Validity: past paper questions
Real questions on validity
The newest 20 of 71 written questions. Open one to see it on the real paper.
- 9990/31 · May/June 2026 · Q10b[2]
Explain one reason why the clinical interview to measure pain uses the idiographic approach.
See it on the paper → - 9990/41 · May/June 2026 · Q1b[2]
Suggest one way in which the validity of this study could be tested.
See it on the paper → - 9990/42 · May/June 2026 · Q5c[4]
Explain one reason why generalisations can be made from this study and one reason why generalisations cannot be made from this study.
See it on the paper → - 9990/43 · May/June 2026 · Q1b[2]
Suggest one way in which the validity of this study could be tested.
See it on the paper → - 9990/21 · October/November 2025 · Q4a[2]
Explain one strength of using an independent measures design.
See it on the paper → - 9990/21 · October/November 2025 · Q4b[2]
Explain one weakness of using an independent measures design.
See it on the paper → - 9990/22 · October/November 2025 · Q8b(i)[2]
Explain one way this method of collecting data is valid.
See it on the paper → - 9990/22 · October/November 2025 · Q8b(ii)[2]
Explain one way this method of collecting data is not valid.
See it on the paper → - 9990/22 · October/November 2025 · Q9b[4]
Explain two strengths of the study you described in part (a). Do not refer to sampling or ethics in your answer.
See it on the paper → - 9990/23 · October/November 2025 · Q8b(i)[4]
Suggest why two possible differences between individuals in Group A and Group B could lower validity. difference difference
See it on the paper → - 9990/23 · October/November 2025 · Q8b(ii)[2]
For one of the differences you suggested in part (b)(i): Suggest how Dr Bakar could change her study to improve validity.
See it on the paper → - 9990/23 · October/November 2025 · Q8c(i)[1]
Suggest a suitable control group for Dr Bakar’s study.
See it on the paper → - 9990/23 · October/November 2025 · Q8c(ii)[1]
Explain why the control group you suggested in part (c)(i) is suitable.
See it on the paper → - 9990/23 · October/November 2025 · Q9b[2]
Suggest one problem with validity that Daniel may have because he is only using adults in his study, other than generalisability. Section B Answer all questions.
See it on the paper → - 9990/23 · October/November 2025 · Q10b[4]
Explain how two features of the procedure you described in part (a) help to make the study valid. Do not refer to ethics in your answer.
See it on the paper → - 9990/42 · October/November 2025 · Q1b[2]
Suggest how the validity of one of these measures could be tested.
See it on the paper → - 9990/42 · October/November 2025 · Q2c[4]
Explain two reasons why generalisations cannot be made about feeling-states from one study. Consumer Psychology Answer all questions if you have studied this option.
See it on the paper → - 9990/21 · May/June 2025 · Q8a(i)[2]
Explain one problem about validity or reliability that Josie could have with one of her measures of tidiness.
See it on the paper → - 9990/21 · May/June 2025 · Q8b[2]
The hypothesis that Josie is testing is correlational. Explain which one of the measures of tidiness in part (a) is not suitable for Josie to use in her correlation.
See it on the paper → - 9990/21 · May/June 2025 · Q8c(i)[2]
Explain what Josie will conclude about her correlation.
See it on the paper →
What examiners said
This two-mark question asked candidates to explain why the withdrawal of two participants (in Holzel et al.) could have reduced the validity of the study. To achieve the two marks candidate responses needed to explain why the withdrawal will have a negative effect on the study (i.e., mean a smaller sample size) and then provide some detail of why their explanation would have an effect on the valid...
— Examiner report, February/March 2025, 9990/22 Q3 (Cambridge)
This two-mark question asked candidates to suggest one way that the performance test (in Fagen et al.) could have lacked validity. Candidates needed to justify their answer. To achieve two marks candidate responses needed to: • Make a suggestion as to why it may not be valid • Justify their suggestion. Unfortunately, candidate responses for this question were a little muddled and often did not r...
— Examiner report, February/March 2025, 9990/22 Q5(a) (Cambridge)
This one-mark question asked candidates to suggest one way that the validity of the performance test could have been improved. To achieve the two marks candidate responses needed to make an appropriate suggestion only. Inevitably the strength of responses for part (b) was directly related to how the candidates had responded to part (a). If part (a) was incorrect it was very likely that part (b) w...
— Examiner report, February/March 2025, 9990/22 Q5(b) (Cambridge)
Past papers, syllabus and examiner reports © UCLES (Cambridge University Press & Assessment). Questions are matched to topics from the official syllabus. AssessPro is independent and not endorsed by Cambridge.