifically. • Determinism allows us to make predictions about peoples’ future behaviour. • Determinism allows us to make generalisations about behaviour and form laws (nomothetic). • Determinism in choice heuristics allows us to see the utility in them. They exist for the purpose of providing a short-cut in reaching decisions. Example: One strength of determinism is that it can allow us to make predictions about peoples’ behaviour (1). For example, representative heuristics predict that if a product looks like a well-known high quality market leader then this determines that we will tend to think this new product is also high quality (1). This is also useful to product developers who will then tend to make sure their new product is as similar to say, the leading brand of Nike trainers, leading consumers to view those trainers more favourably and buying them.

This question in 9990/31 Oct/Nov 2025

7 Supermarket shoppers do not all behave in the same way. Shoppers can be categorised into five types based on their different spatial behaviour patterns. Zelda visits all of the aisles of the supermarket when she does her main shopping. However, Louis spends a short time in the supermarket and visits only a few aisles. (a) (i) Identify which type of shopper spatial behaviour pattern would be most appropriate to describe: • Zelda • Louis. [2] (ii) Frank is a different type of shopper from Zelda and Louis. He shows a different spatial behaviour pattern. Suggest how Frank could behave in the supermarket. [2] (b) Explain one problem that psychologists may have when investigating shoppers’ spatial behaviour patterns. [2]

6 marks

Mark scheme: 7 Supermarket shoppers do not all behave in the same way. Shoppers can be categorised into five types based on their different spatial behaviour patterns. Zelda visits all of the aisles of the supermarket when she does her main shopping. However, Louis spends a short time in the supermarket and visits only a few aisles. 7(a)(i) Identify which type of shopper spatial behaviour pattern would be most appropriate to 2 describe: • Zelda • Louis Syllabus content: Shopper behaviour focusing on spatial movement patterns including types of trip (short, round, central and wave) and the five types of spatial behaviour patterns (specialist, native, tourist, explorer, raider); the use of CCTV tracking, including a study, e.g. Gil et al. (2009). Award 1 mark for each correctly identified type of behaviour pattern. Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded Likely answers • Zelda – native or explorer (or ‘likes to explore’) • Louis – tourist or raider 7(a)(ii) Frank is a different type of shopper from Zelda and Louis. He shows a different spatial 2 Frank should not be behaviour pattern. described as undertaking either of the behaviour Suggest how Frank could behave in the supermarket. patterns identified in (i) 1 mark – named/brief outline of behaviour Could also credit type of trip – 1 mark – detailed outline of behaviour (clearly obvious about the type of spatial behaviour short, round, central, wave if pattern) described for 1 mark The type of spatial behaviour patterns does not need to be stated but the description needs to be clear as different to Zelda and Louis. Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded Likely answers: Specialist – Focus on a few products but spending time on these (not necessarily purchasing), mostly to ‘top-up’ shopping or for non-foods Native (if not used for Zelda) – Long trip visiting relevant aisles and most likely leading to purchases Tourist (if not used for Louis) – Fast-moving and not straying very far from the entrance. They look to buy. Explorer (if not used for Zelda) – a very long trip, visiting all aisles and some more than once, spending a lot of time and money in the supermarket Raider (if not used for Louis) – Fast movements and decisions, perhaps looking at a ‘food for tonight’ mission. Examples: Frank is an explorer (1). He has a shopping list with him and his trip is very long (1). He visits every aisle and spends a lot of money in the supermarket as this is his main shopping trip (1). Frank goes into the supermarket to look for a few specific items (1). He spends time considering his purchases and may not actually buy many of the things he looks at (1). This is a specialist (1). 7(b) Explain one problem that psychologists may have when investigating shoppers’ spatial 2 movement patterns. 1 mark – basic problem 1 mark – reference to shoppers’ spatial movement patterns Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded Likely problems • Demand characteristics – if people see that they are being investigated then they may change their behaviour • Shoppers may demonstrate multiple shopper characteristics simultaneously – difficult to classify • Shoppers could be a specialist in one store but a tourist in another – how representative is the finding? • Ethics – making observations without consent Examples: One problem with investigating shoppers’ behaviour patterns may be that shoppers do not behave consistently over time or in different stores (1), this means that the findings may not be representative / or may lack meaning (1). For example, in a supermarket that is familiar, a customer may be very predictable and always shop as a specialist but in another store behave as a raider (1). As a result finding could lack validity and usefulness (1). One problem with investigating shoppers’ behaviour patterns is due to the ethics of lack of consent (1) because the shopper has not given permission for their shopping behaviour to be observed and measured (1). If consent had been asked for this would potentially mean that the shopper behaved differently leading to a lack of validity. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/31 Oct/Nov 2025

