Learn 200 AQA GCSE Psychology words for describing theories, applying concepts to scenarios and evaluating studies. Each entry gives a plain-English meaning and an example.
AQA Psychology 8182 has two 105-minute papers, each worth 100 marks and 50%. Paper 1 is Cognition and Behaviour. Paper 2 is Social Context and Behaviour. Each has four 25-mark sections containing a mixture of question types.
200 essay vocabulary words and examples
Thinking, development and social behaviour
- encoding — turning information into a form that can be stored in memory. explain how attention may affect encoding.
- storage — holding information over time. distinguish storage from successful recall.
- retrieval — bringing stored information back into use. a prompt may support retrieval.
- recall — bringing information to mind, often without seeing it again. compare free recall with recall supported by cues.
- recognition — identifying information encountered before. recognition can improve when the original item is present.
- reconstructive memory — the idea that remembering involves rebuilding an account. expectations can influence reconstructive memory.
- schema — an organised mental framework for interpreting information. a schema can guide what a person expects to see.
- perception — interpreting information from the senses. explain why perception can differ despite a similar stimulus.
- illusion — a systematic mismatch between appearance and a physical feature of the stimulus. describe what the illusion makes the viewer perceive.
- assimilation — using an existing schema to understand a new experience. a child may assimilate an unfamiliar animal into a known category.
- accommodation — changing a schema in response to information that does not fit it. a child accommodates after learning that two animals belong to different groups.
- egocentrism — difficulty taking another person’s perspective in this developmental sense. connect the task to the child’s ability to see another viewpoint.
- conformity — changing behaviour or judgement in response to group influence. compare public conformity with private agreement.
- obedience — following a direct instruction from an authority. identify who gives the instruction in the example.
- bystander behaviour — action or inaction by people who witness an event. explain what might affect whether a bystander helps.
- diffusion of responsibility — a reduction in felt personal responsibility when others are present. apply diffusion of responsibility to the crowded setting.
- neuron — a cell specialised to carry signals in the nervous system. explain the role of a neuron in passing information.
- synapse — a junction at which a signal passes between cells. describe how chemical signals can cross a synapse.
- lateralisation — a tendency for a function to be more associated with one brain hemisphere. avoid assuming lateralisation means the other hemisphere is inactive.
- non-verbal communication — communication through means other than words. compare facial expression and posture as non-verbal cues.
Memory, learning and explanation
- perspective — a standpoint or framework used to interpret behaviour. compare cognitive and sociocultural perspectives.
- responsibility — an obligation to consider the consequences of inquiry or action. researcher responsibility includes protecting participants.
- reconstruction — rebuilding a memory using stored information and other inputs. reconstruction may incorporate later wording.
- interference — disruption of recall or learning by competing information. similar material can produce interference.
- misinformation — inaccurate information that can influence a later report. post-event misinformation may change a response.
- leading — phrased in a way that suggests a particular answer. a leading question can affect an estimate.
- measurement — the process of assigning observations or scores using a rule. evaluate the measurement of recall.
- cue — a signal that helps evoke a response or memory. a contextual cue can prompt recall.
- change — a difference over time or between states. distinguish measured change from a practice effect.
- compliance — outward agreement or action without necessarily changing private belief. compliance can end when pressure is removed.
- internalisation — acceptance of a view as part of one’s own belief. internalisation can persist privately.
- causation — a relationship in which one factor produces an effect. a controlled experiment can support a claim about causation.
- attachment — an enduring emotional bond. evaluate how attachment is assessed.
- reinforcement — a consequence that increases the likelihood of a behaviour. reinforcement can maintain a learned response.
- conditioning — learning through associations or consequences. compare different forms of conditioning.
- mediational — concerned with processes that intervene between stimulus and response. a mediational process such as attention.
- reductionism — explaining a complex phenomenon through simpler components or a single level. evaluate whether the account is reductionist.
- determinism — the view that behaviour is governed by causes or conditions. compare different forms of determinism.
- idiographic — focused on individuals and their particular experiences. an idiographic approach can reveal personal meaning.
- nomothetic — aimed at general patterns or laws. a nomothetic approach seeks common patterns.
Design, measurement and ethics
- operationalisation — specifying how an idea will be measured or manipulated. operationalisation turns recall into a score.
