📚 Year 11 SQA Psychology: Core Knowledge Overview | Year 11 SQA心理学核心知识点梳理
SQA National 5 Psychology gives learners a foundation in understanding human behaviour and the scientific methods used to study it. This guide covers the compulsory topics — Research Methods, Memory, Sleep and Dreams, Conformity and Obedience, and Non-Verbal Communication — with clear explanations of classic studies and key evaluation points. Use these notes to reinforce your knowledge ahead of the exam.
SQA国家5级心理学为学习者理解人类行为及研究行为的科学方法奠定了基础。本指南涵盖了必修主题——研究方法、记忆、睡眠与做梦、从众与服从以及非语言交流——并对经典研究和关键评估要点进行了清晰解释。请在考前用这些笔记巩固知识。
1. Course Overview and Assessment | 课程概览与评估
The SQA National 5 Psychology course is assessed through a question paper and an assignment. The question paper tests knowledge and understanding, application of psychological concepts, and the ability to analyse and evaluate research. The assignment allows students to investigate a topic in depth, applying research skills.
SQA国家5级心理学课程通过试卷和作业进行评估。试卷考查知识与理解、心理学概念的应用以及分析和评估研究的能力。作业则让学生深入研究一个主题，应用研究技能。
Candidates are expected to develop a critical understanding of methodology, ethics, and the implications of psychological explanations for society. Balanced evaluation — discussing strengths and weaknesses — is essential for high marks.
考生需要发展对方法论、伦理以及心理学解释对社会影响的批判性理解。平衡地评价——讨论优点和缺点——对于获得高分至关重要。
2. Research Methods: Aims, Hypotheses and Variables | 研究方法：目的、假设与变量
An aim is a general statement of what the researcher intends to investigate, such as 'to investigate whether background noise affects concentration'.
目的是关于研究者打算研究什么的一般陈述，例如“研究背景噪音是否影响注意力”。
A hypothesis is a precise, testable prediction. A directional (one‑tailed) hypothesis predicts the direction of the effect, e.g. 'There will be more words recalled in silence than in noise.' A non‑directional (two‑tailed) hypothesis simply predicts a difference without stating direction.
假设是一个精确、可检验的预测。方向性（单尾）假设预测效应的方向，例如“安静条件下回忆的单词会比噪音条件下更多”。非方向性（双尾）假设只预测存在差异而不说明方向。
The independent variable (IV) is what the researcher manipulates. The dependent variable (DV) is what is measured. Operationalisation means stating exactly how each variable is defined and measured, allowing replication.
自变量（IV）是研究者所操纵的因素。因变量（DV）是被测量的因素。操作化是指准确说明每个变量如何被界定和测量，以便重复实验。
3. Research Methods: Experimental Designs | 研究方法：实验设计
Independent groups design: different participants are allocated to each condition of the IV. Order effects are avoided, but individual differences may confound results. Random allocation helps control for participant variables.
独立组设计：不同的参与者被分配到自变量的各个条件。既可避免顺序效应，但又可能因个体差异混淆结果。随机分配有助于控制参与者变量。
Repeated measures design: the same participants take part in all conditions. This controls for participant variables, but order effects (practice, boredom) can occur. Counterbalancing can be used to minimise order effects.
重复测量设计：相同的参与者参加所有条件。这控制了参与者变量，但可能产生顺序效应（练习、厌倦）。可以使用平衡法来减小顺序效应。
Matched pairs design: participants are paired on key characteristics (e.g. age, IQ) before being split between conditions. It reduces individual differences, but matching is time‑consuming and can be imperfect.
配对组设计：参与者在分配到条件之前，先按关键特征（如年龄、智商）配对。它减少了个人差异，但匹配耗时且可能不完美。
4. Research Methods: Sampling and Ethics | 研究方法：抽样与伦理
Random sampling: every member of the target population has an equal chance of being selected. It is unbiased, but can be impractical.
随机抽样：目标人群中的每个成员都有均等的机会被选中。它没有偏差，但可能不切实际。
Opportunity sampling: selecting people who are readily available. It is quick, but likely to be representative of a narrow group.
机会抽样：选择现成可用的人。它快捷，但可能只代表一个狭窄的群体。
Volunteer sampling: participants self‑select. It is convenient, but may attract a particular type of person (volunteer bias).
志愿者抽样：参与者自我选择。它方便，但可能吸引特定类型的人（志愿者偏差）。
Ethical guidelines protect participants. The main principles include informed consent, the right to withdraw, protection from harm, confidentiality, and debriefing. Deception should be avoided unless justified and followed by full debrief.
伦理准则保护参与者，主要原则包括知情同意、退出权、免受伤害、保密和事后解释。除非有充分理由并在事后充分解释，否则应避免欺骗。
5. Memory: The Multi‑Store Model | 记忆：多储存模型
Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) proposed that memory consists of three stores: sensory memory, short‑term memory (STM), and long‑term memory (LTM). Information flows between them through attention and rehearsal.