6 (a) Outline the nomothetic approach, including an example from the effect of sound on consumer behaviour. [2] (b) Explain one strength of using a nomothetic approach in psychology. [2]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 6(a) Outline the nomothetic approach, including an example from the effect of sound on 2 Collection of quantitative data consumer behaviour. is acceptable as definition of nomothetic approach. 1 mark – definition of nomothetic 1 mark – example from effect of sound on consumer behaviour. Example: A nomothetic approach uses large samples of participants to establish general laws of behaviour (1). For example, experimental evidence shows that the taste is perceived as less intense in noisy conditions than quiet ones (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 6(b) Explain one strength of using a nomothetic approach in psychology. 2 ‘Data is quantitative’ is not a strength. 1 mark for identifying strength. 1 mark for detail linking strength to nomothetic approach. ‘Quantitative data means comparisons are easier to Likely answers: make’ = 1 • Use of large numbers of participants makes finding more likely to be generalisable • Findings that apply to large numbers of participants are likely to be more useful particularly in terms of predictive value • The establishing of general laws of high predictive value makes psychology be seen as more scientific • Scientific and predictive theories can be seen to be more credible increasing the status of psychology Example: One strength of using a nomothetic approach in psychology is that the laws established will have come from a large number of participants (1). As a result, these laws will have high predictive value (1). This means they could potentially be used to help people, e.g., research on the success of therapies that establishes that they work with large numbers of people could be used with even more people, potentially making their lives better (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2025

7 Nandi is a chef in a local restaurant. She is designing a menu and knows that food names can affect customers’ menu item choice. (a) Suggest how Nandi could use her knowledge about food names when designing a menu for her restaurant. [4] (b) Explain one problem with carrying out research into the effect of food names on menu item choice. [2]

6 marks

Mark scheme: 7 Nandi is a chef in a local restaurant. She is designing a menu and knows that food names can affect customers’ menu item choice. 7(a) Suggest how Nandi could use her knowledge about food names when designing a 4 Research has found many menu for her restaurant. different types of food names on menus effect customer Syllabus content: choice. A lot of the research • Menu design psychology – the effect of food name on menu item choice, including a findings/conclusions are study, e.g., Lockyer (2006). contradictory. Award 3–4 marks for a detailed description of how Nandi can use her knowledge about 1 mark – example of food food names in context. name (max 2 marks) Award 1–2 marks for a basic description of how Nandi can use her knowledge about food names. 1 mark – what name contains e.g. fresh, seasonal Likely suggestions may come from the study by Lockyer (2006) or from Wansink et al ingredients or simple to (2004). understand (2 marks max) Examples: 1 mark – effect of food name If Nandi uses a French description for a soup dish such as consommé julienne (1) is likely on diner (something the diner to lead to it being rated less appealing by customers (1) than if the description is more might say – such as tastes seasonal such as spring vegetables garnished in a fresh clear soup (1). She should use delicious or a behaviour – the second option as if customers find the item more appealing, they are more likely to more likely to order it. (max 2 order it (1). marks) Plain statements about dishes such as seafood filet (1) will not be sold as much as those e.g. A name like ‘grandma’s with more evocative names like Succulent Italian Seafood Filet (1). Customers are likely to homemade lasagna (1) rate the more descriptive name as more appealing to the eye (1), tasting better (1), feeling ‘sounds nostalgic so tastes satisfied after eating it (1), and having more calories than the basic descriptions (1). All of good (1) and they will these examples could lead to more sales for the more descriptive menu item (1). purchase it. (1) Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 7(b) Explain one problem with carrying out research into the effect of food names on 2 menu item choice. 1 mark identifying/explaining the problem 1 mark for link to effect of food names on menu item choice. Likely problems • Difficulties associated with design of study e.g., repeated measures or problems in gathering data from questionnaires and/or interviews • Cultural differences in eating out or selecting from a menu • Difficulties generalising from the sample and/or type of restaurant • If lab study, problems with applying results to real world • If results of research lead to increased sales could this be seen as exploiting customers leading to ethical issues Examples: One problem could be the issue of generalisablity (1). For example, findings about food names in, say a small café in France, may not apply to a large chain fast-food restaurant in India (1). This would limit the usefulness of the findings (1). One problem could be that if an experiment is carried out on menu names, in order to reduce individual differences in the customers a repeated measures design is used (1). However, this means that if participants see both conditions in the study (both sets of names of menu items) this causes a demand characteristic (1). Participant will realise what is being investigated and, albeit unwittingly, may change their response to appear more helpful to the researcher (1). This would reduce the validity of the research findings (1). Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2025

8 (a) Describe explanations and examples of compensatory, non-compensatory and partially compensatory strategies of consumer decision-making. [6] (b) Evaluate explanations and examples of compensatory, non-compensatory and partially compensatory strategies of consumer decision-making, including a discussion of application to everyday life. Evaluation in your answer can include strengths, weaknesses and a discussion of issues and debates. [10] Section C: Health Psychology Answer all questions.