- construct — an abstract concept that cannot be observed directly. memory accuracy is a construct.
- validity — how well a measure or inference supports its intended interpretation. evaluate whether the task measures the construct.
- reliability — consistency of measurement or results under specified conditions. check inter-rater reliability.
- replication — repeating a study or procedure to test a finding. a replication uses the same core manipulation.
- sampling — selecting cases or participants from a population. sampling affects who is represented.
- random allocation — assigning participants to conditions by chance. random allocation can reduce systematic group differences.
- control condition — a comparison condition without the critical manipulation or with an alternative treatment. compare the experimental and control conditions.
- confound — a variable that changes with the factor of interest and offers another explanation. prior exposure could confound the result.
- standardisation — keeping procedures consistent across participants or settings. standardisation helps isolate the wording change.
- demand characteristics — cues that suggest what a study expects from participants. demand characteristics may influence answers.
- social desirability — a tendency to give answers viewed favourably by others. social desirability can affect self-reports.
- observer effect — a change associated with being observed. the observer effect may alter classroom behaviour.
- generalisation — extension of a finding beyond the cases or conditions studied. limit generalisation from a narrow sample.
- consent — agreement to participate based on appropriate information and choice. obtain informed consent.
- debriefing — explaining the study after participation and addressing questions or concerns. debriefing can explain why details were withheld.
- anonymity — a condition in which identities are not known or linked to responses. anonymous responses can reduce some disclosure concerns.
- confidentiality — protection against unauthorised disclosure of information. maintain confidentiality in the interview records.
- self-report — information participants provide about themselves. a self-report may differ from observed behaviour.
- attrition — loss of participants over the course of a study. attrition can change the composition of the final sample.
Taking a position
- claim — a statement you want the reader to accept. make a claim.
- stance — your position on a question. take a clear stance.
- thesis — the central position or interpretation your response develops. support the thesis.
- premise — an idea the argument starts from. question the premise.
- assumption — something treated as true without being established. test the assumption.
- assert — state a position firmly. assert that access matters.
- argue — give reasons in support of a position. argue for a trial.
- maintain — continue to hold or defend a view. maintain that the policy is fair.
- contend — put forward a position that can be challenged. contend that the proposal is workable.
- justify — give sufficient reasons for a decision or judgement. justify the expense.
- advocate — publicly support an action or change. advocate for reform.
- defend — answer criticism of a view or choice. defend a decision.
- qualify — limit a statement so it applies only where warranted. qualify the conclusion.
- concede — acknowledge a valid point made by the other side. concede that costs may rise.
- rebut — answer an opposing claim with reasoning or evidence. rebut the objection.
- counterargument — a reasoned objection to a position. address a counterargument.
- reservation — a concern that makes agreement incomplete. express a reservation.
- distinguish — show what makes two things different. distinguish cost from value.
- criteria — standards used to judge something. agree on the criteria.
- verdict — a final judgement reached after consideration. reach a verdict.
Using evidence and reasoning
- evidence — information that helps establish a claim. draw on evidence.
- example — a specific case that makes a general point clearer. give a concrete example.
- illustrate — make an idea clearer through a case or detail. illustrate the difficulty.
- demonstrate — show how or why something is true. demonstrate a connection.
- substantiate — support a claim with convincing information. substantiate the allegation.
- corroborate — provide independent support for an existing account. corroborate the witness’s account.
- infer — draw a conclusion from available clues. infer a motive from the wording.
- imply — suggest a meaning without saying it directly. imply that change is possible.
- interpret — explain what something means in context. interpret a figure in context.
- analyse — examine how parts work together. analyse the writer’s choices.
- evaluate — judge the strength, quality or value of something. evaluate the proposal.
- plausible — reasonable enough to believe given what is known. a plausible explanation.
- credible — worthy of belief or trust. a credible source.
- relevant — directly connected to the issue being considered. relevant to the question.
- sufficient — enough for the purpose or conclusion at hand. sufficient for a limited trial.
- representative — typical enough to reflect a larger group. a representative sample.
- anecdote — a brief account of a particular incident. open with an anecdote.
- limitation — something that restricts what a method or claim can establish. acknowledge a limitation.
- contradict — state or show something incompatible with another claim. contradict the earlier finding.
- synthesise — combine ideas from separate sources into a new account. synthesise competing accounts.
