9990 · Cambridge International A Level
9990/12
Approaches, Issues and Debates
Psychology · June 2024 · Variant 2
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: Cambridge Assessment International Education
3.4 / 5
240
360 min
Research Methods and Practical Application
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
240
Duration
360 min
Session difficulty
3.4 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
A significant proportion of marks is concentrated in AO2 (Application) and AO3 (Analysis and Evaluation).
In Paper 12, the 8-mark comparison question (comparing Fagen et al.
and Bandura et al.) and the 10-mark essay on Baron-Cohen et al.
serve as major differentiators.
Question difficulty map
How candidates performed on each question in this series
No data available in official reports
Assessment objectives
Skill and AO weighting from official examiner commentary
Skill weighting
Shows the skill mix this paper tested most heavily.
Knowledge andAO2
Weight: 3100%Application oAO3
Weight: 267%Analysis and
Weight: 133%
Method marks watchlist
Where working, steps, or method marks were commonly lost
No data available in official reports
Recurring mistakes across years
Themes examiners flag in multiple recent sessions for this subject
No data available in official reports
Question choice intelligence
Mean scores and popularity for optional questions (HKDSE electives)
No data available in official reports
Level exemplars
What candidate scripts at each grade level looked like
No data available in official reports
Grade & admission context
How marks relate to grade thresholds and entry standards
Report type
Cambridge Principal Examiner Report — component performance and international standards
Level A*
Approx. 65% of maximum mark
Level A
Approx. 58% of maximum mark
Level B
Approx. 51% of maximum mark
Level C
Approx. 44% of maximum mark
Level D
Approx. 37% of maximum mark
Level E
Approx. 30% of maximum mark
Deep insights
What top candidates did
Techniques and approaches examiners rewarded in this series
No data available in official reports
Command word playbook
How to match each command word to the expected response style
Give reasons and link mechanism to outcome; each point needs a because/so chain.
State features in sequence or list observable properties — do not explain causes unless asked.
Apply knowledge to an unfamiliar context; concise, practical points score best.
Match the expected response style for “Outline” questions.
Name or point to the specific feature asked for — avoid extra explanation.
Weigh arguments for and against with evidence; end with a supported judgement.
Time traps
Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks
Min per mark: 1.5
Min per mark: 1.5
Min per mark: 1.5
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
Research Methods General Principles and Application
45 marks this session
Fagen et al. (elephant learning) (Learning approach)
12 marks this session
Baron-Cohen et al. (eyes test) (Cognitive approach)
12 marks this session
Stress (Health Psychology)
12 marks this session
Impulse control disorders (Clinical Psychology)
12 marks this session
MCQ trap analytics
Commonly chosen wrong options from examiner commentary
No data available in official reports
Topic heatmap across years
Mark concentration by topic and exam year for this subject
Mark intensity
Research Methods
Organisational work conditions
Consumer decision-making
Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) (Clinical Psychology)
Mood (affective) disorders: depressive disorder (unipolar) and bipolar disorder
Pain
Andrade (doodling)
The physical environment (Consumer Psychology)
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
Paper 12: Approaches, Issues and Debates:
Paper 22: Research Methods:
Paper 32: Specialist Options: Approaches, Issues and Debates:
Paper 42: Specialist Options: Application and Research Methods:
Marks you can still earn
Where valid approaches outside the mark scheme may still gain credit
No data available in official reports
Practise what examiners flagged
Target weak topics from this report inside the Revui app
Research Methods General Principles and Application
45 marks this session
Practise in RevuiFagen et al. (elephant learning) (Learning approach)
12 marks this session
Practise in RevuiBaron-Cohen et al. (eyes test) (Cognitive approach)
12 marks this session
Practise in RevuiStress (Health Psychology)
12 marks this session
Practise in RevuiImpulse control disorders (Clinical Psychology)
12 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
A significant proportion of marks is concentrated in AO2 (Application) and AO3 (Analysis and Evaluation).
