AP Psychology Free Response QuestionsAAQ and EBQ Archive and Practice (2023 to 2025)

What do AP Psychology FRQs test?

Applying psychological science to unfamiliar research, not reciting terminology from memory.

The free response section accounts for 33.3% of the AP Psychology score and is divided between two distinct question types, the Article Analysis Question and the Evidence Based Question. Both center on peer reviewed research summaries provided within the question itself: students never need to have encountered the studies before. The AAQ asks students to demonstrate research methods and data interpretation skills on a single study, covering methodology, operational definitions, statistics, ethics, and generalizability. The EBQ asks students to build and defend an argument using three sources, integrating course concepts as the reasoning behind the evidence. Neither question rewards defining terms in isolation. According to the AP Psychology Course and Exam Description (V.1, 2024), Practice 4 (Argumentation) is assessed exclusively through the free response section, and earning full credit on both questions requires explicitly connecting evidence to explanation at every step.

What is the difference between the AAQ and the EBQ?

Two separate question types, each worth 7 points, testing distinct but overlapping skill sets.

The AP Psychology free response section has exactly two questions. The Article Analysis Question (AAQ) and the Evidence Based Question (EBQ) are fixed in structure and are never interchangeable. They differ in the number of sources provided, the skills assessed, the time allotted, and the structure of the required response. Understanding the distinction before exam day is essential because the response format for each is entirely different.

How are AP Psychology FRQs scored?

Analytic point rubrics scored by trained Readers: each part is a binary earn or miss, with no holistic grade.

Each part of both the AAQ and EBQ has a College Board scoring guideline that states precisely what a response must do to earn the point. Readers award the point only when the response meets that part's specific requirement. Partial credit applies within the two point parts (F on the AAQ and B(ii) and C(ii) on the EBQ): earning 1 of the 2 points is possible when a response includes evidence without explanation, or explanation without evidence, but not both with an applied concept. A definition alone does not earn any point, though a clear definition can support an application. According to the 2025 scoring guidelines, a response is also not penalized for incorrect information unless it directly contradicts information that otherwise would have earned the point, for example, defining a concept in two contradictory ways voids the point. There is no penalty for attempting a part, so students should respond to every part. The 2025 AAQ had a national mean of 4.97 out of 7, and the 2025 EBQ had a national mean of 4.07 out of 7, per the 2025 AP Psychology Chief Reader Report (Chief Reader: Elliott Hammer, Xavier University of Louisiana).

Worked example: how a real AP Psychology AAQ was scored

2025 AAQ, Question 1, topic: the misinformation effect. Max score 7, national mean 4.97.

The 2025 Article Analysis Question provided a summary of a peer reviewed study by Pena et al. (2017) on how varying amounts of misinformation affect memory for a mock crime video. Students were randomly assigned to low (20% misleading sentences), medium (50%), or high (80%) misinformation conditions and then answered 40 multiple choice questions about the video. The question connects to Unit 2 Cognition in the AP Psychology Course and Exam Description. Each part below pairs the exact rubric requirement from the 2025 Scoring Guidelines with a response that earns the point and one that does not, grounded in the failure modes documented by Chief Reader Elliott Hammer in the 2025 AP Psychology Chief Reader Report.

1. Part A: Identify the research method used in the study.

   Rubric: The response must accurately identify the research method used in the study as an experiment. Naming a different research method (e.g., correlational study, naturalistic observation, or meta analysis) does not earn the point. Describing an element of research design (e.g., survey, random assignment) without naming the method does not earn the point.

   Earns the point: The researchers used an experiment. Since students were randomly assigned to the low, medium, and high misinformation conditions, the study manipulated an independent variable across groups.

   Loses the point: The researchers used a correlational study. (Names the wrong research method. Alternatively: The researchers studied memory. This describes the topic, not the methodology, and does not earn the point.)

2. Part B: State the operational definition of high misinformation in the study.

   Rubric: The response must state a measurable or quantifiable definition of the identified variable as used in the study. The definition must be specific to how the researchers administered or measured the variable. Describing the misinformation effect in general, or saying only that one group received more misinformation than another, does not earn the point.

   Earns the point: The researchers operationally defined high misinformation as 80% of the sentences in the narrative including incorrect information. Equivalently: the researchers defined high misinformation as a summary having 32 misleading sentences out of 40.

   Loses the point: The researchers gave more misinformation to one group than another. (Describes the general manipulation without stating the specific, quantifiable definition the rubric requires. 69% of students earned this point in 2025; those who did not most often described the topic rather than the measurable definition.)

3. Part C: Describe what the mean indicates for the percentage of correct responses between the high misinformation group and the low misinformation group.