Connecting ideas
- whereas — introduces a clause that contrasts with another. whereas the first option costs less.
- although — introduces a fact that qualifies the main statement. although demand may rise.
- however — signals a contrast or change in direction. however, costs remain uncertain.
- nevertheless — signals that a point still holds despite a difficulty. nevertheless, the trial could go ahead.
- conversely — introduces a contrasting relationship in the reverse direction. conversely, lower demand can free capacity.
- similarly — points out a meaningful likeness. similarly, smaller groups need space.
- likewise — shows that a similar point applies elsewhere. likewise, evening users need lighting.
- consequently — introduces a result of what came before. consequently, the queue grew.
- therefore — introduces a conclusion or result that follows. therefore, a trial is justified.
- furthermore — adds a supporting point. furthermore, the existing room is free.
- specifically — narrows the discussion to a precise detail. specifically, the plan would add two sessions.
- instead — signals a replacement or different choice. instead, use the current building.
- alternatively — introduces another option. alternatively, change the timetable.
- otherwise — indicates what happens under different conditions. book early, otherwise places may fill.
- provided — introduces a condition when used with a following clause. provided that staffing is adequate.
- despite — introduces something that fails to prevent the main outcome. despite the delay.
- unlike — marks a difference between two things. unlike the previous scheme.
- respectively — matches items with values in the same stated order. costs were $5 and $8, respectively.
- overall — signals a judgement about the whole picture. overall, the benefits are modest.
- ultimately — identifies what matters after other factors are considered. ultimately, the decision depends on demand.
Explaining cause and effect
- cause — produce or bring about an outcome. cause avoidable delays.
- contribute — play a part in bringing about an outcome. contribute to overcrowding.
- trigger — set a process or reaction in motion. trigger a review.
- accelerate — make a process happen faster. accelerate the transition.
- intensify — make something stronger or more severe. intensify competition.
- exacerbate — make an existing problem worse. exacerbate existing inequalities.
- mitigate — reduce the severity or harmful effect of something. mitigate the harm.
- prevent — stop something from happening. prevent further damage.
- deter — discourage someone from taking an action. deter people from taking risks.
- enable — make an action possible. enable students to attend.
- facilitate — make an action or process easier. facilitate access to training.
- reinforce — strengthen an effect, belief or behaviour. reinforce an existing pattern.
- undermine — weaken something, often gradually. undermine public trust.
- sustain — keep something going over time. sustain the improvement.
- displace — push something or someone out of an existing place or role. displace smaller operators.
- redistribute — change how something is shared. redistribute public funds.
- consequence — an outcome that follows an action or event. an unintended consequence.
- mechanism — the process through which an effect occurs. identify the mechanism.
- correlation — a pattern in which two things vary together. observe a correlation.
- constraint — a condition that limits what can be done. work within a budget constraint.
Synthesising sources
- attribute — identify where an idea or quotation comes from. attribute the statistic to Source A.
- cite — identify the source of material used in an argument. cite the survey in Source B.
- paraphrase — restate a source’s meaning in your own words and structure. paraphrase the author’s reasoning.
- excerpt — a passage taken from a longer work. an excerpt from a public address.
- provenance — the origin and history of a piece of material. check the provenance of a photograph.
- testimony — a person’s account offered as evidence. testimony from residents.
- dataset — an organised collection of data. a dataset on bus ridership.
- sample — a subset examined to learn about a larger group. a sample of city schools.
- metric — a defined quantity used to measure performance or change. an attendance metric.
- variable — a factor that may vary or be deliberately changed. control for a confounding variable.
- baseline — a reference point used to judge later differences. measure change against the baseline.
- methodology — the overall system of methods used to investigate a question. question the study’s methodology.
- outlier — a result far from the others in a set. identify an outlier.
- independent — arising separately from the source or factor under discussion. an independent source.
- convergence — movement towards agreement or a shared conclusion. convergence between findings.
- divergence — movement apart or difference between results or views. divergence between local and national data.
- complement — add a missing part or strength to something else. complement the survey with testimony.
- complicate — show that a simple explanation leaves important things out. complicate the initial conclusion.
- reconcile — explain how apparently conflicting claims can fit together. reconcile the two findings.
- triangulate — check a claim by comparing different independent sources or methods. triangulate claims across three sources.
