Why is "Describing kleptomania/pyromania as ordinary crime" a common mistake in Impulse Control Disorders?

Why it happens: Both involve illegal acts. How to avoid it: State the exclusions: kleptomania is NOT theft for gain; pyromania is NOT arson for profit/revenge. The urge/tension-relief pattern is key. Source: 9990 Paper 3 mark schemes

Why is "Saying covert sensitisation uses real punishment" a common mistake in Impulse Control Disorders?

Why it happens: It is an aversion therapy. How to avoid it: The aversive stimulus is IMAGINED (covert) — vivid imagery paired with the imagined act, not real physical punishment.

Why is "Writing 'faulty thinking' without naming distortions" a common mistake in Impulse Control Disorders?

Why it happens: Partial recall. How to avoid it: Name specific distortions: illusion of control, gambler's fallacy, selective recall.

Why is "Ignoring the reinforcement schedule for gambling" a common mistake in Impulse Control Disorders?

Why it happens: Students stop at 'reinforced'. How to avoid it: Gambling persists because of a VARIABLE (intermittent) reinforcement schedule — highly resistant to extinction.

Why is "Evaluating without the named debate" a common mistake in Impulse Control Disorders?

Why it happens: Generic evaluation habit. How to avoid it: Use free will vs determinism (and the responsibility angle) explicitly to reach the top band on Paper 3.

Clinical Psychology (A Level)Cambridge International A Level Psychology 9990

Impulse Control Disorders

Work through the notes, try the practice questions, then take the quiz. The report tells you exactly what to revise next.

Previous Next

Learn this Topic

Start with the slides for the quick version, then go deeper with the full study notes.

Short Study Notes in the form of Slides

Read the notes first. If the method in a worked example clicks, you're ready for the questions.

Short Study Notes — Impulse Control Disorders

Start with these resources to cover the key concepts, then work through the practice questions.

Page 1 / 0

Detailed Notes

Full prose, callouts and a recap — built for A* mastery, not just a quick scan.

Take these study notes with you

Download a branded PDF — full prose, callouts, recap and memorise list for Impulse Control Disorders, ready to print or save offline.

Impulse Control Disorders (Clinical Psychology) — Cambridge A Level Psychology 9990 Study Notes (2024-2026)

Disorders of failing to resist an impulse — kleptomania, pyromania, intermittent explosive disorder and gambling disorder. This note builds the background (what impulse control is; the tension–act–relief cycle), then drills the diagnostic criteria, the biochemical, behavioural and cognitive explanations, and the covert-sensitisation, CBT and drug treatments — with the evaluation that scores on Paper 3.

At a glance

What they are: repeated failure to resist an impulse/urge to perform an act that is harmful to self or others.
Shared cycle: rising tension/arousal → performing the act → relief/pleasure → later guilt (the urge then returns).
Kleptomania: recurrent urges to steal objects not needed for use or value.
Pyromania: deliberate fire-setting for tension relief / fascination (not for profit or revenge).
Intermittent explosive disorder (IED): recurrent aggressive outbursts out of proportion to the trigger.
Gambling disorder: persistent, problematic gambling (classified with addictive disorders in DSM-5).
Explanations: biochemical (serotonin/dopamine reward), behavioural (positive reinforcement) and cognitive (distortions; feeling-state).
Treatments: covert sensitisation, CBT, and drug therapy (e.g. an opioid antagonist such as naltrexone).

What you’ll learn

Mapped to the Cambridge International A Level 9990 syllabus (2024-2026).

Describe impulse control disorders and how they are diagnosed (kleptomania, pyromania, IED, gambling disorder).
Describe and evaluate biochemical explanations (serotonin and the dopamine reward system).
Describe and evaluate behavioural explanations (positive reinforcement of the act).
Describe and evaluate cognitive explanations (cognitive distortions; the feeling-state model).
Describe and evaluate treatments (covert sensitisation, CBT, drug therapy) and relate to issues & debates.

What impulse control is — the tension–act–relief cycle (background substance)

Impulse control disorders share a cycle: rising tension, an act that relieves it, then guilt — and the urge returns.

Impulse control is the ability to resist an urge to act. In impulse control disorders, this fails repeatedly, despite harmful consequences.

The shared cycle. Most impulse control disorders follow a similar pattern:

An increasing sense of tension or arousal before the act.
Pleasure, gratification or relief at the moment of performing the act.
Often guilt or regret afterwards — but the urge returns, repeating the cycle.

This cycle is why impulse control disorders resemble addictions: the act is negatively reinforcing (it removes unpleasant tension) and positively reinforcing (it produces pleasure). In DSM-5, gambling disorder has in fact been reclassified with substance-related and addictive disorders for this reason.

