Year 13 WJEC Psychology: Unit Test Mock Paper Walkthrough | 13年级 WJEC 心理学：单元测试模拟卷解析

📚 Year 13 WJEC Psychology: Unit Test Mock Paper Walkthrough | 13年级 WJEC 心理学：单元测试模拟卷解析

This walkthrough provides detailed, step-by-step explanations for a sample WJEC Year 13 Psychology unit test covering Applied Behaviours – specifically addictive behaviours and schizophrenia, plus integrated research methods. By reviewing each question, you will consolidate core theories, understand assessment expectations, and sharpen your examination technique for the real paper.

本篇解析针对一份涵盖成瘾行为与精神分裂症及综合研究方法的WJEC 13年级心理学模拟单元测试卷，提供分步详解。通过逐一回顾每道题目，你将巩固核心理论，理解评分要求，并为真实考试磨炼应试技巧。

1. Question 1: Defining Addiction | 第1题：界定成瘾

Question: Distinguish between the disease model and the dependence model of addiction. Refer to tolerance and compulsion in your answer. (6 marks)

题目：区分成瘾的疾病模型与依赖模型，在答案中需提及耐受性与强迫性。（6分）

A high-scoring response begins by stating that the disease model conceptualises addiction as a chronic, relapsing brain condition. It emphasises compulsive substance use that persists despite negative consequences, driven by lasting neurobiological changes. Key evidence includes how dopamine dysregulation in the mesolimbic pathway undermines volitional control, making the behaviour feel involuntary to the individual.

高分答案会先指出疾病模型将成瘾概念化为一种慢性、易复发的脑部疾病。该模型强调尽管存在负面后果，仍会出现由持久神经生物学变化驱动的强迫性物质使用。关键证据包括中脑边缘通路中多巴胺失调如何削弱意志控制，使个体感觉行为并非自愿。

In contrast, the dependence model focuses primarily on the physiological adaptation of the body. Tolerance is the central mechanism: with repeated exposure, larger doses are needed to achieve the original effect. When substance use stops, a withdrawal syndrome emerges, characterised by physical symptoms such as tremors, nausea, and anxiety. This model explains continued drug-taking as an attempt to avoid the aversive withdrawal state rather than as a loss of control per se.

相反，依赖模型主要聚焦于身体的生理适应。耐受性是核心机制：反复接触后，需要更⼤剂量才能达到原初效果。当停止物质使用时，会出现戒断综合征，表现为颤抖、恶心和焦虑等身体症状。该模型将持续服药解释为试图避免厌恶性的戒断状态，而非失去控制本身。

To achieve full marks, candidates must explicitly link the concepts: the disease model accounts for the compulsive 'wanting' that persists even when tolerance has developed, whereas the dependence model struggles to explain why craving and relapse occur long after detoxification and physical withdrawal have subsided. Use the term 'psychological dependence' to bridge both views.

要拿到满分，考生必须明确联系概念：疾病模型解释了即使在耐受性已经发展后仍持续的强迫性“渴求”，而依赖模型难以解释为何在脱毒和身体戒断消退很久后仍会出现渴求和复发。用“心理依赖”一词将两种观点联系起来。

2. Question 2: Biological Explanations of Addiction | 第2题：成瘾的生物学解释

Question: Outline the role of dopamine in addiction. Use research evidence to support your explanation. (8 marks)

题目：概述多巴胺在成瘾中的作用，并引用研究证据支持你的解释。（8分）

The core biological argument is that addictive substances and behaviours hijack the brain's natural reward pathway, the mesolimbic dopamine system. When an individual takes a drug such as cocaine, dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens is massively amplified, creating intense euphoria and reinforcing the behaviour at a neural level.

核心生物学观点是成瘾物质和行为劫持了大脑的自然奖赏通路——中脑边缘多巴胺系统。当个体服用可卡因等药物时，伏隔核中的多巴胺释放被极大地放大，产生强烈的欣快感，并在神经层面强化该行为。

Olds and Milner (1954) provided seminal animal evidence: rats repeatedly pressed a lever to deliver electrical stimulation to the medial forebrain bundle, a region rich in dopamine neurons. They ignored food and water, demonstrating that direct activation of the reward pathway can dominate behaviour. Later human studies using PET scans by Volkow et al. (2001) showed reduced D2 dopamine receptor availability in the brains of chronic cocaine users, suggesting the system becomes downregulated. This downregulation explains tolerance – natural rewards no longer activate the system sufficiently, driving escalated drug use to compensate.

