From IB Guide:

Topic Primacy effect in attribution of performance—replication of “Patterns
of performance and ability attribution: An unexpected primacy effect”,
Edward E Jones et al (1968)
Aim To investigate a primacy effect in performance and ability attribution
Independent variable Order in which correct and incorrect answers are given by confederate
(condition 1: confederate answers correctly at the start of a list of questions;
condition 2: confederate answers correctly at the end of a list of questions)
Dependent variable Participants’ rating of confederate’s intelligence
Research hypothesis Assessments of intelligence are greater when a confederate answers
correctly at the start of a list of questions than when a confederate answers
correctly at the end of a list of questions.

Topic Chameleon effect—“The Chameleon Effect as Social Glue: Evidence for the
Evolutionary Significance of Nonconscious Mimicry”, Chartrand and Bargh
(1999)
Aim To investigate the occurrence of a chameleon effect in an interview
situation
Independent variable Presence/absence of foot-tapping and face-rubbing mannerisms in
interviewer (condition 1: interviewer exhibits foot-tapping and facerubbing
mannerisms; condition 2: interviewer does not exhibit foot-tapping
and face-rubbing mannerisms)
Dependent variable Frequency of foot-tapping and face-rubbing mannerisms in participants/
interviewees
Research hypothesis The frequency of participants’/interviewees’ foot-tapping and face-rubbing
mannerisms will be greater when with an interviewer who taps their foot
and rubs their face than with an interviewer who does not demonstrate
these behaviours.

Topic Central traits in impression formation—“Forming impressions of
personality”, Asch (1946)
Aim To investigate effects of particular adjectives on impression formation
Independent variable Adjectives used in a description of a fictional person (condition 1: “warm”
included in standardized description of fictional person; condition 2: “cold”
included in standardized description of fictional person)
Dependent variable Likeability ratings given by participants
Research hypothesis Ratings of likeability are greater when “warm” is included in a list of
adjectives pertaining to a fictional person than when “cold” is included.
Internal assessment
Psychology guide 47

Topic Familiarity and liking—“Attitudinal Effects of Mere Exposure”, Zajonc (1968)
Aim To investigate the effect of familiarity on liking
Independent variable Familiarity (condition 1: previous exposure to XXX; condition 2: no previous
exposure to XXX)
Dependent variable Liking ratings
Research hypothesis Ratings of likeability are greater for familiar XXX than unfamiliar.

Topic Social facilitation—“The dynamogenic factors in pace-making and
competition”, Triplett (1898)
Aim To investigate the effect of co-actors on competitive performance of a task
Independent variable The presence/absence of co-actors (condition 1: co-actors present;
condition 2: co-actors absent)
Dependent variable Time taken to reel in fishing line through a 4 m course
Research hypothesis The time taken to reel in fishing line through a 4 m course is reduced by the
presence of co-actors.

Topic Odour sensation and memory—“The effects of olfactory stimulation on
short-term memory”, Deethardt (2007); “Odour sensation and memory”,
Trygg (1991)
Aim To investigate the effect of olfactory stimulation on short-term memory of
new information
Independent variable Association of odours with listed words (condition 1: a different odour
associated with each word on a list presented for memorization;
condition 2: word list presented for memorization without associated
odours)
Dependent variable Rate of recall of words from word list
Research hypothesis Rate of recall of a word list is greater when words are associated with
odours at memorization.

Topic Availability bias—“Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases”,
Kahneman and Tversky (1974)
Aim To investigate availability bias in judgments about lists of names
Independent variable Familiarity of listed names (condition 1: list of 19 “famous” males;
condition 2: list of 20 “non-famous” females)
Dependent variable Response to question: “Which list was longer?” after trying to recall names
on both lists
Research hypothesis Participants judge a list of “famous” people longer than a slightly longer list
of “non-famous” people.
Internal assessment
48 Psychology guide

This list is not exhaustive and many other examples of suitable experiments that could be replicated are
available in psychology textbooks.
Examples of experiments that are ethically unacceptable for SL or HL internal assessment include, but are
not limited to:
• conformity studies
• obedience studies
• animal research
• placebo experiments
• experiments involving ingestion (for example, food, drink, smoking, drugs)
• experiments involving deprivation (for example, sleep, food)
• experiments involving young children (teachers should observe local laws and guidelines in relation
to the involvement of children in psychological research).

