AP Psychology – Excelling Psychology

Read the stimuli following the questions below carefully. Then read the sample answers along with expert commentary given below. Happy learning!

This question has three parts: Part A, Part B, and Part C. Use the three sources provided to answer all parts of the question.

For Part B and Part C, you must cite the source that you used to answer the question. You can do this in two different ways:

Parenthetical Citation: For example: “…(Source 1).”

Embedded Citation: For example: “According to Source 1…”

Write the response to each part of the question in complete sentences. Use appropriate psychological terminology.

2. Using the sources provided, develop and justify an argument about the extent to which the limbic system governs human emotional and social behavior.

A. Propose a specific and defensible claim based in psychological science that responds to the question.

B.i. Support your claim using at least one piece of specific and relevant evidence from one of the sources.

ii. Explain how the evidence from Part B (i) supports your claim using a psychological perspective, theory, concept, or research finding learned in AP Psychology.

C.i. Support your claim using an additional piece of specific and relevant evidence from a different source than the one that was used in Part B (i).

ii. Explain how the evidence from Part C (i) supports your claim using a different psychological perspective, theory, concept, or research finding learned in AP Psychology than the one that was used in Part B (ii).

Source 1

Introduction

Adolescence is a critical neurodevelopmental period characterized by significant maturation within the limbic system, particularly the amygdala and hippocampus. These structures are central to emotional processing and fear memory, respectively. While their individual roles are well-documented, the development of the neural circuitry between them is less understood. This longitudinal study tracked the development of amygdala-hippocampus functional connectivity and its correlation with the emergence of anxiety symptoms over a four-year period in a cohort of typically developing adolescents.

Participants

The study recruited 150 participants (75 female, 75 male) at age 12 (M = 12.1 years, SD = 0.5) from a community sample. Participants were screened for any pre-existing neurological or psychiatric conditions. Retention rate over the four-year study was 92%, with 138 participants completing the final assessment at age 16.

Method

Participants underwent annual functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) scans while at rest (resting-state fMRI) to measure intrinsic functional connectivity. Immediately following each scan, participants completed the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) scale, a validated self-report measure of anxiety symptom severity. The primary analysis focused on the correlation strength (functional connectivity) between the bilateral amygdala and the bilateral hippocampus.

Results and Discussion

The longitudinal data revealed a clear developmental trend. Amygdala-hippocampus connectivity strengthened significantly from age 12 to 16. Crucially, individual differences in this trajectory were predictive of anxiety outcomes. Participants who showed a steeper-than-average increase in connectivity reported higher levels of anxiety symptoms by age 16. The data table below illustrates the mean connectivity strength (represented by correlation coefficient, r) and mean GAD-7 scores across the study period.

Chen, L., & Hayes, M. P. (2021). A longitudinal fMRI investigation of amygdala-hippocampus connectivity and its relationship to anxiety trajectories in adolescents. Journal of Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 52, 101012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2021.101012

Source 2

Introduction

The limbic system is crucial for social behavior. The hypothalamus, a key part of this system, produces and responds to oxytocin, a hormone linked to love and bonding. This study used prairie voles, small rodents known for forming lifelong monogamous pairs, to test if oxytocin in the hypothalamus is necessary for forming a preference for a specific partner.

Participant

The study used 80 adult female prairie voles that had no prior mating or long-term social experience (they were sexually naive). They were divided into two groups of 40.

Method

Each vole spent 24 hours with a male vole to become familiar with him. Then, the experimental group received an injection into the hypothalamus that blocked oxytocin receptors (the parts of the brain that allow oxytocin to work). The control group received a harmless saline injection in the same brain area. After recovery, each female was placed in a three-chamber cage for a 3-hour “partner preference test.” Her familiar partner was tethered in one chamber, and an unfamiliar, stranger male vole was tethered in another.

Researchers measured the percentage of time the female spent huddling side-by-side with each male, which is a sign of social bonding in voles.

Results and Discussion

The results were clear. Voles in the control group, who received the saline injection, showed a strong preference for their partner. In contrast, the voles that had their oxytocin receptors blocked showed no preference, spending equal time with the partner and the stranger. The results can be seen in the graph below-

Rivera, S., & Feldman, R. L. (2022). The role of the hypothalamus in social bonding: A study of prairie voles. Behavioral Neuroscience, 136(3), 245-255. https://doi.org/10.1037/bne0000514

Source 3

Introduction

Sometimes, the best way to understand how a brain region works is to see what happens when it is damaged. This report from a national health institute summarizes the behavioral patterns observed in patients with injuries to different parts of the limbic system. By looking at these clinical cases, we can create a direct link between specific limbic structures and the emotions and behaviors they control.

Methodology

The report reviewed the medical files of 200 patients with confirmed damage to one of three limbic system areas: the amygdala, the hippocampus, or the cingulate gyrus. The damage was caused by strokes, tumors, or surgery. For each patient, neurologists and psychologists documented the primary changes in their behavior and emotional responses.

