AQA A-level Psychology 2 2017 © Hodder & Stoughton Limited

7 Eating behaviour

ASSESSMENT CHECK 19:

7.1–7.2 Eating behaviour – Explanations for food preferences & Neural and hormonal mechanisms involved in the control

of eating (page 244)

1 Leptin is a hormone produced by fat cells; it is associated with the regulation of energy intake and expenditure. Leptin is released into the bloodstream to signal to the hypothalamus brain area that calorific storage is high, and subsequently it has the effect of decreasing appetite. When calorific storage is low, fat cells stop producing leptin and when the hypothalamus detects this the sensation of hunger is created and thus appetite is stimulated.

2 ‘Discuss’ means to outline and evaluate, in this instance the role of learning in food preference. There are 6 marks available here for an outline of the role of learning and 10 marks available for the evaluation of it. About 20 minutes should be spent constructing the answer, of which about 7½ minutes should be spent on the outline and 12½ minutes on the evaluation. For the average student this equates to about 150 to 185 words for the outlining and 250 to 310 words for the evaluation.

Probably the best way to construct an answer would be firstly to outline the role of learning in food preference and then to provide an evaluation of it.

The outline could be constructed by describing how learning experiences shape food preferences, such as by reducing neophobia. Marks awarded would depend on the accuracy, relevance and clarity of the description and the degree of elaboration (detail). For example, by detailing the role of social influences in how the impact of others affects an individual’s food preferences, and by detailing how cultural influences lead to the transmission of food preferences.

The evaluation would probably centre on the degree of research support for the role of learning in food preferences. For social influences, Birch’s (1992) study of the impact of a mother’s food preferences on her children would be useful, as would Mennella & Beauchamp’s (1996) study of how foodstuffs eaten in pregnancy shape resultant children’s preferences and Zimmerman’s (1980) study of using foodstuffs as rewards for good behaviour. For cultural influences, Bourdieu’s (1984) study of working class food preferences would be useful, as would Menella’s (2005) study of the influence of culture in developing a sweet taste preference and Lanfer’s (2013) study of taste preferences in eight European countries.

Additional evaluation could be formed from critical analysis of the role of learning in general terms, such as cultural eating practices often reflecting local environmental conditions. If comparisons were made with other explanations for food preferences,

1

AQA A-level Psychology 2 2017 © Hodder & Stoughton Limited

7 Eating behaviour

such as the evolutionary explanation, this would be creditworthy only if used to highlight strengths and weaknesses of the role of learning.

Evaluative material focused on methodological criticisms, such as the difficulties in generalising from animal studies (which are often used to assess the role of learning), would be relevant only if focused on the role of learning in food preferences.

Remember that the most effective evaluation is created from a number of evaluative points being woven together to form a sophisticated commentary, rather than being a series of unconnected evaluative points.

3 Evolutionary explanations see food preferences as being inherited. – True

Taste aversion concerns an innate tendency to dislike certain foods. – True

4 One limitation of using non-human animals in such research is that as their physiology and cognitive processes are often very different to humans, which presents problems generalising the findings to humans.

Another limitation is that of ethical issues, especially harm. Similar research on humans might not be seen as ethical, due to the level of physical and psychological distress generated, so some argue that it should not be ethical to perform the research on animals either.

5 i) Evolutionary explanations of food preferences see bitter tastes as not being preferred as bitter tastes often indicate the presence of toxins in food. This then would have a survival value in protecting us from consuming toxins. Velvet exhibits this evolutionary food preference, as she is unable to swallow the medicine given to her by her father, as it tastes bitter and so she has an innate inability to swallow it.

ii) Velvet’s medicine could be altered by adding a sweetener to it so that she could swallow it. This would disguise the bitter taste so that it did not appear toxic. The sweet taste would appeal to her innate sweet taste preference, which would suggest the medicine was toxin-free and rich in energy, supplying calories.

2

AQA A-level Psychology 2 2017 © Hodder & Stoughton Limited

7 Eating behaviour

ASSESSMENT CHECK 20:

7.3–7.4 Eating behaviour – Biological explanations for anorexia nervosa & Psychological explanations

for anorexia nervosa (page 255)

1 The family systems theory sees anorexia nervosa as arising from dysfunctional patterns of interaction within families, especially those concerning emotional connections. Enmeshment is an important part of this, where a family’s interactive style inhibits individual members’ sense of individuality. This is true of Janice, as her parents are very protective of her, with her mother buying all her clothes. Her individuality is also inhibited by her family tending to do everything together. Janice may have gone on to develop anorexia nervosa as an attempt to divert attention on to her and away from her arguing parents in order to save their marriage.

2 ‘Discuss’ means to outline and evaluate, in this instance biological explanations of anorexia nervosa. There are 6 marks available here for an outline of biological explanations of anorexia nervosa and 10 marks available for the evaluation of them. About 20 minutes should be spent constructing the answer, of which about 7½ minutes should be spent on the outline and 12½ minutes on the evaluation. For the average student this equates to about 150 to 185 words for the outlining and 250 to 310 words for the evaluation.

The wording of the question means that at least two biological explanations must be covered. If more than two explanations were covered then less depth and detail would be expected than if just two explanations were featured. Probably the best way to construct an answer would be firstly to outline one biological explanation, such as the genetic explanation, and evaluate it, and then to repeat the process for one or more further biological explanations.