Olds和Milner（1954）提供了开创性的动物证据：大鼠反复按压杠杆以获得传递到内侧前脑束（富含多巴胺神经元的区域）的电刺激。它们忽略食物和水，证明直接激活奖赏通路可以主导行为。后来Volkow等人（2001）使用PET扫描的人类研究显示，慢性可卡因使用者大脑中D2多巴胺受体的可用性降低，表明系统发生下调。这种下调解释了耐受性——自然奖赏不再能充分激活该系统，驱使加剧用药以弥补。

A common pitfall is describing dopamine simply as the 'pleasure chemical'. A refined answer distinguishes between dopamine's role in 'wanting' (incentive salience) and 'liking' (hedonic impact), citing Robinson and Berridge (1993). The essay should also note that dopamine does not operate alone; glutamate and GABA systems are also implicated, indicating a complex neurochemical interplay.

常见的误区是将多巴胺简单描述为“快乐化学物质”。精致的答案会区分多巴胺在“想要”（诱因显著性）和“喜欢”（愉悦感）中的角色，引用Robinson和Berridge（1993）。文章还应指出多巴胺并非单独作用；谷氨酸和GABA系统也参与其中，表明复杂的神经化学相互作用。

3. Question 3: Learning Theories of Addiction | 第3题：成瘾的学习理论

Question: Describe and evaluate how operant conditioning explains the initiation, maintenance, and relapse of addictive behaviour. (12 marks)

题目：描述并评价操作条件作用如何解释成瘾行为的启动、维持和复发。（12分）

According to operant conditioning, addiction is acquired through reinforcement. Initiation is often explained by positive reinforcement: the first drug-taking experience produces a pleasurable, rewarding consequence — such as euphoria or social approval — which increases the likelihood of the behaviour being repeated.

根据操作条件作用，成瘾通过强化习得。启动通常由正强化解释：第一次服药经历产生令人愉悦的、具有奖赏性质的后果——比如欣快感或社会认可——增加了该行为被重复的可能性。

Maintenance shifts towards negative reinforcement. As tolerance develops, the user experiences unpleasant withdrawal symptoms (e.g., anxiety, nausea). Taking the drug removes or avoids this aversive state, powerfully reinforcing continued use. This is akin to escape learning: the removal of the negative stimulus strengthens the drug-taking response. Relapse can be explained by the return of withdrawal-like cues or by the spontaneous recovery of the conditioned response even after a period of extinction, as the individual re-enters drug-associated environments that serve as discriminative stimuli.

维持阶段转向负强化。随着耐受性发展，使用者体验到不愉快的戒断症状（如焦虑、恶心）。服药移除或避免这种厌恶状态，极大地强化了持续使用。这类似于逃避学习：消除负面刺激加强了服药反应。复发可由类似戒断的线索回归，或即使经过一段消退期后，条件反应的自发恢复来解释，此时个体再次进入作为辨别刺激的吸毒相关环境。

Stage / 阶段	Operant Process / 操作过程	Example / 例子
Initiation / 启动	Positive reinforcement / 正强化	Euphoria from nicotine / 尼古丁带来的欣快感
Maintenance / 维持	Negative reinforcement / 负强化	Taking heroin to stop withdrawal pain / 吸食海洛因以停止戒断疼痛
Relapse / 复发	Spontaneous recovery / 自发恢复	Cue-induced reinstatement of cocaine seeking / 线索诱发可卡因寻求恢复

Evaluatively, operant conditioning is supported by animal models such as the self-administration paradigm, where laboratory animals self-administer drugs and show withdrawal-avoidance behaviour. However, it is reductionist, ignoring cognitive factors like expectancy and self-efficacy. Also, operant theory struggles to explain why many people experiment with drugs but do not become addicts, pointing to the need for a diathesis-stress model involving genetic vulnerability.