Students found to have carried out ethically unacceptable experiments will be awarded no marks for
the internal assessment.

More Sample Topics for those of you stuck:

• Self fulfilling prophecy using anagrams is: Feather, N.T. (1966) Effects of prior success and failure on expectations of success and subsequent performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3 287-298. (Found in our Psy text Tavris and Wade, page 228)
• The Strength of the Halo Effect in Physical Attractiveness Research (Lucker, Beane and Helmreich)
• Memory and acoustic learning: There is a theory that when we have to learn something like a telephone number that we store the number in the form of the mental sound that it makes i.e. acoustically. Participants have to learn lists of letters and then write them down after a delay. According to the acoustic coding theory participants will have more difficulty recalling letters which sound similarcompared to a list of words which sound quite different.
• Imagery vs rehearsal: participants recall more words from a (20) word list when they use an imagery method (forming a vivid mental image and linking each item to the last in a dynamic fashion) than if they use either rehearsal (repeat each item until you hear the next) or no particular method (no prior instruction). Bower (1967); Paivio (1971).
• Memory and levels of processing: Craik and Lockhart hypothesize that the deeper and more meaningfully we process information the better subsequent recall will be. Participants are asked to process words either at a basic structural level like 'is the word in capitals?' or at a level requiring the comprehension of meaning e.g. 'is it something you can eat'? Participants would be expected to recall those words processed more deeply more successfully. Craik and Tulving (1975).
• Eye-witness reports: Loftus and Palmer (1974); Loftus and Zanni (1975).
• Does background noise impair memory? This is good for those who argue that they can listen to their iPods and still study for their IB exams...
• Stroop effect: Participants take a lot longer to name the colour of ink that words are written in when the words themselves are contradictory colour words e.g. ‘red’ written in yellow ink – Dyer (1973).
• Word and letter recognition: Visual search: Time taken to find X’s hidden in a four column list of similar shaped letters (Y, Z etc.) is longer than for lists with letters such as S, R, P etc. – Neisser’s (1964) feature analysis model of pattern recognition. Alternatively: Participants will take longer to find 0 among letters if it is called tzero’ than when it is called letter ‘oh’ and vice versa – Jonides & Gleitman (1972).
• Heuristics: Tversky and Kahneman’s (1973) ‘availability’ hypothesis. If people recall more items from one set than from another they assume (heuristically) that there actually were more in the former set. Demonstrate this by giving participants a set of names to remember containing 19 very famous males and 20 not so famous females. Since participants tend to recall more male names they tend to judge that more males were in the list.
• Anchoring Bias - Tversky and Kahneman. Someone's estimates of something will be greatly influenced by the way the question is structured. For example, people asked to estimate 1x2x3x4x5x6x7x8x9 give lower estimates than those estimating 9x8x7x6x5x4x3x2x1 because the earliest numbers affect perception of the answer. Similarly, if subjects are asked to guess the length of the river Vltava, their estimates will be influenced by a preceding question "is 2000 km (or 20,000km in the other condition) an over or underestimate of the length of the river Vltava". (Kahnemann and Tversky (1973) and Northcraft and Neale (1987)
• Versions of Asch’s (1946) ‘warm’, ‘cold’ central traits paradigm can be implemented in many topical ways. Candidates give one description of a person to one group of participants and an identical version to another group varying only one characteristic, for instance ‘agrees with nuclear testing’ for one group and ‘disagrees....’ for the other. They then ask participants to assess the fictitious person on, say, liking or trustworthiness on a 10 point scale and look for differences between groups. Asch’s ‘primacy’ effect can also be tested using a list of descriptors – e.g. ‘orderly entertaining humble cool calculating moody’ in that order for one group and in the opposite order for another. Those hearing the positive traits first might rate the person more favourably on a ten point scale – Anderson and Barrios (1961). Luria and Rubin (1974) – participants given the same picture of a baby but one group told it is male the other female. Record differences in descriptions. It is best to give a checklist to participants containing ‘typical’ masculine and feminine traits – fine featured, strong, robust, sensitive, cute, and delicate.
• Social inference : Do people over-estimate the number of beads in a jar if they see a list of other peoples "over-estimates?" i.e. do they base their estimates on other peoples' views?
• Social facilitation: The idea is that people tend to perform better when in groups than when on their own. Subjects can be given tasks (e.g. word searches) either in groups or on their own to test this theory.