The outline could be constructed by describing how two or more biological explanations view the development of anorexia, such as the genetic explanation seeing the disorder as having an inherited component, neural explanations seeing the disorder as resulting from abnormally functioning brain mechanisms, and the evolutionary explanation perceiving anorexia as having an adaptive survival value. Marks awarded would depend on the accuracy, relevance and clarity of the descriptions and the degree of elaboration (detail). For example, by detailing specific brain areas associated with the disorder, such as the insula brain area.

The evaluation would probably centre on the degree of research support for the explanations. Bulik’s (2006) Swedish twin study would be useful for evaluating the genetic explanation, as would Kortegaard’s (2001) Danish twin study and Hakonarson’s (2010) DNA study. For the neural explanation, Oberndorfer’s (2013)

1

AQA A-level Psychology 2 2017 © Hodder & Stoughton Limited

7 Eating behaviour

fMRI scan study of brain areas associated with anorexia would be useful, as would Mayo-Smith’s (1989) study of leptin levels in females and Nunn’s (2012) study of the association between noradrenaline and anorexia.

Additional evaluation could be formed from critical analysis of the model in general terms, such as abnormal biochemistry possibly being an effect rather than a cause of the disorder. Evaluation based on practical applications could focus on the effectiveness of biological treatments, such as drug therapies.

Evaluative material focused on methodological and ethical criticisms, such as the problems of generalising findings from female samples to male sufferers, would be relevant only if focused on the validity of the theory.

Remember that the most effective evaluation is created from a number of evaluative points being woven together to form a sophisticated commentary, rather than being a series of unconnected evaluative points.

3 Neural explanations see anorexia nervosa as resulting from abnormally functioning brain mechanisms. The insula brain area in the cerebral cortex especially is seen as being different in those with anorexia nervosa.

4 SLT sees anorexia nervosa as occurring through vicarious reinforcement.

5 A Spearman’s rho test could be used. Reasons for selection of this test are that a correlational design has been used, a relationship is being sought between sets of data, and the data is of at least ordinal level.

2

AQA A-level Psychology 2 2017 © Hodder & Stoughton Limited

7 Eating behaviour

ASSESSMENT CHECK 21:

7.5–7.6 Eating behaviour – Biological explanations for obesity & Psychological explanations for obesity (page 265)

1 Restraint theory sees weight increase, and even obesity, as resulting from placing unsustainable limits on food intake. This occurs because dieting in this way can create negative mood states, increase hunger and thus result in a loss of motivation to diet and ultimately in over-eating. Paul exhibits this, as while trying to stick to his diet he became quite depressed and anxious and was hungry all the time. His motivation crumbled, he gave in to temptation and ate so many calories that he put on weight.

2 Neural explanation sees faulty functioning of the hypothalamus as being associated with the development of obesity. – True

Neural explanation sees obesity as resulting from abnormally functioning brain mechanisms. – True

3 a) Mode = 4

b) Mean = 3

4 One reason for the success of dieting is relapse-prevention. This involves achieving a stable energy balance around a new lower weight. This is achieved by dieters identifying situations in which lapses might occur and learning to how to re-focus if and when they do lapse, so that they can return to their dieting regime and retain their motivation to lose weight.

5 There are 6 marks available here for an outline of the genetic explanation for obesity and 10 marks available for the evaluation of it. About 20 minutes should be spent constructing the answer, of which about 7½ minutes should be spent on the outline and 12½ minutes on the evaluation. For the average student this equates to about 150 to 185 words for the outlining and 250 to 310 words for the evaluation.

Probably the best way to construct an answer would be firstly to outline the explanation and then to provide an evaluation of it.

The outline could be constructed by describing how the genetic explanation sees obesity as having an inherited component to it. Marks awarded would depend on the accuracy, relevance and clarity of the description and the degree of elaboration (detail). For example, by detailing the belief that rather than there being a single ‘obesity gene’, there are instead several genes that contribute to an individual’s genetic vulnerability to the condition. Explaining how twin, adoption and gene profiling studies work in assessing the role of genetics would also be creditworthy.

1

AQA A-level Psychology 2 2017 © Hodder & Stoughton Limited

7 Eating behaviour

The evaluation would probably centre on the degree of research support for the explanation. Stunkard’s (1990) twin study of the incidence of obesity would be useful here, as would Sorensen & Stunkard’s (1994) study that assessed the degree of obesity in adopted children and their adoptive and biological parents, as well as Frayling’s (2007) study of the FTO gene and its incidence in obese people.

Additional evaluation could be formed from critical analysis of the explanation in general terms, such as genes not being able to account for the recent upsurge in obesity levels. Comparison with other explanations, both biological (such as neural explanations) and psychological (such as the restraint theory), would be creditworthy only if used to highlight strengths and weaknesses of the genetic explanation.

Evaluative material focused on methodological and ethical criticisms, such as the danger of harm when using obese people as participants, would be relevant only if focused on the validity of the explanation.

Remember that the most effective evaluation is created from a number of evaluative points being woven together to form a sophisticated commentary, rather than being a series of unconnected evaluative points.

2