评价而言，操作条件作用得到动物模型的支持，例如自身给药范式，实验动物自我给药并表现出戒断避免行为。然而，它是还原论，忽略了期望和自我效能等认知因素。同时，操作理论难以解释为什么很多人尝试药物但并未成瘾，表明需要包含遗传脆弱性的素质-应激模型。

4. Question 4: Cognitive Explanations of Addiction | 第4题：成瘾的认知解释

Question: Explain how cognitive biases, such as attentional bias and irrational beliefs, contribute to the maintenance of gambling addiction. (8 marks)

题目：解释认知偏差（如注意偏差和非理性信念）如何促使赌博成瘾的维持。（8分）

Cognitive explanations propose that addiction persists because of faulty thought patterns. In gambling disorder, attentional bias is prominent: addicted individuals pay disproportionate attention to gambling-related stimuli (e.g., flashing lights, sounds of slot machines) which automatically triggers cravings. The elaborated intrusion theory suggests that this automatic processing consumes working memory resources, making it difficult to engage in alternative, healthier behaviours.

认知解释认为成瘾持续是由于错误的思维模式。在赌博障碍中，注意偏差尤为突出：成瘾个体对赌博相关刺激（如闪烁的灯光、老虎机的声音）给予不成比例的注意，自动触发渴求。精细侵入理论认为这种自动处理占用工作记忆资源，使人难以从事其他更健康的行为。

Irrational beliefs are equally critical. Many problem gamblers exhibit the 'gambler's fallacy' — the erroneous belief that a series of losses makes a win 'due', despite each event being statistically independent. Another cognitive distortion is the 'illusion of control', where gamblers overestimate their ability to influence chance outcomes through rituals or lucky charms. The 'near-miss' effect is a powerful cognitive bias: when a win is narrowly missed (e.g., two matching symbols out of three), the brain interprets it as almost winning, activating reward circuits similarly to an actual win, which fuels further gambling.

非理性信念同样关键。许多问题赌徒表现出“赌徒谬误”——错误地认为一系列失败后胜利“该来了”，尽管每次事件在统计上相互独立。另一种认知扭曲是“控制幻觉”，赌徒高估自己通过仪式或幸运符影响偶然结果的能力。“差一点”效应是一种强大的认知偏差：当险胜未能实现（例如三个符号中两个匹配），大脑将其解释为差一点赢，以类似于实际获胜的方式激活奖赏回路，推动继续赌博。

A limitation of purely cognitive accounts is that they are descriptive rather than explanatory of the origins. They are better viewed as proximal maintaining factors within a broader biopsychosocial framework, as external triggers and biological sensitisation initially set the stage for these biases to develop.

广告 / Sponsored

纯粹认知解释的一个局限是它们更多是描述性而非解释性。它们更适合被视为更广泛的生物心理社会框架中的近端维持因素，因为外部触发和生物敏化最初为这些偏差的发展奠定了基础。

5. Question 5: Schizophrenia – Symptoms and Classification | 第5题：精神分裂症——症状与分类

Question: Describe the positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia, using specific examples. (6 marks)

题目：描述精神分裂症的阳性症状和阴性症状，并给出具体例子。（6分）

Schizophrenia is characterised by a constellation of symptoms traditionally divided into positive and negative categories. Positive symptoms reflect an excess or distortion of normal functions. Hallucinations are the most well-known, typically auditory, where individuals hear voices that are not present. These voices may comment on the person's behaviour or issue commands, causing intense distress. Delusions are firmly held false beliefs despite evidence to the contrary; common types include persecutory delusions (believing others are plotting to harm them) and delusions of grandeur.

精神分裂症以一组症状为特征，传统上分为阳性与阴性两大类。阳性症状反映正常功能的过剩或扭曲。幻觉是最为人所知的，通常是听幻觉，个体听到并不存在的声音。这些声音可能评论其行为或发出命令，造成强烈痛苦。妄想是尽管有相反证据仍坚信的错误信念；常见类型包括被害妄想（认为他人在密谋伤害自己）和夸大妄想。

Negative symptoms, in contrast, represent a diminution or loss of normal functions. Avolition is a notable example — a severe lack of motivation to initiate and persist in goal-directed activities, resulting in poor hygiene or prolonged inactivity. Alogia refers to poverty of speech, where verbal responses become brief and empty. Affective flattening involves a marked reduction in emotional expression, including unchanging facial expressions and reduced eye contact. Exam success depends on providing concrete examples, not just definitions.