Atkinson和Shiffrin（1968）提出记忆由三个储存库组成：感觉记忆、短时记忆（STM）和长时记忆（LTM）。信息通过注意力和复述在这些储存库之间流动。
Sensory memory holds information from the senses very briefly (about 0.25‑2 seconds) and has a very large capacity. If attention is paid, information passes to STM.
感觉记忆非常短暂地保持来自感官的信息（约0.25‑2秒），容量非常大。如果给予注意，信息就会进入STM。
STM has a limited capacity (7±2 chunks, according to Miller) and a duration of about 15‑ Coding is mainly acoustic. Rehearsal keeps information in STM and can transfer it to LTM.
STM的容量有限（根据Miller的研究，约为7±2个组块），在不进行复述的情况下持续时间约为15‑30秒。编码主要是声学的。复述使信息保持在STM中，并可将其转入LTM。
LTM has potentially unlimited capacity and a very long duration. Coding is largely semantic (meaning‑based). Evidence from brain‑damaged patients supports the distinction between STM and LTM.
LTM可能有无限的容量和极长的持续时间。编码主要是语义的（基于意义）。来自脑损伤患者的证据支持了STM与LTM的区别。
6. Memory: Forgetting and Eyewitness Testimony | 记忆：遗忘与目击证词
Forgetting from STM is often explained by decay (memory trace fades) or displacement (new information pushes out old). In LTM, interference is important: proactive interference (old learning disrupts new) and retroactive interference (new learning disrupts old).
STM中的遗忘通常被解释为消退（记忆痕迹消退）或替代（新信息挤出旧信息）。在LTM中，干扰十分重要：前摄干扰（旧学习干扰新学习）和倒摄干扰（新学习干扰旧学习）。
Retrieval failure due to absence of cues (context‑dependent or state‑dependent forgetting) also explains why we sometimes cannot recall information that is available in LTM.
由于缺乏线索而导致的提取失败（背景依赖或状态依赖遗忘）也解释了为什么我们有时无法回忆起LTM中已有的信息。
Loftus and Palmer (1974) investigated the effect of leading questions on eyewitness memory. Participants watched a car accident video and were asked about speed using different verbs ('smashed' vs. 'hit'). The verb 'smashed' produced higher speed estimates and more false memories of broken glass. This shows that memory can be reconstructed and is vulnerable to post‑event information.
Loftus和Palmer（1974）研究了引导性问题对目击者记忆的影响。参与者观看了一场车祸视频，并被问及车速，使用不同的动词（“撞碎”与“撞”）。动词“撞碎”导致了更高的速度估计和更多关于碎玻璃的错误记忆。这表明记忆是可被重构的，并容易受到事后信息的影响。
7. Sleep and Dreams: The Sleep Cycle | 睡眠与做梦：睡眠周期
Dement and Kleitman (1957) monitored participants' brain waves using EEG during sleep and woke them during different stages. They found a repeating cycle of non‑REM (NREM) stages 1‑3 and REM (rapid eye movement) sleep about every 90 minutes.
Dement和Kleitman（1957）在参与者睡眠期间使用脑电图监测脑电波，并在不同阶段唤醒他们。他们发现了一个约每90分钟重复的周期，包括非快速眼动（NREM）第1‑3阶段和快速眼动（REM）睡眠。
Stage 1 is light sleep with theta waves; stage 2 has sleep spindles and K‑complexes; stage 3 is deep slow‑wave sleep with delta waves. REM sleep is characterised by rapid eye movements, brain activity resembling wakefulness, and muscle paralysis. Participants woken during REM reported vivid dreams 80% of the time, compared to 7% during NREM.
第1阶段是浅睡眠，有θ波；第2阶段有睡眠纺锤波和K复合波；第3阶段是深慢波睡眠，有δ波。REM睡眠的特征是快速眼动、类似清醒时的大脑活动以及肌肉麻痹。在REM期间被唤醒的参与者80%报告了生动的梦境，而在NREM期间仅为7%。
8. Sleep and Dreams: Dream Theories | 睡眠与做梦：梦境理论
Hobson and McCarley (1977) proposed the activation‑synthesis model. During REM, random neural signals from the brainstem activate the cortex, and the brain attempts to synthesise these signals into a meaningful narrative. This explains why dreams can be bizarre — they are the brain's interpretation of random firing.
Hobson和McCarley（1977）提出了激活‑整合模型。在REM期间，来自脑干的随机神经信号激活皮层，大脑试图将这些信号合成一个有意义的叙事。这解释了为什么梦境会荒诞离奇——它们是大脑对随机发放信号的解读。
In contrast, the rehearsal/consolidation account suggests that REM sleep aids memory consolidation. During sleep, neural connections are strengthened, and information from the day is processed. Supporting this, some studies find improved performance on tasks after REM sleep compared to wakefulness.