Testing evidence and reasoning
- intermediate — coming between earlier reasons and the main result. identify an intermediate conclusion.
- unstated — implied without being expressed directly. an unstated assumption about access.
- premiss — a proposition offered as a reason for a conclusion. test whether the premiss is true.
- jointly — together rather than separately. the two reasons jointly support the claim.
- deductive — involving an inference intended to follow necessarily. a deductive argument with a missing premiss.
- inductive — involving reasoning that extends beyond the observed cases. an inductive inference from a survey.
- abductive — concerned with inferring a likely explanation. an abductive inference from an unexpected result.
- counterinstance — an example that goes against a general claim. one counterinstance challenges the rule.
- equivocal — open to different meanings or interpretations. an equivocal use of the word free.
- circular — using the conclusion itself as part of its supposed support. circular reasoning provides no independent reason.
- fallacy — a flaw in reasoning. identify a fallacy in a forced choice.
- confounder — a factor that can distort a proposed causal relationship. distance may be a confounder.
- denominator — the reference total against which a count or rate is expressed. check the denominator in the reported rate.
- response — a reply or a contribution to a survey. a low survey response rate.
- self-selection — the process by which participants choose whether to take part. self-selection limits the survey.
- comparability — the extent to which items can be fairly compared. question comparability across the two periods.
- interested — having a stake that could affect an account. an interested source may still provide accurate data.
- contemporaneous — made or existing at the same time as an event. contemporaneous records of attendance.
- weight — the importance assigned to a piece of evidence. give more weight to direct measurements.
- decisive — strong enough to settle a question under the available evidence. the documents do not provide decisive support.
Evaluating limits and assumptions
- presuppose — treat something as already true before arguing. presuppose that demand is fixed.
- conflate — treat distinct things as if they were the same. conflate availability with accessibility.
- elide — leave out or pass over a distinction or detail. elide the difference between choice and constraint.
- overgeneralise — draw a conclusion that covers more cases than the evidence allows. overgeneralise from one institution.
- extrapolate — extend an observed pattern beyond the data available. extrapolate from a small pilot.
- circumscribe — limit something to a defined range. circumscribe the policy’s application.
- predicate — base a claim or decision on a condition. predicate success on continued funding.
- reductive — simplifying a subject in a way that loses important detail. a reductive account of motivation.
- tenable — capable of being maintained under criticism. a tenable explanation of the discrepancy.
- fallacious — based on faulty reasoning. a fallacious comparison between unlike cases.
- ambivalent — having mixed or opposing feelings about something. an ambivalent response to regulation.
- normative — concerned with what ought to be done or valued. a normative claim about fairness.
- empirical — based on observation or evidence from experience. empirical evidence on take-up.
- asymmetry — a significant difference between two sides that are compared. an asymmetry in bargaining power.
- contention — a claim presented as part of an argument. the contention that access is universal.
- caveat — a warning or limitation attached to a statement. accept the proposal with a caveat.
- paradox — an apparently contradictory situation or statement. the paradox of choice without access.
- compatibility — ability to work or coexist together. compatibility with local practice.
- salience — importance or prominence in a particular context. the salience of cost in the debate.
- commensurate — matching another thing in size or degree. support commensurate with need.
Exam requirements and worked examples
Locate the longer writing in both papers
Paper 1 covers memory, perception, development and research methods. Paper 2 covers social influence, language, thought and communication, brain and neuropsychology, and psychological problems. Both have multiple-choice, short-answer and extended-writing tasks. Use the mark value and the command to judge how much to develop.
AQA assesses knowledge and understanding, application, and analysis and evaluation. In an application answer, identify the scenario detail that makes the concept relevant. In evaluation, explain how a feature of the study changes what can be concluded. A term such as validity becomes useful when it identifies the exact issue with a measure or inference.
Official specifications and sources
- AQA GCSE Psychology 8182 assessment overview
- AQA GCSE Psychology assessment objectives
- AQA GCSE Psychology subject content
Worked response about reconstructive memory
Imagine participants hear a short account of an unfamiliar event. Later, some remember details that fit what they usually expect at that kind of event. Reconstructive memory offers a way to explain the pattern. Existing knowledge may influence how people fill gaps or organise what they remember. The example is invented for practice.
