Year 12 WJEC Psychology: Case Study Analysis in Action | WJEC 心理学 Y12：案例分析实战演练

📚 Year 12 WJEC Psychology: Case Study Analysis in Action | WJEC 心理学 Y12：案例分析实战演练

Case study analysis is a core skill in Year 12 WJEC Psychology. You will be expected to read a research scenario, interpret data, identify methodological and ethical issues, and apply psychological knowledge. This article provides practical training through four detailed case studies, followed by evaluation techniques, comparison of approaches, and exam strategies to boost your confidence.

案例分析是 WJEC 心理学 Y12 的核心技能。你需要在阅读研究情境后，解读数据、识别方法论和伦理问题，并应用心理学知识。本文通过四个详细的案例研究提供实战训练，随后讲解评估技巧、取向比较和考试策略，帮你提升信心。

1. Understanding Case Study Analysis in WJEC Psychology | 理解 WJEC 心理学中的案例分析

In the WJEC specification, case study questions typically present a summary of a psychological investigation. You might be asked to describe the aim, procedure, findings, and conclusion, or to evaluate the study in terms of validity, reliability, ethics, and sampling. Examiners look for accurate use of terminology and clear application of the research methods knowledge you have learned throughout the year.

在 WJEC 考纲中，案例题通常会概述一项心理学研究。你可能需要描述研究目的、程序、发现和结论，或从效度、信度、伦理和取样等方面进行评价。考官看重术语的准确使用以及对全年所学研究方法知识的清晰应用。

The skills required go beyond simple recall. You must demonstrate critical thinking by identifying strengths and weaknesses, suggesting improvements, and linking the study to psychological approaches or debates. This mirrors the real scientific process.

所需技能远不止简单回忆。你必须通过识别优势劣势、提出改进建议，并将研究与心理学取向或争论联系起来来展现批判性思维。这反映了真实的科学过程。

2. The Role of Research Methods | 研究方法的作用

Before analysing any case, you need a solid grasp of research methods. This includes experimental designs (independent groups, repeated measures, matched pairs), variables (IV, DV, extraneous, confounding), sampling techniques (random, opportunity, volunteer, stratified), and types of data (quantitative, qualitative, primary, secondary).

在分析任何案例前，你需要扎实掌握研究方法。包括实验设计（独立组、重复测量、匹配对）、变量（自变量、因变量、额外变量、混淆变量）、取样方法（随机、机会、自愿、分层）以及数据类型（定量、定性、一手、二手）。

You also need to understand ethical guidelines (consent, deception, protection from harm, right to withdraw, debriefing, confidentiality) and how to assess reliability (consistency of measures) and validity (accuracy of findings). These concepts will be the building blocks of every case analysis.

你还需要理解伦理准则（知情同意、欺骗、免受伤害、退出权、事后说明、保密性）以及如何评估信度（测量一致性）和效度（发现的准确性）。这些概念将是每个案例分析的基础构件。

3. Ethical Considerations in Practice | 实践中的伦理考量

Many WJEC case studies involve ethically sensitive procedures. For example, a study might use covert observation, deception, or distressing stimuli. You should be ready to identify which ethical guidelines have been breached, explain why this is problematic, and suggest how the researcher could resolve the issue—such as by obtaining fully informed consent before the study or providing a thorough debrief afterwards.

许多 WJEC 案例涉及伦理敏感的程序。例如，研究可能使用隐蔽观察、欺骗或令人痛苦的刺激。你应准备好识别哪些伦理准则被违反，解释为何这是问题所在，并建议研究者如何解决问题——例如在研究前获取完全知情同意或事后提供详尽说明。

You may also need to argue whether the potential benefits of the research (e.g., understanding eyewitness testimony, helping people with phobias) outweigh the costs to participants. Balancing ethical concerns with the pursuit of knowledge is a key debate.

你可能还需要论证研究的潜在益处（如了解目击证词、帮助恐惧症患者）是否超过参与者的代价。平衡伦理关切与知识追求是一个关键争论。

4. Case Study 1: The Memory Experiment | 案例 1：记忆实验

A researcher wished to test the effect of leading questions on memory. He recruited 40 students and randomly assigned them to two groups. Group A watched a 2-minute video of a shoplifting incident and were then asked 10 questions, including “How many items did the man steal when he grabbed the goods from the shelf?” Group B watched the identical video but were asked “How many items did the man take when he lifted the goods from the shelf?” (the word ‘grabbed’ replaced by ‘lifted’). The mean number of items recalled by Group A (grabbed) was 5.2, while Group B (lifted) reported a mean of 3.1. The researcher concluded that verb choice influences memory accuracy.

一位研究者希望测试引导性问题对记忆的影响。他招募了40名学生并随机分配至两组。A组观看一段2分钟的盗窃事件视频，随后被问10个问题，包括“当该男子从货架上抢走商品时，他偷了多少件？”B组观看相同视频，但被问“当该男子从货架上拿起商品时，他拿走了多少件？”（“抢走”一词替换为“拿起”）。A组（抢走）回忆起的平均物品数为5.2，而B组（拿起）报告的平均数为3.1。研究者得出结论：动词选择影响记忆准确性。

Analysis: Identify the independent variable (IV) — the wording of the critical question (verb “grabbed” vs “lifted”). The dependent variable (DV) is the mean number of items recalled. The design is independent groups because different participants were used in each condition. A strength of random allocation is that it reduces participant variables. However, extraneous variables such as individual differences in attention or memory capacity could still act as confounds. The small sample size (40) and reliance on students may limit generalisability.

分析：识别自变量（IV）——关键问题的措辞（动词“抢走” vs “拿起”）。因变量（DV）是回忆起的平均物品数。设计为独立组设计，因为每种条件下使用了不同的参与者。随机分配的优点在于减少参与者变量。但注意等额外变量，如个体在注意力或记忆能力上的差异，仍可能成为混淆变量。小样本量（40人）和依赖学生样本可能限制推广性。

Ethics: The study appears low-risk; however, showing a theft video might cause mild distress. No mention is made of informed consent or debriefing. An ethical researcher would provide full information after the session and remind participants of their right to withdraw data.

伦理：该研究看似风险较低；但展示盗窃视频可能引起轻微沮丧。未提及知情同意或事后说明。合乎伦理的研究

Published by TutorHao | Year 12 Psychology Revision Series | aleveler.com

更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）