相比之下，复述/巩固假说认为REM睡眠有助于记忆巩固。在睡眠期间，神经连接得到加强，白天的信息得到处理。支持这一假说的是，一些研究发现与清醒时相比，REM睡眠后人们在任务上的表现有所改善。
9. Conformity: Asch's Line Study | 从众：阿希线段实验
Asch (1951) investigated whether people would conform to an obviously wrong majority. In a group of 7‑9 confederates and one real participant, everyone had to say which of three comparison lines matched a standard line. Confederates gave the same wrong answer on 12 out of 18 critical trials.
Asch（1951）研究人们是否会从众于一个明显错误的大多数。在一组7‑9名假被试和一名真被试中，每个人必须说出三条比较线中的哪一条与标准线匹配。假被试在18个关键试次中，有12次给出相同的错误答案。
About 37% of all participant responses conformed; 75% of participants conformed at least once. Conformity was reduced when there was a dissenter (a confederate giving the correct answer), showing the power of unanimity. This is explained by normative social influence (wanting to fit in) and informational social influence (believing the group is correct).
大约37%的参与者反应是从众的；75%的参与者至少从众了一次。当存在异议者（一个给出正确答案的假被试）时，从众降低，这显示了一致性的力量。这可以用规范社会影响（希望被接纳）和信息社会影响（相信群体是正确的）来解释。
10. Obedience: Milgram's Shock Experiment | 服从：米尔格拉姆电击实验
Milgram (1963) set up a study where participants believed they were delivering increasing electric shocks to a 'learner' (a confederate) for wrong answers. The experimenter used verbal prods ('You must continue') when the participant hesitated. In the original condition, 65% administered the maximum 450‑volt shock.
Milgram（1963）设计了一项研究，让参与者以为他们在对一名“学习者”（假被试）施加递增的电击，以惩罚错误答案。当参与者犹豫时，实验者使用语言催促（“你必须继续”）。在原始条件下，65%的参与者施加了最高450伏的电击。
Obedience decreased when the study was conducted in a run‑down office (prestige reduced), when the experimenter gave orders by telephone, and when the learner was in the same room. These situational factors show that obedience is heavily influenced by context, not just personality.
当研究在破旧的办公室进行（声望降低）、实验者通过电话发出命令以及学习者处于同一房间时，服从程度下降。这些情境因素表明服从在很大程度上受环境影响，而不仅仅取决于人格。
11. Non‑Verbal Communication: Channels and Signals | 非语言交流：渠道与信号
Non‑verbal communication (NVC) includes facial expressions, eye contact, gestures, posture, touch, and proxemics. Mehrabian (1971) found that in emotional communication, the relative importance of words, tone of voice, and facial expression followed a 7%‑38%‑55% rule — facial expression dominates.
非语言交流（NVC）包括面部表情、目光接触、手势、姿势、触摸和空间关系。Mehrabian（1971）发现，在情感交流中，词语、语调和面部表情的相对重要性遵循7%‑38%‑55%的规则——面部表情占主导地位。
Argyle and Dean (1965) proposed the intimacy‑equilibrium model: people maintain a comfortable level of intimacy by adjusting eye contact, proximity, and smiling. If one channel is intensified (e.g. closer distance), another may be reduced (less eye contact) to restore balance.
Argyle和Dean（1965）提出了亲密‑平衡模型：人们通过调节目光接触、接近度和微笑来维持一个舒适的亲密水平。如果一个渠道被加强（如距离变近），另一个渠道可能会被削弱（减少目光接触）以恢复平衡。
12. Non‑Verbal Communication: Functions and Personal Space | 非语言交流：功能与个人空间
NVC serves several functions: it can regulate turn‑taking in conversation, express emotion, communicate attitudes, and support or contradict verbal messages. For example, nodding while saying 'yes' reinforces agreement, while a sarcastic tone can contradict the words.
NVC具有多种功能：它可以调节对话中的话轮转换，表达情感，传递态度，支持或矛盾言语信息。例如，说“是”时点头可以加强同意，而讽刺的语气则可能与词语矛盾。
Hall (1966) identified four zones of personal space: intimate (0‑45 cm), personal (45 cm‑1.2 m), social (1.2‑3.6 m), and public (3.6 m+). The comfortable distance varies with culture, relationship, and context. Invasion of personal space can cause arousal and discomfort.
Hall（1966）确定了四种个人空间区域：亲密距离（0‑45厘米）、个人距离（45厘米‑1.2米）、社交距离（1.2‑3.6米）和公共距离（3.6米以上）。舒适的距离随文化、关系和情境而变化。个人空间被侵入会引起唤醒和不适。
Published by TutorHao | Psychology Revision Series | aleveler.com
更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）
或截图后用「扫一扫 → 相册」选择本图