I’ve just sat down to write an example essay for the new Paper 1. Then I thought to myself, “Do I need to use studies?” My first instinct was to follow my cheeseburger essay format, since this makes the most sense to me. However, I thought I’d challenge myself . Is it possible to write an essay without studies? Let’s see.
The Question: In the context of health and well-being, discuss the concept of bias in relation to one or more biological explanations of one mental health disorder.
Teacher Tip: If you’re stuck on how to phrase essay questions, I think this generic template is helpful: “In the context of (insert context), discuss the concept of (insert concept) in relation to…(insert topic).”
Depression for IB Psychology NOW AVAILABLE
The Essay Plan:
- Intro
- BP1: Biological explanation 1: serotonin hypothesis
- BP2: Bias: Cultural bias – Western bias
- BP3: Biological explanation 2: 5-HTT gene
- BP4: Cultural bias: East vs West
- BP5: Diathesis-stress model
- Conclusion
My first thought…
This is tricky. I’ve just written the plan above and I’m finding it easy to plan the “area of study” = biological explanations. Two that overlap really well are the serotonin hypothesis and the 5-HTT gene. This combination works well because the serotonin hypothesis is pretty straightforward, easy to comprehend and explain but then allows for more complexity to be introduced with the 5-HTT gene. The problem? I’m kinda stuck with what biases to write about. I wanted to talk about the original studies on monoamine inhibitors and talk about researcher bias and the placebo bias, since these studies didn’t use control groups – they just gave one group of people with depression MAOIs and measured their change in symptoms. However, by my own rule for this essay I can’t. I’m limited with cultural bias in the explanation. I also want to bring in the Dunedin study to “analyse” the biological explanation a bit more, but I can’t. Let’s see how the essay turns out…
The Essay
| In the context of health and well-being, discuss the concept of bias in relation to one or more biological explanations of one mental health disorder. | |
|---|---|
| A common mental health problem is depression, or major depressive disorder (MDD). Two biological explanations for this disorder are the serotonin hypothesis (which came from the earlier monoamine hypothesis) and | Simple yet effective restating of the question to start the essay. |
| The first biological explanation is the serotonin hypothesis of depression. This hypothesis came from an early hypothesis called the monoamine hypothesis. In the 1950s, doctors were prescribing medications for diseases like tuberculosis and heart-disease. They noticed an interesting side-effect of these medications – people’s symptoms of depression disappeared. These medications were monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) – they prevent the enzyme monoamine oxidase from breaking down neurotransmitters, which means they stay in the synaptic cleft longer. This increases the amount of monoamines (like dopamine and serotonin) to bind to receptors. Since these medications were shown to improve depression, it was suggested that low monoamine levels were the cause of depression. From this, the specific monoamine neurotransmitter serotonin was identified as a potential cause of depression, which is why the serotonin hypothesis of depression became popular. | Knowledge shown of the area of study. |
| However, one major issue with the serotonin hypothesis is cultural bias. This hypothesis comes from mainly Western studies, so it may limit the generalisability of the findings to other cultures. One specific reason for this is because genetic differences between cultures. Another possible reason is symptoms differences. Asians tend to experience more physical symptoms of depression (like stomach aches), whereas in the West it’s more about cognitive and emotional symptoms. Serotonin influences our thinking and decision-making and problems with these cognitive processes are possible symptoms in Western diagnostic manuals (like the DSM), but they might not necessary be in Asian criteria (like the Chinese manual of disorders). This means low serotonin might not have the same effect on symptoms across cultures, which is why we should consider cultural bias when trying to explain biology and mental health. | Bias introduced to the essay early to stay connected with the concept. |
| This brings us to the next potential biological explanation of depression – genes. The 5-HTT gene (aka the serotonin transporter gene) affects gene expression and the production of serotonin transporters – proteins on the presynaptic neuron that reabsorb serotonin from the synaptic cleft. There are two variants – the S variant (two short alleles) and the L variant (two long alleles), and some people are a combination SL (one short, one long). In Western people the S variant is the risk variant – people with this variant are more likely to be diagnosed than others. However, the opposite is true for East Asians – in those populations it’s the people with the L variant who are at risk. This shows one reason why cultural bias is important to consider in biological explanations of disorders. If we only use our knowledge from one group and apply it around the world, this biased perspective might be incorrect. | This paragraph effectively combines knowledge of the topic and a link with bias – cultural bias. |
| Depression probably isn’t caused by biological factors alone. It’s more likely due to a combination of environment plus biology, nature via nurture. This is where the diathesis-stress model is valuable. This model suggests that depression is caused by the combination of stress and existing vulnerabilities (like genetics or serotonin levels). | Brief paragraph on diathesis-stress model. This needs development. |
| In conclusion, the serotonin and genetic explanations for depression are two biological explanations that are closely related, but these hypotheses might suffer from a Western bias. (532 words). | Brief and simplistic conclusion |
The Mark
Using the rubric (see below), I’d give this a 9-11 out of 15. Gun to my head I’d say 9/15.
Notes from my marking of the essay
Most descriptors in the 7-9 and 10-12 band fit best, with the exception of a couple. The essay has a very simplistic conclusion but demonstrates excellent knowledge and appropriate use of terminology. The limited conclusion is because there’s not much analysis of the content using the concept of bias. I’d argue because it’s really difficult to analyse some topics with just the concept – analysing the research using the concept is far easier. The compensation is to have in-depth knowledge of the content.
I found a peculiar phrase in my rubric that escaped me before – the “links between concepts.” Thankfully, this has been changed in the latest edition of the guide (Dec 2025) and it now says “Links between the area of study and the concept.” This makes a lot more sense.
My Reflections
It seems it can be done. We can write a reasonably solid, middle-band essay that might even be enough for a 7. But is it the best strategy?
Half-way through I really want to make a point about publication bias and how there’s weak evidence supporting the serotonin hypothesis, but if I’m a student who hasn’t learned about research then I wouldn’t be able to make these points. Similarly, I want to talk about confirmation bias and its relevant for researchers conducting studies, but how double-blind procedures can control for this. Yet again, when I write these essays I try to write from the student’s perspective. If we overlook the research, they won’t know about these biases and will find it difficult to write about them.
I also want to talk about the diathesis-stress model and bring in the famous Dunedin study showing the combination of the S variant and life stressors increases the risk for depression. I feel this would have added to my analysis, but alas, it’s a study.
My Final Thought
With the limited time we have and the amount of content to cover, is time spent on research worthwhile? After all, would it be better focusing on content knowledge that could be used for SAQs and ASAQs – exploiting the overlaps? For example, neurotransmission and genetic inheritance. I have a hunch about the answer, but the only way for me to know for sure is to write another essay with research. Let’s do that now…
Travis Dixon is an IB Psychology teacher, author, workshop leader, examiner and IA moderator.