16 marks

Mark scheme: 8(a) Describe explanations and examples of compensatory, non-compensatory and 6 Annotations: partially compensatory strategies of consumer decision-making. Add the levels to get the mark awarded e.g. NAQ and L2 = 2 Use Table A: AO1 Knowledge and understanding to mark candidate responses to this marks, L1 and L2 = 3 marks, question. L1 and L3 = 4 marks, L3 and L3 = 6 marks There are a number of possible consumer decision-making strategies that can be used by consumers. Consumers may vary between strategies, depending on the purchase and the Plus, overall level at the individual. bottom of the response as follows: Compensatory 1 or 2 marks = L1 A customer will allow the value of one attribute to compensate for another. For example, 3 or 4 marks = L2 when buying a new car, the preferred model may compensate for a high mileage. 5 or 6 marks = L3 Richarme (2005) described two compensatory strategies: • Equal weight strategy, where attributes are seen as being equally important (model of car and mileage are equally important). Mark compensatory/partially • Weighted additive strategy, where some attributes are more important e.g., valuing compensatory with one level the low mileage much more highly than the make or model. AND Non-compensatory with Non-compensatory second level. Each attribute is evaluated individually (rather than one compensating for another). So, when buying a new car, even if it was a good price, the ideal model, and had a low To achieve full marks must mileage, it would be immediately rejected if it was not the correct colour. Simon suggests cover all 3. three non-compensatory strategies: • Satisficing – the first product to meet the basic requirements is chose and no further Can credit details of the consideration takes place e.g., if a new essential but basic item is needed, we might Jedestski et al. study for simply buy the first one seen. compensatory/non- • Elimination by aspects – this sets a ‘cut-off’ value for the most important attribute compensatory level. and allows everything that meets that attribute to remain under consideration. These remaining items are assessed against the next attribute and so on. For example, when buying a washing machine, you might decide on the minimum capacity so anything of at least that capacity is considered, then you might consider another factor, such as choice of washing programs, for the remaining washing machines. 8(a) • Lexigraphic – the most important attribute is evaluated and if one item is considered superior in terms of this attribute, this immediately stops the decision-making process, and the item is chosen. If one item does not emerge as best on the most important attribute, then consideration moves to the next attribute etc. For example, you need to buy a washing machine but have a large family so you will get the washing machine with the biggest capacity, and won’t consider other factors. Partially compensatory These are a middle group between compensatory and non-compensatory strategies. Two examples are: • Majority of conforming dimensions – this strategy involves evaluating two products against all relevant attributes and keeping the one that does best. This one is then compared to the next product and so on until there is only one product left. For example, you might look at two washing machines and compare them on price, and disregard the more expensive one, then compare the cheaper one with another washing machine and so on. • Frequency of good and bad features – all products are compared to the appropriate cut-off values and the product that has the most positive features exceeding the cut-off values will be chosen. For example, comparing all washing machines on important factors, such as capacity, efficiency and price, and choosing the one that seems best across all factors. Other appropriate responses should also be credited. 8(b) Evaluate explanations and examples of compensatory, non-compensatory and 10 For each evaluation partially compensatory strategies of consumer decision-making, including a point/issue/strength/weakness discussion of application to everyday life. /paragraph assess each and record level on left hand side. Use Table B: AO3 Analysis and evaluation to mark candidate responses to this question. Use AN for analysis and A range of issues could be used for evaluation. These include: CONT for specific detail. • Named issue – application to everyday life – These strategies all lend themselves Overall level awarded well to everyday life examples and can be considered of practical value. underneath the candidate’s – Application to everyday life must be evaluative and not descriptive. Giving an response as follows – ‘best fit’ example of one of the strategies using a product that customers purchase (e.g. from individual points e.g. if all laptop, iPhone, BMW car) is descriptive. L2 award L2 regardless of – Practical applications are creditworthy – if a company can identify which strategy how many, e.g. 6 L2 = 4 most of their customers use, they can design their website to accommodate this marks. e.g. if compensatory allow customers to select different models of a product and see a comparison of the feature where they differ and where they are the same. If 1 L4 and 2 L3 award L4 (but – However, it would be difficult to generalise as to whether the same customers use give 7 rather than 8 marks). the same strategies all the time, or for only certain types of items (large, expensive purchases as opposed to small less important items). Are customers If only 2 points but different consistent in their use of strategies? What happens if purchase decisions are levels not usually sufficient for made alone as opposed to jointly e.g., buying a family car. the higher level overall, e.g. 1 L1 and 1 L2 = L1 (2 • Cultural differences – In some cultures there may be far more choices available marks). compared to others. With fewer choices of items to purchase, this would compromise e.g. 1 L2 and 1 L3 = L2 (4 the types of strategies available to consumers. Levels of affluence within a community marks). could also be factors. In some less affluent cultures, different decision-making could be involved in purchasing food items than in others. • Reductionism versus holism – Making decisions are clearly quite complex procedures. It can be helpful to reduce decision-making to a variety of classifications but in doing so this may be losing the human and more whimsical aspects of everyday life. 8(b) • Determinism versus free-will – Having theories that are deterministic can be extremely helpful as it does allow predictions to be made. This could be helpful for sellers of, for example, washing machines or computers to know that people will tend to use certain predictable strategies. However, in decision-making there must be aspects that are less predictable and open to free-will. • Idiographic versus nomothetic – All of the strategies for decision-making seem to be geared towards establishing general laws and are thus nomothetic. This same decision making could be explored idiographically by getting a consumer to explain their choices to an interviewer. Additional issues candidates may include • Generalisations • Individual versus situational Other appropriate responses should also be credited. Section C: Health Psychology