阴性症状则代表正常功能的减弱或丧失。意志缺乏是一个显著例子——严重缺乏启动和维持目标导向活动的动机，导致卫生习惯差或长期不活动。言语贫乏指言语量减少，反应简短空洞。情感淡漠表现为情绪表达显著减少，包括面部表情不变和目光接触减少。考试成功依赖于提供具体例子，而不仅仅是定义。

6. Question 6: Biological Explanations – Dopamine Hypothesis | 第6题：生物学解释——多巴胺假说

Question: Discuss the dopamine hypothesis as an explanation for schizophrenia. Include evidence from drug treatments and neuroimaging. (12 marks)

题目：讨论多巴胺假说作为精神分裂症的一种解释，并纳入药物治疗和神经影像的证据。（12分）

The original dopamine hypothesis proposed that schizophrenia results from excessive dopaminergic activity in subcortical regions. This was based on two cornerstone observations. First, amphetamines, which increase dopamine levels, can induce a psychotic state closely resembling paranoid schizophrenia in healthy individuals. Second, typical antipsychotic drugs such as chlorpromazine work by blocking D2 dopamine receptors, and their clinical potency correlates strongly with their affinity for these receptors.

最初的多巴胺假说提出精神分裂症是由皮层下区域的多巴胺能活动过度引起的。这基于两个基石性观察。首先，苯丙胺会增加多巴胺水平，能在健康个体中诱发出与偏执型精神分裂症极为相似的精神病状态。其次，典型的抗精神病药物如氯丙嗪通过阻断D2多巴胺受体起效，其临床效价与对这些受体的亲和力密切相关。

However, the original hypothesis was too simplistic. The revised version acknowledges that there is both subcortical hyperdopaminergia (too much dopamine in mesolimbic pathways, linked to positive symptoms) and cortical hypodopaminergia (too little dopamine in the prefrontal cortex, linked to negative symptoms and cognitive deficits). Neuroimaging studies using SPECT and PET provide support: increased dopamine synthesis capacity in the striatum is found in schizophrenia patients, and an exaggerated displacement of radioligands in response to amphetamine challenge indicates excessive releasable dopamine.

然而，最初的假说过分简单化。修订版承认既存在皮层下多巴胺功能亢进（中脑边缘通路多巴胺过多，与阳性症状相关），也存在皮层多巴胺功能不足（前额叶皮层多巴胺过少，与阴性症状及认知缺陷相关）。使用SPECT和PET的神经影像研究提供了支持：精神分裂症患者纹状体中多巴胺合成能力增加，且对苯丙胺挑战反应的放射性配体过度置换表明有过量的可释放多巴胺。

Evaluatively, pharmacological evidence is strong but correlational; it does not establish causation. Furthermore, the dopamine hypothesis struggles to explain why some patients do not respond to D2 blockers, which has led to the glutamate hypothesis and attention to other neurotransmitters such as serotonin. A balanced essay thus concludes that dopamine is a major neurochemical pathway in psychosis but interacts with multiple systems.

评价而言，药理学证据有力但具有相关性；并未确立因果关系。此外，多巴胺假说难以解释为何一些患者对D2阻断剂无反应，这导致了谷氨酸假说及对5-羟色胺等其他神经递质的关注。因此，一篇平衡的论文会总结多巴胺是精神病中的一个主要神经化学通路，但与多个系统相互作用。

7. Question 7: Psychological Explanations of Schizophrenia | 第7题：精神分裂症的心理社会解释

Question: Outline and evaluate the family dysfunction explanation for schizophrenia, focusing on expressed emotion. (10 marks)

题目：概述并评价精神分裂症的家庭功能障碍解释，聚焦于高情感表达。（10分）

The family dysfunction explanation, a psychological model, posits that dysfunctional communication patterns within the family environment can trigger and maintain schizophrenic symptoms, especially relapse. The concept of expressed emotion (EE) has received substantial empirical support. EE involves three key components: criticism (disapproving comments directed at the patient), hostility (more extreme negative attitudes that undermine the patient's self-worth), and emotional over-involvement (excessive, intrusive, self-sacrificing concern that fosters dependency).

家庭功能障碍解释是一种心理学模型，认为家庭环境中的异常沟通模式可以触发并维持精神分裂症状，特别是复发。高情感表达（EE）概念得到了大量实证支持。EE包含三个关键成分：批评（指向患者的非难评语）、敌意（更为极端的负面态度，损害患者自尊），以及情感过度卷入（过度、侵扰、自我牺牲的关心，助长依赖性）。

Research by Kavanagh (1992) reviewed prospective studies showing that the relapse rate for patients discharged to high-EE families was around 48%, compared with only 21% for those in low-EE environments. This suggests a clear stressor effect. A major strength of the EE literature is its practical application: family intervention programmes that reduce face-to-face contact and teach constructive communication have successfully lowered relapse rates. This treatment efficacy strengthens the validity of the explanation.