Results and Discussion

Amygdala Damage: Patients with amygdala damage had great difficulty recognizing fear in other people’s faces and often showed a lack of fear in situations that would normally scare most people. They also often displayed poor social judgment, trusting strangers too easily.

Hippocampus Damage: The most common problem for these patients was severe memory loss, specifically the inability to form new conscious memories (anterograde amnesia). Their old memories and intelligence often remained intact, but they could not remember new people or events for more than a few minutes.

Cingulate Gyrus Damage: Damage here often led to a profound loss of motivation and emotion. Patients became extremely apathetic, showing little interest in speaking, moving, or engaging with others, even though they were physically able to.

The chart below shows the breakdown of the most common type of behavioral impairment documented for patients with damage to each of the three key limbic structures.

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS). (2023). Clinical case profiles: Behavioral changes from limbic system damage. Clinical Neurology Report, 41(2), 88-95. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.neuro.23010034

(Note: The created source texts are fictionalized and condensed version inspired by the paradigms and findings of limbic system growth, damage and related studies in the field.)

Questions and Answers	Commentary
Part A: Propose a specific and defensible claim. “The limbic system is the main driver of our most basic emotional and social behaviors. Structures within the limbic system, like the amygdala and hypothalamus, have specific jobs that control things like fear, memory, and social attachment, showing that this brain network is essential for how we feel and interact with others.”	This is a strong, defensible claim. It is specific (“main driver,” “basic emotional and social behaviors”), defensible (it can be supported with evidence from the sources), and rooted in psychological science (it names specific brain structures and their functions). It directly responds to the prompt’s core issue.
Part B (i): Support your claim with evidence from a source. “In Source 2, when researchers blocked oxytocin in the hypothalamus of the voles, they didn’t show a partner preference anymore and spent equal time with a stranger (Source 2).”	This is effective evidence. The student provides a specific and relevant piece of data from the source (the result of the oxytocin blockade). The citation is correctly and clearly done.
Part B (ii): Explain with a psychological concept. “This supports my claim because it shows the role of the limbic system in social behavior through the concept of neurotransmitters. Oxytocin is a neurotransmitter that works in the limbic system. The study proves that this specific chemical in this specific brain part is what causes the social bonding behavior. Without it, the bond doesn’t form, showing that the limbic system is in charge.”	This is a clear and accurate explanation. The student correctly identifies a key AP Psychology concept (neurotransmitters). The explanation logically connects the evidence (blocking oxytocin) to the concept and then back to the claim (showing the limbic system is “in charge”).
*Part C (i): Support your claim with evidence from a different* source.** “Source 3 shows that damage to different limbic structures causes specific problems. For example, 42% of the cases showed that amygdala damage led to problems with feeling fear and social judgment (Source 3).”	This successfully uses a different source (Source 3). The student provides specific evidence (the 42% statistic linked to amygdala damage) and correctly uses a parenthetical citation. This meets the requirement to use a new source.
*Part C (ii): Explain with a different* psychological concept.** “This supports my claim by using the idea of localization of function, which is different from neurotransmitters. Localization means that different parts of the brain have different jobs. The fact that damaging the amygdala always messes up fear, and damaging the hippocampus always messes up memory, proves that these behaviors are localized in and controlled by the limbic system.”	This is an excellent application of a second, distinct concept. The student correctly identifies localization of function and explains it in their own words. The explanation powerfully links the clinical evidence from Source 3 to the concept, showing how it proves the limbic system’s primary role. The student explicitly states it is different from the concept used in Part B.

ap psychology, ap psych, ebq, frq, latest syllabus, 2025-26, 2025, 2026, new frqs, revision, model answers, practice, stimulus, past Paper answers, limbic system, neurotransmitters, biological module, amygdala, neurotransmitters

The following AAQ is based on the topic, ‘The Nervous System,’ specifically, the sub-topic of ‘Sympathetic Nervous System and the Stress Response’ from the AP Psychology Curriculum.

Read the questions and the stimulus that follows carefully, then attempt writing answers on your own. Once you’re done, check the answer key with explanation given after the stimulus. Happy learning!

Instructions

Using the source provided, respond to all parts of the question.1. Your response to the question should be provided in six parts: A, B, C, D, E, and F. Write the response to each part of the question in complete sentences. Use appropriate psychological terminology in your response.

A. Identify the research method used in the study.

B. What is the operational definition of “motor performance” in this study?

C. Based on the data in the graph, describe the difference in heart rate between the High-Pressure and Low-Pressure groups.

D. Identify at least one ethical guideline applied by the researchers.

E. Explain the extent to which the research findings may or may not be generalizable using specific and relevant evidence from the study.

F. Explain how the finding for motor errors connects to the researchers’ original hypothesis regarding the nervous system.