Diagnosis. As with all clinical disorders, clinicians match behaviour to DSM-5/ICD-11 criteria, requiring the behaviour to be recurrent, to cause distress or impairment, and not be better explained by another disorder or by rational motives (e.g. stealing for need, fire-setting for profit). (See the [[schizophrenia]] note for the general diagnosis framework.)

Why this matters. Understanding the cycle lets you explain why the behaviour repeats and why treatments target the reinforcement (covert sensitisation pairs the act with something unpleasant; CBT breaks the thinking that drives it).

Impulse control = ability to resist an urge; here it fails repeatedly.
Cycle: tension/arousal → act → pleasure/relief → guilt → urge returns.
Acts are positively AND negatively reinforcing (addiction-like).
DSM-5 moved gambling disorder in with addictive disorders.
Diagnosis: recurrent, distressing/impairing, not better explained otherwise.

Types and diagnostic criteria

Kleptomania (stealing), pyromania (fire-setting), IED (aggressive outbursts), gambling disorder — each with recurrent urges and impairment.

Learn one or two clearly; you can use them as examples throughout.

Kleptomania — recurrent failure to resist urges to steal objects not needed for personal use or monetary value; tension before, relief during, often guilt after. (The theft is not for gain or out of anger.)

Pyromania — deliberate, purposeful fire-setting on more than one occasion, with tension/arousal beforehand and fascination/relief; not done for profit, to conceal crime, or out of revenge.

Intermittent explosive disorder (IED) — recurrent aggressive outbursts (verbal or physical) that are grossly out of proportion to any trigger and not premeditated.

Gambling disorder — persistent, recurrent problematic gambling leading to distress/impairment (e.g. needing to bet more, restlessness when trying to stop, chasing losses, lying about gambling). In DSM-5 it sits with addictive disorders.

Common diagnostic thread: the behaviour is recurrent, driven by an urge with tension/relief, and causes distress or impairment — and is not better explained by another disorder.

Kleptomania: stealing unneeded objects (not for use/value/anger).
Pyromania: deliberate fire-setting for tension relief/fascination (not profit/revenge).
IED: recurrent aggressive outbursts out of proportion to the trigger.
Gambling disorder: problematic gambling (chasing losses) — with addictive disorders in DSM-5.
All: recurrent urge + tension/relief + distress/impairment.

Biochemical and behavioural explanations

Biochemical: low serotonin + dopamine reward system; behavioural: the act is positively reinforced.

Biochemical explanation.

Serotonin — low serotonin activity is linked to impulsivity and poor inhibition (reduced 'braking' on behaviour).
Dopamine / reward system — the act activates the brain's reward (dopamine) pathway, producing pleasure that drives repetition (as in addiction).
Supporting evidence: drugs that affect these systems (e.g. opioid antagonists that dampen the reward, or SSRIs that raise serotonin) can reduce the behaviour in some patients.

Behavioural explanation (operant conditioning).

The act is positively reinforced by the pleasure/excitement it brings (e.g. the 'rush' of stealing or a gambling win), and negatively reinforced by the relief from tension.
In gambling, the variable (intermittent) reinforcement schedule (unpredictable wins) makes the behaviour especially resistant to extinction — a powerful, exam-ready point.

Evaluation in brief. Biochemical accounts are scientific and lead to drug treatments, but are reductionist and unclear on cause vs effect. The behavioural account explains the repetition well and leads to behavioural therapy, but may ignore the biological vulnerability and the person's thinking.

Biochemical: low serotonin → impulsivity; dopamine reward pathway → pleasure → repetition.
Evidence: opioid antagonists / SSRIs can reduce the behaviour.
Behavioural: act is positively (pleasure) + negatively (relief) reinforced.
Gambling: variable reinforcement schedule → very resistant to extinction.
Evaluation: + scientific/leads to treatment; − reductionist, cause-effect, ignores cognition.

Cognitive explanation

Cognitive distortions (especially in gambling) and the feeling-state model: the act becomes linked to a desired feeling.

The cognitive explanation focuses on faulty thinking that drives and maintains the behaviour.

Cognitive distortions (clearest in gambling):

the illusion of control (believing you can influence chance outcomes),
the gambler's fallacy (believing a win is 'due' after losses),
selective recall (remembering wins, forgetting losses). These distortions keep the person gambling despite losses.

The feeling-state model. Some accounts argue the act becomes fused with a positive feeling-state experienced during an early episode (e.g. the excitement of a first big win). The behaviour is then triggered whenever the person wants that feeling — explaining the compulsive, hard-to-resist quality.

