Read the official IB Psychology Internal Assessment criteria with markbands, guiding questions, and notes. Use the selectors to switch subject, level, or component; the optional AI grading prompt stays at the bottom for self-review.
Step 1 — what are you working on?
Step 2 — narrow it down
Group
Subject
Level
Official criteria
Psychology · All · Investigation
4 criteriaTotal 24 marks
Criterion A: Introduction
6 marks
0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
The aim or research question is stated but not clearly expressed or is too broad.
The real-life problem is stated.
The findings and conclusions of two pieces of research are not clearly stated and are not made relevant to the investigation, or only one piece of research is included.
3–4
The aim or research question is clearly stated but only partially focused.
The real-life problem is described, but the impact on the population of interest is not addressed.
Relevant findings and conclusions of two pieces of research are described and linked to the investigation or only one is explained and linked to the investigation.
5–6
The aim or research question is clearly stated and focused.
The real-life problem is described and the impact on the population of interest is explained.
Relevant findings and conclusions of two pieces of research are explained and linked to the investigation.
Criterion B: Research methodology
6 marks
0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
The research method is described with errors in understanding.
The procedure is described but is unclear due to errors or omissions.
Ethical considerations are described but not linked to the investigation.
3–4
The choice of research method is described.
The procedure is described but lacks detail.
Relevant ethical considerations are described but some are not linked to the investigation.
5–6
The choice of research method is explained.
The procedure is explained.
Relevant ethical considerations are described and explicitly linked to the investigation.
Criterion C: Data collection
6 marks
0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
An appropriate data collection tool has been created to measure behaviour, but it contains errors.
Decisions made when creating the data collection tool are in limited detail or have limited relevance to the aim or research question of the investigation.
Potential challenges when collecting data are described in limited detail and/or are not relevant to the investigation.
3–4
An appropriate data collection tool has been created to measure behaviour.
Decisions made when creating the data collection tool are described and relevant to the aim or research question of the investigation.
Potential challenges when collecting data are described and relevant to the investigation.
5–6
An appropriate and effective data collection tool to measure behaviour has been created.
Decisions made when creating the data collection tool are explained and relevant to the aim or research question of the investigation.
Potential challenges when collecting data are explained and relevant to the investigation.
Criterion D: Discussion
6 marks
0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
Potential findings of the investigation are described but the implication(s) for policy/practice are not addressed.
One or more examples of researcher bias are identified.
The usefulness of one relevant additional research method is described, without reference to increasing the understanding of the area of investigation.
3–4
Potential findings of the investigation are described and the implication(s) for policy/practice are partially addressed.
One or more relevant examples of researcher bias are described.
The usefulness of one relevant additional research method is discussed without reference to increasing the understanding of the area of investigation.
5–6
Potential findings of the investigation are described in detail and the implication(s) for policy/practice are explained.
One or more relevant examples of how researcher bias may affect the investigation are discussed.
The usefulness of one relevant additional research method is discussed with reference to increasing the understanding of the area of investigation.
Optional: AI grading prompt
For self-review only
A copyable prompt that embeds the criteria above and asks an AI to grade the work criterion by criterion. Use it as a draft sanity check — not a substitute for teacher or examiner feedback.
Common questions
Where do the criteria come from?
The criteria are stored locally in a structured database that mirrors the official IB descriptors. The page only displays them — descriptor wording is preserved as written, with no paraphrasing.
Why pick subject, level, and component?
The criteria differ by assessment type, subject, level, and component. The selectors at the top filter the database to the criteria set that applies to your specific submission.
What is the AI grading prompt at the bottom for?
It is an optional helper. The prompt embeds the same criteria you see above and asks an AI to evaluate the work criterion by criterion. Useful for a quick self-review before teacher feedback.
Is my work sent anywhere?
No. The page only loads criteria. If you choose to use the AI prompt, you copy it manually and paste it into the AI tool of your choice — nothing leaves this page.
More IB resources
Other tools that pair well with the official criteria.