   Rubric: The response must accurately describe what the difference in means indicates in relation to the study, including the direction of the difference. Restating the raw mean values without explaining what that difference indicates does not earn the point. Defining the word mean without applying it to the study does not earn the point. Interpreting the direction of the relationship incorrectly does not earn the point.

   Earns the point: The high misinformation group recalled less correct information about the video (mean 63%) than the low misinformation group (mean 74%), indicating that exposure to a higher percentage of misinformation was associated with a lower rate of accurate memory. Equivalently: the low misinformation group scored 11 percentage points higher in correct responses than the high misinformation group.

   Loses the point: The mean of the high misinformation group is 63%. (Restates the value from the table without explaining what the difference between groups indicates. This was the most common error: 35% of students did not earn this point by reporting means without interpreting the direction of the relationship.)

4. Part F: Explain how at least one of the research findings supports or refutes the misinformation effect. (2 points possible)

   Rubric: For 1 point: the response uses results from the study but does not fully explain how the concept is supported or refuted, OR explains the concept without citing any results. For 2 points: the response uses a specific result from the study and explains how it supports or refutes the misinformation effect, with the results accurately interpreted.

   Earns the point: This study supports the misinformation effect because participants in the high misinformation group were more likely to choose misleading answer options (30%) than those in the low misinformation group (19%), showing that greater exposure to incorrect information increased the incorporation of that information into memory. (Uses a specific finding and connects it to the concept with accurate interpretation: 2 points.)

   Loses the point: This study supports the misinformation effect, which is when people remember incorrect information that is presented to them. (Provides an explanation of the concept without citing any specific result from the study: earns 1 point, not 2. Alternatively: The high misinformation group answered more questions using misleading information. (Presents evidence only, with no explanation connecting it to the misinformation effect: also earns 1 point, not 2.))

Across all four parts the pattern is the same: responses that named something without specifying it lost the point. Part A required naming the method, not the topic. Part B required the measurable definition, not a general description. Part C required the direction and meaning of the difference, not just the numbers. Part F required both specific evidence and an explicit explanation connecting that evidence to the concept. The 2025 Chief Reader Report frames this as a task verb problem: Identify, State, Describe, and Explain each require a different level of response, and conflating them is the most consistent source of missed points on the AAQ.

Common AP Psychology FRQ mistakes

1. 01

   AAQ Part A: naming a different method or describing research design instead of the method

   In 2025, 25% of students did not earn Part A. The most common errors were identifying a different research method such as a correlational study, meta analysis, or naturalistic observation, or naming an element of research design such as survey or random assignment instead of the overall method. The Chief Reader's guidance is explicit: provide only the research method, and do not add other methods, because a response that names two contradictory methods (for example, experiment and correlation) voids the point through self contradiction. The key discriminating feature of an experiment is the manipulation of an independent variable across randomly assigned groups; recognizing that feature in the source summary is what the part tests.

   2025 AP Psychology Chief Reader Report (AAQ Part A, Chief Reader Elliott Hammer, Xavier University of Louisiana)

2. 02

   AAQ Part B: describing the misinformation effect in general rather than giving the operational definition

   In 2025, 31% of students did not earn Part B. Responses that did not score this point described the misinformation effect in general terms or stated only that one group received more misinformation than another, without providing the specific, measurable definition the researchers used. The operational definition is always stated in the source summary; students must extract the quantifiable terms (for the 2025 AAQ: 80% of sentences, or equivalently 32 misleading sentences out of 40). A response that says the researchers studied how much misinformation people can handle names the topic, not the operational definition, and does not earn the point.

   2025 AP Psychology Chief Reader Report (AAQ Part B, Chief Reader Elliott Hammer, Xavier University of Louisiana)

3. 03

   AAQ Part C: restating means from the table without interpreting their direction or meaning

   In 2025, 35% of students did not earn Part C. The most common failure was reporting the raw mean values from the table, for example writing that the high misinformation group mean was 63% and stopping there. The rubric requires describing what the difference between those means indicates, specifically the direction of the relationship: that higher misinformation exposure was associated with lower correct recall. A second common error was interpreting the direction in reverse, stating that the high misinformation group relied less on misinformation when the data showed the opposite. Defining the word mean instead of applying it to the study also did not earn the point.

   2025 AP Psychology Chief Reader Report (AAQ Part C, Chief Reader Elliott Hammer, Xavier University of Louisiana)

4. 04

   AAQ Part D: identifying an ethical guideline not explicitly stated in the source summary

   In 2025, 14% of students did not earn Part D, making it the highest scoring individual part (86% correct). Students who did not score it most often identified ethical guidelines not explicitly presented in the source, such as confidentiality, debriefing, or institutional review board approval, none of which were mentioned in the 2025 AAQ summary. The October 2025 CED clarification tightens this further: Part D now requires students to both identify one ethical guideline described in the study and describe one way the researchers applied it. Students who reference a guideline that is not in the summary, or who reference other study features that are not ethical guidelines, do not earn the point.