Evaluation in brief. Explains the content of the behaviour and underpins CBT (which challenges the distortions), but may describe the maintaining thoughts rather than the origin, and overlaps with biological accounts of reward.

Cognitive distortions (gambling): illusion of control, gambler's fallacy, selective recall.
Distortions maintain the behaviour despite losses.
Feeling-state model: act fused with a desired positive feeling → triggered to regain it.
Evaluation: + underpins CBT; − may describe maintenance not origin.

Treatments — covert sensitisation, CBT and drugs

Covert sensitisation pairs the act with an aversive image; CBT challenges distortions; drugs target the reward/serotonin systems.

Covert sensitisation (behavioural).

The patient is trained to imagine performing the unwanted act and then pair it with a vivid aversive image (e.g. nausea, being caught and humiliated). Repeated, this makes the act itself feel aversive, counter-conditioning the urge.
- + Targets the learned reinforcement directly; no drugs. − Relies on vivid imagery/engagement; effects may not last without follow-up.

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT).

Identifies and challenges the cognitive distortions (e.g. the gambler's fallacy), teaches coping strategies to resist urges and manage tension, and may include relapse prevention.
- + Tackles the maintaining thoughts; evidence of effectiveness, especially for gambling. − Requires insight/motivation.

Drug therapy (biochemical).

Opioid antagonists (e.g. naltrexone) dampen the reward from the act; SSRIs raise serotonin to improve impulse control. Used especially where biochemical factors dominate.
- + Can reduce urges and reward; useful alongside therapy. − Side effects, treats symptoms not cause, relapse if stopped.

Key framing: behavioural and cognitive therapies target the learning and thinking behind the act; drugs target the biochemistry — combining them is often most effective.

Covert sensitisation: imagine the act + aversive image → counter-condition the urge.
CBT: challenge distortions + coping/relapse prevention.
Drugs: opioid antagonists (naltrexone) dampen reward; SSRIs raise serotonin.
Therapies target learning/thinking; drugs target biochemistry; combine for best results.

Evaluation and issues & debates

Useful explanations and treatments, but reductionism, the addiction overlap and free will–determinism recur.

Bring it together for Paper 3 'evaluate / discuss'.

Strengths

Multiple, complementary explanations (biochemical, behavioural, cognitive) that lead to practical treatments.
The addiction parallel (reward, reinforcement) is well supported, especially for gambling.

Weaknesses / issues

Reductionism — biochemical accounts reduce complex behaviour to chemistry; behavioural accounts may ignore biology and thought.
Cause vs effect — low serotonin / distortions may be consequences of the behaviour.
Diagnostic difficulty — overlap with addiction and other disorders (comorbidity); cultural/legal judgements about 'normal' behaviour.

Relevant issues & debates

Free will vs determinism — are sufferers unable to resist (determinism) or choosing to act (free will)? This has real legal/ethical implications (responsibility).
Nature vs nurture / diathesis–stress — biochemical vulnerability + learned reinforcement + environment.
Reductionism vs holism, and application to everyday life (treatment, public health for gambling).

Strengths: complementary explanations → practical treatments; strong addiction parallel.
Weaknesses: reductionism; cause-effect unclear; diagnostic overlap (comorbidity).
Free will vs determinism = key debate (legal responsibility).
Diathesis–stress; reductionism vs holism; application (gambling public health).

How it’s examined

Examined in the Clinical Psychology option on Paper 3 (Specialist Options: Theory) — describe (a type/criteria, an explanation, a treatment) and evaluate/discuss with a named issue or debate (free will vs determinism is especially relevant). On Paper 4 (Application) you may apply a treatment to a case or design a study. Examiner guidance: state the 'not for…' diagnostic clauses, link the behavioural explanation to covert sensitisation, and use free will vs determinism for the responsibility angle.

Sources: Cambridge International AS & A Level Psychology 9990 syllabus (2024-2026); DSM-5 (APA) and ICD-11 (WHO) — impulse control & addictive disorders; Covert sensitisation (Cautela); cognitive distortions in gambling; 9990 Learner Guide, Scheme of Work & past Paper 3/4 mark schemes. Last reviewed 2026-05-21.

Master this Topic

Worked examples, formulae, definitions and the mistakes examiners flag — everything you need to push from a pass to an A*.

Take this whole topic with you

Download a branded revision sheet — worked examples, formulae, definitions and common mistakes for Impulse Control Disorders, ready to print or save as PDF.

Step-by-step worked examples — Impulse Control Disorders

Step-by-step solutions to past-paper-style questions on impulse control disorders, written exactly the way a tutor would explain them at the board.

