I'm not good at psychology since I'm a chemist by training, but I can try.
1) [1]: reasoning process please...
Rule out A because it's clear from the graph that nine year-olds don't perform like adults. Adults make more central placement errors than younger cohorts so C is out. Recall for distances is not mentioned in the passage so D is out. B is correct because you can see for the nine year-old and eleven year-old groups that there is a difference between the simultaneous and serial conditions, which is designed to measure the categorical error bias.
2) [2] : I don't see why an experimental study CAN'T be used to get relevant data here....it is very easy to artificially start a panic attack in PD folks....
Experiments have independent and dependent variables. The independent variable here would be a change in body sensation and the dependent variable would be panic. Artificially starting a panic attack would be modulating the wrong variable - the proper experiment would be to artificially induce a change in body sensation (like heartbeat), which is difficult.
3) [3]: for 15....how would you reason an a choice on this one. for 16 ..again, i could make arguments for B,C,D.
For 15, optimal arousal theory basically says that there is a goldilocks zone for arousal where people perform best. Too much arousal and it's hard to concentrate; too little arousal and you're not motivated well enough to do the task at hand - both extremes result in poor performance. So here, A is out because optimal arousal would lead to good performance, not variable. B is out because fluctuating arousal doesn't really indicate poor performance - it would probably cause fluctuating performance if anything. D is out because eliminating arousal completely would result in poor performance per optimal arousal theory. C is correct because it's basically saying that informing women of the stereotype causes too much arousal and according to optimal arousal theory, too much arousal is outside the goldilocks zone and you get poor performance.
For 16, it's clear from the graph that reminding people of their ethnic identity actually boosts performance somewhat. I would expect that someone for whom ethnic identity plays a huge role in their lives would be more affected in the same direction (boosting performance) than someone for whom ethnic identity doesn't really matter. So that prediction is C. B doesn't make sense because the question isn't talking about gender identity at all. There's no evidence whatsoever that there is any causal relationship between ethnic and gender identities - they are not mutually exclusive. Ethnic identity being central to one's life has nothing to do with whether gender identity is also important in one's life. D is out because there's no evidence or logic whatsoever behind them doing the same no matter what conditions they are subject to. This one is essentially saying that self-concept doesn't really matter and that's not true.
4) [4]: I see a case for A,B and D
Well, B and D are valid reasons because if you have outliers, that could skew your results one way or the other. B and D are just other ways to say that your sample should be representative of the population you're trying to study, which is normal people. A is correct because I don't think there are any absolute rules against doing research on people with psychological conditions. I think people who have disorders get recruited for studies all the time - like studying bipolar disorder, for instance. For those kinds of studies where they're
trying to study the population of people with bipolar disorder, having those people as the sample is appropriate.
5) [5]: i was between A and D....not sure if this is a content related Q.
Not too sure on this one. I would have chosen D because it looks like the odd one out. It seems like having people who would help a patient adhere to treatment is a benefit of a social support network.