To test the explanation, compare the details each participant actually heard with the details they later report. Ask whether the instructions or questions could have suggested the extra information. If the wording differs between groups, it becomes harder to attribute the result to expectations alone. The evaluation should identify the competing cause and explain how to control it.
A qualified conclusion could say the result is consistent with an influence of prior expectations while recognising that the procedure might also have introduced cues. In an exam, connect the reasoning to the named study or evidence given. Explain what the method supports and how far the result can be applied to everyday remembering.
Fencing Method for a psychological word
Start with Recall changed. Add detail. Some participants reported a detail they had not heard. Refine the tone. The detail was consistent with their expectations about the event. Add logic. This supports a reconstructive explanation if the detail was not suggested by the procedure. Transfer the reasoning to an unfamiliar story and decide what to control.
Try fencing diffusion of responsibility. Identify the people present, the action someone might take and the reason personal responsibility could feel weaker. Then consider whether the other people also provided cues about what was happening. Explain which process the evidence can actually distinguish.
Evaluate a study through a specific limitation
Suppose two groups complete the same memory task in different rooms. One room is noisier. Name the feature, explain which variable it might affect and link it to the result. If noise reduces attention, a difference in recall might partly reflect the room. A control such as using comparable rooms can help test the intended explanation.
Compare this with a problem about generalising. A narrow sample affects who the result may apply to. An uncontrolled room difference affects confidence in the cause of the result. Identify which problem the question is asking about and what change would address it.
Use figures in an extended response
Write what each score measures and compare the groups using the same units. If one group recalls eight words and another six, explain the difference of two words before interpreting it. Check whether the values are individual scores or group averages. Ask what information about variation would help you judge the strength of the pattern.
A numerical difference alone cannot establish a mechanism. Refer to the design and the conditions that were controlled. If the task asks for a conclusion, state what the result supports and identify a limit. Keep the conclusion at the same level as the evidence.
Turn a theory into a scenario answer
Choose a concept and underline the detail in the scenario that signals it. Then write the link in a complete sentence. If a person changes a public answer to match a group, the detail about agreement in public may support an explanation involving group pressure. Whether private belief changed would need further evidence.
Practise a second scenario where the person follows a direct instruction. Explain why the authority relationship matters. Comparing the examples helps you choose between conformity and obedience by looking at what produced the response.
Frequently asked questions
Do both papers require extended writing? Yes. Is naming a limitation enough? Explain what it does to the result or conclusion. Can an example replace a definition? Use the answer type required by the question. In a scenario task, give enough meaning for the application to be clear.
Make a study card you can use under timed conditions
Write the aim, procedure, result and conclusion on separate lines. Underline the result that matters to the theory. Next, explain what the procedure lets you rule out and which alternative explanation remains possible. If your first limitation is simply that a task feels artificial, identify the everyday activity you want to generalise to and the feature missing from the task.
Use the same card for two questions. A description should give the procedure and result accurately. An evaluation should explain how a feature of the procedure affects what the result means. Practise retrieving the relevant part rather than writing every fact you know about the study. This also helps you stay within the time indicated by the mark value.
Compare an experimental claim with a correlational claim
Suppose a survey finds a relationship between sleep and recall scores. Write what the finding shows, then name a possible alternative explanation. Study habits or another factor could be associated with both. If the question asks about cause, explain why a relationship alone leaves the direction and mechanism unresolved. A different design would be needed to test the claim more directly.
Now imagine a controlled experiment that varies the length of a rest break before a memory task. Identify the independent variable and the dependent variable, and state how each is operationalised. Explain one control that would improve the comparison. This practice separates the evidence that two variables move together from the evidence that a specific change produces an effect.
Apply a development term to a fresh scenario
Imagine a child calls an unfamiliar four-legged animal a dog. Explain how the child might be using an existing schema. Then imagine the child learns to separate that animal from dogs and changes the way the category is used. Apply accommodation to that second change. Give the scenario detail in each answer so the examiner can see how the term fits.
For a longer question, assess what the observation can establish. One response can illustrate the concepts, while a claim about typical development needs evidence from more observations or participants. Write a conclusion that matches the strength and scope of the example. Then test a different explanation, such as the child repeating a familiar label, and say what additional evidence could distinguish it.
Use the same test when comparing two studies. State whether they measure the same behaviour under similar conditions before treating one as confirmation of the other.