Kavanagh（1992）的综述回顾了前瞻性研究，显示出院回到高EE家庭的患者复发率约为48%，而处于低EE环境的仅为21%。这表明了明确的应激源效应。EE文献的一个主要优势在于其实践应用：减少面对面接触并教导建设性沟通的家庭干预项目已成功降低了复发率。这种治疗效果强化了解释的效度。

However, the explanation is limited by its unidirectional view: it paints family members as causal agents and fails to account for how the patient's behaviour may evoke negative reactions. There is evidence of interactive causality, where difficult behaviours elicit high EE, creating a cycle. Also, family dysfunction alone cannot account for the initial onset of schizophrenia without contributing biological vulnerability, aligning more with the diathesis-stress model.

然而，该解释受限于其单向观点：它将家庭成员描绘为致因因素，未能解释患者行为如何引发负面反应。有证据显示交互因果关系，即困难行为引发高EE，形成循环。而且，家庭功能障碍本身不能解释精神分裂症的最初发病，必须结合潜在的生物脆弱性，更符合素质-应激模型。

8. Question 8: Research Methods – Analysing a Study on Craving | 第8题：研究方法——分析一项关于渴求的研究

Question: A psychologist investigated whether exposure to drug-related cues increases self-reported craving in abstinent heroin users. Participants rated their craving on a 1-10 scale before and after viewing neutral images or heroin-related images. Design an appropriate inferential statistical test for this scenario, justify your choice, and state the null hypothesis. (8 marks)

题目：一位心理学家调查接触毒品相关线索是否会增加戒断海洛因使用者的自报告渴求。参与者在中性图片或海洛因相关图片前后用1-10量表评定渴求。为此情景设计一种恰当的推断统计检验，证明你的选择，并陈述虚无假设。（8分）

This is a repeated measures design with two conditions (neutral vs. drug-related images) and the dependent variable is craving rated on an ordinal scale (1-10). The most appropriate test is the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. This non-parametric test compares two related samples when the data are at least ordinal, making it suitable because we cannot assume craving ratings are interval data with equal spacing between points.

这是一个重复测量设计，有两个条件（中性vs.毒品相关图片），因变量是以顺序量表（1-10）评定的渴求。最恰当的检验是威尔科克森符号秩检验。这种非参数检验可在数据至少为顺序水平时比较两个相关样本，它适用是因为我们不能假设渴求评分是间隔数据且点间等距。

Reason for Wilcoxon / 选择威尔科克森的理由	Explanation / 解释
Design / 设计	Repeated measures – same participants in both conditions / 重复测量 – 相同参与者处于两种条件
Level of measurement / 测量水平	Ordinal data (self-reported ratings) / 顺序数据（自报告评定）
Assumptions / 假设	No assumption of normal distribution; differences are ranked / 无需正态分布假设；对差异进行排序

An alternative acceptable answer is the sign test if a student justifies that only the direction of difference was recorded. However, the Wilcoxon uses more information (magnitude), giving greater power. The null hypothesis (H₀) must be stated precisely: 'There will be no significant difference in craving ratings after exposure to neutral images versus heroin-related images in abstinent heroin users.' The calculated test statistic T is compared against a critical value table; if T is less than or equal to the critical value, the null hypothesis is rejected.

若学生论证仅记录差异的方向，符号检验也是可接受的替代答案。但威尔科克森使用了更多信息（差异大小），检验效力更强。虚无假设（H₀）必须精确陈述：“在戒断海洛因使用者中，接触中性图像与海洛因相关图像后的渴求评分之间无显著差异。”计算出的检验统计量T与临界值表比较；如果T小于或等于临界值，则拒绝虚无假设。

Additionally, students should identify one potential ethical issue with this design, such as the risk of heightened craving triggering relapse. Researchers would need to provide thorough debriefing and ensure immediate access to counsellors, highlighting the balance between research validity and participant welfare.

此外，学生应当识别该设计的一个潜在伦理问题，例如加剧的渴求触发复吸的风险。研究者需提供彻底的解说，并确保能立即接触到咨询师，凸显研究效度与参与者福祉之间的平衡。

Published by TutorHao | Psychology Revision Series | aleveler.com

更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）