   2025 AP Psychology Chief Reader Report (AAQ Part D); AP Psychology CED Clarifications and Corrections, October 2025

5. 05

   EBQ Part B(ii) and C(ii): providing only a definition of a psychological concept rather than integrating it

   In 2025, only 22% of students earned both points on Part B(ii), and only 14% earned both points on Part C(ii). The second point in each reasoning part requires explicitly applying a psychological perspective, theory, concept, or research finding identified in the AP Psychology CED, not merely defining it. A response that names social facilitation or the Yerkes Dodson Law without connecting it to the specific evidence and the claim does not earn the second point. The concept must be integrated into the explanation: students need to show why that concept explains why the evidence supports the claim, not just identify what the concept means.

   2025 AP Psychology Chief Reader Report (EBQ Parts B(ii) and C(ii), Chief Reader Elliott Hammer, Xavier University of Louisiana)

6. 06

   EBQ Parts B(i) and C(i): citing the same source for both, or providing evidence that is a method description rather than a finding

   In 2025, 16% of students did not earn Part C(i). Two consistent errors drove those misses: using the same source in both Part B(i) and Part C(i) when the rubric requires a different source for each, and citing study methods or participant characteristics as the evidence rather than an actual research finding. For example, stating that the baboon study used operant conditioning describes the method; stating that the baboons took longer to respond in the conflict trials when in the presence of higher ranking males is a finding. Findings are results from the study; the Chief Reader's explicit guidance is to focus on results, not on how the study was conducted or who the participants were.

   2025 AP Psychology Chief Reader Report (EBQ Parts B(i) and C(i), Chief Reader Elliott Hammer, Xavier University of Louisiana)

How to practice AP Psychology FRQs effectively

Work released booklets under timed conditions, then score yourself part by part against the official rubric.

The highest return practice for the AAQ is working through released questions with the source summary covered first, writing responses for each part, then checking them against the 2025 Scoring Guidelines criterion by criterion. The rubric specifies exactly what earns the point and what does not, including example responses in both categories. Comparing your wording to those examples reveals the specific gap, whether it is too general, missing the direction, or naming a guideline not in the source. For the EBQ, the most valuable drill is practicing the claim first, writing a claim independently, and then testing whether your evidence and reasoning in Parts B and C can support it without switching claims midway. The 2025 Chief Reader Report advises reading all three sources before writing Part A, because the quality of your claim determines how easily Parts B and C can be answered. AP Classroom also contains unit specific AAQ and EBQ practice questions with accompanying scoring guidelines that allow repeated practice across different content areas.

1. 1

   Read the source summary for the AAQ twice during the 10 minute reading period: once to understand the study, and once to locate the specific details each part will ask for, specifically the research method, the operational definition, the statistic table, and the ethical guideline. These details are explicitly in the text.

2. 2

   For AAQ Part A, name one and only one research method. Adding a second method to hedge your answer creates a self contradiction that voids the point even if the first method was correct.

3. 3

   For AAQ Part B, find and quote the specific numbers or measurements the researchers used to define the variable. A general description of what was studied is not an operational definition.

4. 4

   For AAQ Part C, always state the direction of the relationship (which group was higher or lower and by how much), not just the individual values. Reporting means without comparing them does not earn the point.

5. 5

   For AAQ Part D, identify only ethical guidelines that are explicitly stated in the source summary. Do not reference guidelines you know from the course unless the summary mentions them. Since the October 2025 CED update, you must also describe one way the researchers applied the guideline you name.

6. 6

   For AAQ Part F, use the evidence plus explanation formula: state one specific result from the study, then explain why that result supports or refutes the concept named in the question. One without the other earns at most 1 of the 2 points.

7. 7

   For the EBQ, read all three sources before writing anything. Note which findings relate to your potential claim and which psychological concept from the CED each finding connects to. Plan the response before writing Part A.

8. 8

   For EBQ Part B(ii) and C(ii), the second point requires applying a named psychological concept from the AP Psychology CED, integrated into your explanation. Defining the concept alone does not earn it. Write: the evidence shows X, and this is explained by concept Y because Z.

9. 9

   For EBQ Parts B and C, keep track of which source and which psychological concept you used in Part B. Part C(i) must use a different source, and Part C(ii) must use a different psychological concept. Repeating either voids the second point.

10. 10

    Budget your time actively: the suggested 25 minutes for the AAQ and 45 minutes for the EBQ are provided in the exam directions. Use the reading periods for planning, not just passive reading, and stay within the suggested allocation so both questions receive full attention.

AP Psychology FRQ FAQ

More AP Psychology resources