Introduction

Researchers aimed to investigate how a high-pressure situation influences the autonomic nervous system and fine motor control. The prediction was that performing a skilled task under social evaluation pressure would lead to increased sympathetic nervous system activation and a higher rate of motor errors compared to performing the same task in a relaxed, private setting.

Participants

The researchers recruited 120 participants from a pool of university students and community members. All participants were pre-screened to be right-handed and have normal or corrected-to-normal vision. They were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: the High-Pressure condition or the Low-Pressure condition. The final sample consisted of individuals ranging in age from 18 to 35 years (M = 23.1, SD = 4.3). The researchers provided detailed demographic information for the final sample, which is presented in the table below.

Method

The study utilized two conditions: High-Pressure and Low-Pressure. In the High-Pressure condition, participants were told they were competing for a monetary prize and that their performance was being recorded and evaluated by a panel of experts. In the Low-Pressure condition, participants were told the study was about equipment calibration and they should simply relax and try the task alone.

Motor performance was measured by counting the number of times a participant’s hand trembled enough to break contact with a stable metal plate while guiding a small metal loop along a curving wire path (a classic steady-hand task). Physiological arousal was also assessed as the average number of heartbeats per minute (BPM) recorded by a heart rate monitor during the task.

Each participant completed a single five-minute trial of the motor task after hearing the context-specific instructions. The setting was kept at a constant temperature to prevent external factors from influencing physiological readings. All equipment was standardized and tested for calibration before each session to ensure consistency in data collection.

Results

The data obtained from the study are displayed in the graph below.

The mean heart rate for the High-Pressure group was 82 BPM, which was a full 10 BPM higher than the Low-Pressure group’s mean of 72 BPM.

Similarly, the motor error data showed a dramatic effect, with the High-Pressure group making over twice as many errors on average (18.5) as the Low-Pressure group (8.2).

Beilock, S. L., & Carr, T. H. (2001). On the fragility of skilled performance: What governs choking under pressure? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(4), 701–725. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.4.701

(Note: The provided citation is for a seminal real-world study on perceptual expertise. The created source text is a fictionalized and condensed version inspired by the paradigms and findings of this and related studies in the field.)

Answer Key

Answer	Explanation
A. Identify the research method used in the study. Answer: The research method used is an experiment.	This is an experiment because the researchers manipulated the independent variable (the pressure level by giving different instructions) and randomly assigned participants to the High-Pressure or Low-Pressure conditions to see the effect on heart rate and motor errors.
B. What is the operational definition of “motor performance” in this study? Answer: Motor performance was operationally defined as the number of times a participant’s hand trembled enough to break contact with a stable metal plate while guiding a metal loop along a wire	In this specific steady-hand task, the researchers couldn’t just measure performance vaguely. They had to define it as a countable behavior: the number of times contact with the plate was broken.
C. Based on the data in the graph, describe the difference in heart rate between the High-Pressure and Low-Pressure groups. Answer: The heart rate of the High-Pressure group (82 BPM) was 10 BPM higher than the heart rate of the Low-Pressure group (72 BPM).	The graph’s data shows that the mean heart rate for the group told they were being evaluated by experts was significantly higher than the group told the study was just about equipment calibration.
D. Identify at least one ethical guideline applied by the researchers. Answer: The researchers debriefed all participants after the study, explaining the true purpose and the use of deception, and gave them the option to withdraw their data.	Since the researchers used deception (e.g., telling the Low-Pressure group it was an equipment calibration study), they ethically had to explain the true hypothesis afterward in a debriefing and allow participants to remove their data.
E. Explain the extent to which the research findings may or may not be generalizable using specific and relevant evidence from the study. Answer: The findings have low generalizability to real-world high-pressure situations because the sample was limited to right-handed 18-35 year olds and the task was an artificial laboratory activity.	The study’s participants were all right-handed and from a limited age range (18-35), so we can’t be sure if the same results would happen for left-handed people or older adults. The artificial “metal loop” task also may not reflect pressure in a real sport or speech.
F. Explain how the finding for motor errors connects to the researchers’ original hypothesis regarding the nervous system. Answer: The hypothesis was that high pressure would increase sympathetic nervous system activation (shown by higher heart rate) and cause more motor errors. The finding that the High-Pressure group made over twice as many errors (18.5 vs. 8.2) directly supports this, associating nervous system arousal to worsened motor control.	The original hypothesis predicted that the “pressure” would trigger the nervous system, leading to more mistakes. The result—that the high-pressure group made more than double the errors—is the direct evidence that confirms this nervous system link to “choking under pressure.”

ap psychology, ap psych, aaq, frq, latest syllabus, 2025-26, 2025, 2026, new frqs, revision, model answers, practice, stimulus, past Paper answers, nervous system, sympathetic nervous system

Archives

Categories

Tags