9990 · Cambridge International AS Level
9990/11
Approaches, Issues and Debates
Psychology · June 2024 · Variant 1
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: Cambridge Assessment International Education
3.5 / 5
120
180 min
Research Methods & Experimental Design
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
120
Duration
180 min
Session difficulty
3.5 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
The May/June 2024 session for Psychology (9990) Papers 11 and 21 falls into a solid medium-to-hard difficulty band (Difficulty Index 3.5).
While standard factual recall was rewarded generously in the opening sections, the analytical weight of Paper 11's comparison task and Paper 21's experimental design scenario separated top-tier candidates from the rest.
Key hurdles included the demanding requirements of designing a valid case study for autistic doodling and navigating fine-grained distinctions in animal research ethics.
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 & RAO2
Weight: 4100%Analysis & Evaluation
Weight: 375%CoAO3
Weight: 250%Research
Weight: 125%
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. 64% of maximum mark
Level B
Approx. 58% of maximum mark
Level C
Approx. 52% of maximum mark
Level D
Approx. 45% of maximum mark
Level E
Approx. 38% of maximum mark
Deep insights
What top candidates did
Techniques and approaches examiners rewarded in this series
Overall Paper Difficulty Verdict
The May/June 2024 session for Psychology (9990) Papers 11 and 21 falls into a solid medium-to-hard difficulty band (Difficulty Index 3.5). While standard factual recall was rewarded generously in the opening sections, the analytical weight of Paper 11's comparison task and Paper 21's experimental design scenario separated top-tier candidates from the rest. Key hurdles included the demanding requir
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.
Match the expected response style for “Outline” questions.
Name or point to the specific feature asked for — avoid extra explanation.
Apply knowledge to an unfamiliar context; concise, practical points score best.
State features in sequence or list observable properties — do not explain causes unless asked.
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: 1.8
Min per mark: 1.6
Min per mark: 1.4
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
Dement and Kleitman (sleep and dreams)
16 marks this session
Pozzulo et al. (line-ups)
13 marks this session
Fagen et al. (elephant learning)
10 marks this session
Research Methods (General Core)
45 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 (Scenario and Design)
Research Methods (General Core)
Dement and Kleitman (sleep and dreams)
Milgram (obedience) (Social approach)
Pozzulo et al. (line-ups)
Andrade (doodling) (Cognitive approach)
Fagen et al. (elephant learning)
Bandura et al. (aggression)
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
Paper 11 Approaches, Issues and Debates:
Paper 21 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
Dement and Kleitman (sleep and dreams)
16 marks this session
Practise in RevuiPozzulo et al. (line-ups)
13 marks this session
Practise in RevuiFagen et al. (elephant learning)
10 marks this session
Practise in RevuiResearch Methods (General Core)
45 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
The May/June 2024 session for Psychology (9990) Papers 11 and 21 falls into a solid medium-to-hard difficulty band (Difficulty Index 3.5).
- 2Message
While standard factual recall was rewarded generously in the opening sections, the analytical weight of Paper 11's comparison task and Paper 21's experimental design scenario separated top-tier candidates from the rest.
- 3Message
Key hurdles included the demanding requirements of designing a valid case study for autistic doodling and navigating fine-grained distinctions in animal research ethics.
- 4Strength
Overall Paper Difficulty Verdict: The May/June 2024 session for Psychology (9990) Papers 11 and 21 falls into a solid medium-to-hard d
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
June 2024 2024
Psychology
The May/June 2024 session for Psychology (9990) Papers 11 and 21 falls into a solid medium-to-hard difficulty band (Difficulty Index 3.5). While standard factual recall was rewarded generously in the opening sections, the analytical weight of Paper 11's comparison task and Paper
The May/June 2024 session for Psychology (9990) Papers 11 and 21 falls into a solid medium-to-hard difficulty band (Difficulty Index 3.5).
While standard factual recall was rewarded generously in the opening sections, the analytical weight of Paper 11's comparison task and Paper 21's experimental design scenario separated top-tier candidates from the rest.
Key hurdles included the demanding requirements of designing a valid case study for autistic doodling and navigating fine-grained distinctions in animal research ethics.
- Total marks
- 120
- Duration
- 180 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.5 / 5
Session analysis
The May/June 2024 session for Psychology (9990) Papers 11 and 21 falls into a solid medium-to-hard difficulty band (Difficulty Index 3.5). While standard factual recall was rewarded generously in the opening sections, the analytical weight of Paper 11's comparison task and Paper 21's experimental design scenario separated top-tier candidates from the rest. Key hurdles included the demanding requirements of designing a valid case study for autistic doodling and navigating fine-grained distinctions in animal research ethics.
Updated Jun 12, 2026
Paper breakdown
Paper 11 Approaches, Issues and Debates:
Paper 21 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.
75% 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.
Short Answer
60·33·50%
Structured
32·7·27%
Extended Response
28·3·23%
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 11 Section A
0.70 m/minPaper 11 Section B
0.63 m/minPaper 21 Section B
0.57 m/minTotal marks
80
Total time
125 min
Avg pace
0.64
Next-year prediction
Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.
Saavedra and Silverman (button phobia)
88%88%
Schizophrenia (Clinical Psychology)
82%82%
Hölzel et al. (mindfulness and brain scans)
78%78%
Overall Paper Difficulty Verdict
The May/June 2024 session for Psychology (9990) Papers 11 and 21 falls into a solid medium-to-hard difficulty band (Difficulty Index 3.5). While standard factual recall was rewarded generously in the opening sections, the analytical weight of Paper 11's comparison task and Paper 21's experimental design scenario separated top-tier candidates from the rest. Key hurdles included the demanding requirements of designing a valid case study for autistic doodling and navigating fine-grained distinctions in animal research ethics.
Examiner notes & key calculations
- Vague Comparatives: On Hassett et al. (monkeys), writing 'played more' instead of specifying 'duration of play' meant zero marks. Always use exact variables.
- Independent Measures Confusion: Many candidates defined independent measures as having 'different conditions' rather than emphasizing that different participants or separate groups are used for each level of the IV.
- Graph-to-Table Errors: In Paper 21 Q5(c), students lost marks due to incomplete headings on their rendered tables. Header labels must fully denote the variable units, such as 'percentage correct identification' and 'type of target'.
Exam tips
Paper format
- Duration
- 1h 30min
- Total marks
- 60
- Weighting
- 50%
- Question types
- Structured Short Answer, Comparison Essay, Evaluation Essay
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.