This question in 9990/32 Oct/Nov 2025

5 Abdul wants to purchase a chair from a website. The website is designed so that comparisons between items are not easy to make. Suggest two decision‑making strategies Abdul is likely to use when purchasing his chair. [4]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 5 Abdul wants to purchase a chair from a website. The website is designed so that 4 Heuristics – yes and utility comparisons between items are not easy to make. theory Suggest two decision-making strategies Abdul is likely to use when purchasing his chair. Syllabus reference: Decision-making strategies applied to internet shopping focusing on website design, including a study, e.g. Jedetski et al (2002). For each suggestion: 1 mark for naming/outlining a non-compensatory strategy 1 mark for detail including context of buying a chair Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded. Likely content: • Customers more likely to use non-compensatory strategies when comparisons are not easy to make • Non-compensatory strategies include satisficing, elimination by aspects, lexigraphic • Satisficing is when first product that meets basic requirements is chosen and no further consideration takes place. • Elimination by aspects is when the consumer uses a cut-off value for those that meet this, a second attribute is considered etc. • Lexigraphic is when the most important attribute is evaluated and if one item is seen to be superior in this attribute this stops the decision-making process. • Could also use partially compensatory strategies such as majority of conforming dimensions and frequency of good and bad features. • Anchoring – give most importance to first piece of information received. Examples: Abdul may decide that the most important feature of the chair is its design (1). When he looks on the website, he sees a chair that has the most attractive design, he selects this chair and does not consider any others (1). This is a lexigraphic non-compensatory strategy of decision-making. Abdul may think that a sturdy, comfortable-looking chair made of wood are his basic requirements (1). He sees a chair that meets these basic requirements and selects that one (1). This is satisficing (1).

This question in 9990/33 Oct/Nov 2025

6 (a) Outline what is meant by ‘determinism’, including an example from choice heuristics. [2] (b) Explain one strength of using the determinism side of the determinism versus free‑will debate to understand choice heuristics. [2]

4 marks

Mark scheme: 6(a) Outline what is meant by determinism, including an example from choice heuristics. 2 1 mark – definition of determinism 1 mark – link to a choice heuristic. Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded Example: Determinism is the extent to which behaviour is due to internal or external factors (1). For example, anchoring is a heuristic that says we pay attention to the first piece of information we receive. This is deterministic because we do not appear able to exercise free will over this heuristic (1). This could be because choice heuristics, being mental shortcuts, are beneficial for us in making decisions (1). 6(b) Explain one strength of using the determinism side of the determinism versus free-will 2 debate to understand choice heuristics. 1 mark for strength of determinism 1 mark for reference to choice heuristics. Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded Likely answers: • Determinism gives rise to causal explanations. Causal relationships can be investigated scientifically. • Determinism allows us to make predictions about peoples’ future behaviour. • Determinism allows us to make generalisations about behaviour and form laws (nomothetic). • Determinism in choice heuristics allows us to see the utility in them. They exist for the purpose of providing a short-cut in reaching decisions. Example: One strength of determinism is that it can allow us to make predictions about peoples’ behaviour (1). For example, representative heuristics predict that if a product looks like a well-known high quality market leader then this determines that we will tend to think this new product is also high quality (1). This is also useful to product developers who will then tend to make sure their new product is as similar to say, the leading brand of Nike trainers, leading consumers to view those trainers more favourably and buying them.

