How A Level Psychology (9990) is really marked

Psychology 9990 runs across six papers: Papers 1–2 (theory, multiple-choice-plus-structured) and Papers 3–4 (specialism and issues/methods). The syllabus is a genuine mix of marking styles — 1,282 questions are points-marked, 176 are points-with-levels, and 187 are pure-levels — so whether an answer is banked point-by-point or judged by overall quality depends heavily on which part of the paper you're in.

Shorter parts of structured questions (outlining a study, identifying a feature, giving a result) are points-marked: the mark scheme lists specific acceptable content and you either include it or you don't. But evaluation and discussion questions — asking you to assess a theory, debate, or issue — shift into points-with-levels or pure-levels territory, especially on Papers 3 and 4, where pure-levels questions make up a large share of the total (48 questions on Paper 31 alone, for instance, are points-with-levels, with more pure-levels questions on Papers 32, 33, 41, 42 and 43).

This matters practically: in a levels-marked answer, listing several disconnected evaluation points without developing any of them into a proper argument caps you in a low band, however many points you list. The mark scheme is reading for depth of analysis and clear linkage to the named study or context, not point-count.

Where candidates actually lose marks

Each point below comes from the official Cambridge examiner reports on specific past-paper questions in our bank — follow the link to try the question it was written about.

• In treatment-evaluation questions, giving the side effects of a treatment when the question part asked how the treatment works, or writing lengthy descriptions of symptoms that aren't what's being asked for. (try the question)
• In evaluation/discussion questions, covering many different issues briefly rather than developing one or two in depth — spreading across issues prevents analysis, and simply asserting a treatment 'is reductionist' without explaining why caps the answer at a low level. (try the question)
• Misunderstanding a technical term in the question (e.g. what a 'jingle slogan' actually is) and designing an answer around the wrong concept as a result. (try the question)
• Explaining a weakness correctly in general terms but not linking it back to evidence from the specific study named in the question, which limits credit to the identification mark only. (try the question)
• Giving a strength of the study as a whole when the question specifically asked for a strength of the sample (or vice versa) — the answer has to match exactly what was asked about. (try the question)
• Suggesting a method the question has explicitly ruled out (e.g. suggesting self-report methods when the question asked for something other than self-report). (try the question)
• Giving a strength and a weakness of a method without relating either to the specific context in the question, so no application marks can be awarded even though the general point is correct. (try the question)
• Writing an answer that just repeats the wording of the question back (a tautological answer) instead of adding any actual content — this receives no credit. (try the question)
• In an 'outline the theories' question, naming the theories or listing model components without any explanation of what they involve, or describing unrelated parts of the syllabus instead of the three theories actually named in the question. (try the question)
• In a discussion question, describing an alternative measurement method fully rather than using description only as supporting evidence within an evaluative argument — pure description does not earn marks in these questions. (try the question)

Command words in AS & A Level Psychology

How to revise with past papers

Because Psychology 9990 splits between points-marked and levels-marked sections, past-paper practice should treat these two skills separately. For points-marked parts, drill precision: does your answer match exactly what the question part is asking (the sample, not the study; the method, not the finding), since answers that drift onto adjacent but wrong content lose marks even when they're accurate in themselves.

For levels-marked evaluation and discussion questions, resist the urge to list many issues briefly. Practise developing one or two evaluation points into a full argument, explicitly linked to the named study, theory or scenario in the question — this is what separates a low-band answer from a high-band one, regardless of how many points you could technically list.

This is generic advice but worth stating plainly for an essay-inclusive subject like this: time your Section C or discussion answers deliberately rather than letting them run over, since a rushed final third of an essay often loses more marks than a slightly shorter but fully developed one.

← All AS & A Level Psychology papers and topics