- 2Message
In Paper 12, the 8-mark comparison question (comparing Fagen et al.
- 3Message
and Bandura et al.) and the 10-mark essay on Baron-Cohen et al.
- 4Message
serve as major differentiators.
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
June 2024 2024
Psychology
A significant proportion of marks is concentrated in AO2 (Application) and AO3 (Analysis and Evaluation). In Paper 12, the 8-mark comparison question (comparing Fagen et al. and Bandura et al.) and the 10-mark essay on Baron-Cohen et al. serve as major differentiators. In Paper 2
A significant proportion of marks is concentrated in AO2 (Application) and AO3 (Analysis and Evaluation).
In Paper 12, the 8-mark comparison question (comparing Fagen et al.
and Bandura et al.) and the 10-mark essay on Baron-Cohen et al.
- Total marks
- 240
- Duration
- 360 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.4 / 5
Session analysis
A significant proportion of marks is concentrated in AO2 (Application) and AO3 (Analysis and Evaluation). In Paper 12, the 8-mark comparison question (comparing Fagen et al. and Bandura et al.) and the 10-mark essay on Baron-Cohen et al. serve as major differentiators. In Paper 22, the 10-mark planning question (Chloe's canteen observation) carries substantial weight. Candidates who did not clearly outline the four mandatory features (participant observation, overt/covert, naturalistic/controlled, and structured/unstructured) in their designs automatically capped their scores. For Specialist Options (Papers 32 and 42), the main mark-yield lies in the detailed description of treatments (like ECT and CBT for Schizophrenia) and the systematic application of models (such as the Health Belief Model or McClelland's Achievement Theory).
Updated Jun 12, 2026
Paper breakdown
Paper 12: Approaches, Issues and Debates:
Paper 22: Research Methods:
Paper 32: Specialist Options: Approaches, Issues and Debates:
Paper 42: Specialist Options: Application and Research Methods:
Top chapters
Exam structure insights
Marks by chapter
See where the marks were concentrated so revision time goes to the highest-value topics.
Mark accessibility
Estimate which marks were basic, mid-level, or high-difficulty.
79% within easy or medium reach
Command word frequency
Spot common command words so answers match the expected response style.
Question type mix
Compare the mark share of each paper section and question type.
Structured/Medium Answer
(4-6 marks)
100·20·42%
Short Answer
(1-3 marks)
80·50·33%
Extended Response/Planning
(8-10 marks)
60·6·25%
Study ROI
Bigger bubbles recur more often; higher bubbles carry more marks, helping you rank revision priorities.
Difficulty trend
Compare difficulty across recent years.
Time vs marks
Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.
Paper 12 Approaches
0.67 m/minPaper 22 Research M…
0.67 m/minPaper 32 Specialists
0.67 m/minTotal marks
180
Total time
270 min
Avg pace
0.67
Next-year prediction
Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.
Milgram (obedience) Ethics & Variations
90%90%
Saavedra and Silverman (button phobia)
85%85%
Hölzel et al. (mindfulness) Biological Correlates
80%80%
Examiner notes & key calculations
- The 'Generic Answer' Trap: Examiners repeatedly penalize candidates who give textbook definitions of terms (e.g., 'case study' or 'situational variable') without linking them directly to the target study (such as Saavedra and Silverman or Daku's obedience study).
- Misunderstanding Ethics: On the Baron-Cohen et al. evaluation essay, many candidates lost marks by discussing ethical guidelines (such as right to withdraw, deception, or debriefing) that are not actually addressed in the original journal paper. Stick to minimizing harm and informed consent.
- Weakness of Planning: When planning studies in Paper 42, candidates frequently forget to provide concrete examples of the questions they would ask or fail to fully describe the format of their rating scales (e.g., specifying a 1-5 Likert scale with labeled anchors).
Exam tips
Paper format
- Duration
- 1h 30min
- Total marks
- 60
- Weighting
- 25%
- Question types
- Short Answer (Recall/Outline), Essay / Evaluation (AO3)
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.