This question in 9990/33 Oct/Nov 2025

7 Supermarket shoppers do not all behave in the same way. Shoppers can be categorised into five types based on their different spatial behaviour patterns. Zelda visits all of the aisles of the supermarket when she does her main shopping. However, Louis spends a short time in the supermarket and visits only a few aisles. (a) (i) Identify which type of shopper spatial behaviour pattern would be most appropriate to describe: • Zelda • Louis. [2] (ii) Frank is a different type of shopper from Zelda and Louis. He shows a different spatial behaviour pattern. Suggest how Frank could behave in the supermarket. [2] (b) Explain one problem that psychologists may have when investigating shoppers’ spatial behaviour patterns. [2]

6 marks

Mark scheme: 7 Supermarket shoppers do not all behave in the same way. Shoppers can be categorised into five types based on their different spatial behaviour patterns. Zelda visits all of the aisles of the supermarket when she does her main shopping. However, Louis spends a short time in the supermarket and visits only a few aisles. 7(a)(i) Identify which type of shopper spatial behaviour pattern would be most appropriate to 2 describe: • Zelda • Louis Syllabus content: Shopper behaviour focusing on spatial movement patterns including types of trip (short, round, central and wave) and the five types of spatial behaviour patterns (specialist, native, tourist, explorer, raider); the use of CCTV tracking, including a study, e.g. Gil et al. (2009). Award 1 mark for each correctly identified type of behaviour pattern. Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded Likely answers • Zelda – native or explorer (or ‘likes to explore’) • Louis – tourist or raider 7(a)(ii) Frank is a different type of shopper from Zelda and Louis. He shows a different spatial 2 Frank should not be behaviour pattern. described as undertaking either of the behaviour Suggest how Frank could behave in the supermarket. patterns identified in (i) 1 mark – named/brief outline of behaviour Could also credit type of trip – 1 mark – detailed outline of behaviour (clearly obvious about the type of spatial behaviour short, round, central, wave if pattern) described for 1 mark The type of spatial behaviour patterns does not need to be stated but the description needs to be clear as different to Zelda and Louis. Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded Likely answers: Specialist – Focus on a few products but spending time on these (not necessarily purchasing), mostly to ‘top-up’ shopping or for non-foods Native (if not used for Zelda) – Long trip visiting relevant aisles and most likely leading to purchases Tourist (if not used for Louis) – Fast-moving and not straying very far from the entrance. They look to buy. Explorer (if not used for Zelda) – a very long trip, visiting all aisles and some more than once, spending a lot of time and money in the supermarket Raider (if not used for Louis) – Fast movements and decisions, perhaps looking at a ‘food for tonight’ mission. Examples: Frank is an explorer (1). He has a shopping list with him and his trip is very long (1). He visits every aisle and spends a lot of money in the supermarket as this is his main shopping trip (1). Frank goes into the supermarket to look for a few specific items (1). He spends time considering his purchases and may not actually buy many of the things he looks at (1). This is a specialist (1). 7(b) Explain one problem that psychologists may have when investigating shoppers’ spatial 2 movement patterns. 1 mark – basic problem 1 mark – reference to shoppers’ spatial movement patterns Annotate with ticks to show where marks awarded Likely problems • Demand characteristics – if people see that they are being investigated then they may change their behaviour • Shoppers may demonstrate multiple shopper characteristics simultaneously – difficult to classify • Shoppers could be a specialist in one store but a tourist in another – how representative is the finding? • Ethics – making observations without consent Examples: One problem with investigating shoppers’ behaviour patterns may be that shoppers do not behave consistently over time or in different stores (1), this means that the findings may not be representative / or may lack meaning (1). For example, in a supermarket that is familiar, a customer may be very predictable and always shop as a specialist but in another store behave as a raider (1). As a result finding could lack validity and usefulness (1). One problem with investigating shoppers’ behaviour patterns is due to the ethics of lack of consent (1) because the shopper has not given permission for their shopping behaviour to be observed and measured (1). If consent had been asked for this would potentially mean that the shopper behaved differently leading to a lack of validity. Other appropriate responses should also be credited.

This question in 9990/33 Oct/Nov 2025