1Define an impulse control disorder (2 marks)
Getting started• diagnosis, AO1
Question
State what is meant by an impulse control disorder. (2 marks)
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  A repeated failure to resist an urge/impulse to perform an act.
2. Step 2
  The act is harmful to self or others, despite the consequences.
Answer
A recurrent failure to resist an urge to perform an act that is harmful to self or others. (2)
Examiner tip
The key idea is 'failure to resist an urge' plus 'harmful' — both earn marks.
2Identify a type and its feature (2 marks)
Getting started• types, AO1
Question
Name one impulse control disorder and state one diagnostic feature. (2 marks)
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  Kleptomania.
2. Step 2
  Recurrent urges to steal objects not needed for use or monetary value (not for gain).
Answer
Kleptomania — stealing objects not needed for use/value (not for gain). (2)
Examiner tip
Other valid: pyromania (fire-setting, not for profit/revenge), IED (aggressive outbursts), gambling disorder.
3Explain the behavioural account (4 marks)
Building confidence• explanation, AO2
Question
Explain how operant conditioning can account for an impulse control disorder. (4 marks)
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  Performing the act produces pleasure/excitement — positive reinforcement.
2. Step 2
  It also relieves built-up tension — negative reinforcement.
3. Step 3
  Both forms of reinforcement increase the likelihood of repeating the act.
4. Step 4
  In gambling, unpredictable wins (variable reinforcement schedule) make the behaviour very resistant to extinction.
Answer
The act is positively reinforced (pleasure) and negatively reinforced (relief from tension), so it repeats; gambling's variable schedule resists extinction. (4)
Examiner tip
The variable-ratio schedule for gambling is a high-value detail showing cross-topic understanding.
4Explain cognitive distortions in gambling (4 marks)
Building confidence• explanation, AO2
Question
Explain how cognitive distortions can maintain gambling disorder. (4 marks)
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  Illusion of control: believing one can influence chance outcomes.
2. Step 2
  Gambler's fallacy: believing a win is 'due' after a run of losses.
3. Step 3
  Selective recall: remembering wins but forgetting losses.
4. Step 4
  These distortions keep the person gambling despite mounting losses.
Answer
Illusion of control, the gambler's fallacy and selective recall distort thinking so the person keeps gambling despite losses. (4)
Examiner tip
Name specific distortions, not just 'faulty thinking' — the named distortions earn the marks.
5Describe covert sensitisation (6 marks)
Stretch• treatment, AO1, Paper 3
Question
Describe how covert sensitisation could be used to treat kleptomania. (6 marks)
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  Covert sensitisation is a behavioural therapy based on counter-conditioning (a form of aversion therapy in imagination).
2. Step 2
  The patient is taught relaxation, then asked to vividly imagine performing the unwanted act (stealing).
3. Step 3
  At the moment of the imagined act, they pair it with a vivid aversive image (e.g. nausea, or being caught and humiliated).
4. Step 4
  This is repeated so the act becomes associated with the unpleasant feeling rather than reward.
5. Step 5
  The patient may also imagine relief/pride when resisting the urge (an escape image).
6. Step 6
  Over time the urge to steal is reduced because it now triggers aversion, not pleasure.
Answer
Covert sensitisation: imagine the act + a vivid aversive image (nausea/being caught), repeated, so the act is counter-conditioned to feel aversive rather than rewarding. (6)
Examiner tip
Stress that the aversive stimulus is IMAGINED. Top band needs the pairing and the counter-conditioning logic.
6Evaluate — free will vs determinism (4 marks)
Stretch• evaluation, AO3, free-will-determinism, exam-technique
Question
Evaluate explanations of impulse control disorders with reference to free will and determinism. (4 marks)
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  Point. Explanations are largely deterministic.
2. Step 2
  Explain. They imply biochemistry/reinforcement drive the behaviour, so the person cannot easily resist.
3. Step 3
  Evidence (in context). This raises a legal/ethical issue: is someone with kleptomania responsible for theft?
4. Step 4
  Link. Yet treatments (CBT/covert sensitisation) assume people can change, implying some free will — so a soft-determinist view fits best.
Answer
Explanations are deterministic (biochemistry/reinforcement), raising responsibility questions; but therapies assume change is possible (free will) — soft determinism fits best. (4)
Examiner tip
The responsibility angle (legal/ethical) is the standout point for this topic's free will–determinism debate.

Model Answers — Impulse Control Disorders

High-scoring sample answers for impulse control disorders on the Cambridge International A Level 9990 paper, with examiner-style notes mapping each response to the mark scheme and assessment objectives.

Question 1
9990 Paper 3 (describe) style6 marks
Q (6 marks). Describe the biochemical and behavioural explanations of impulse control disorders.
Model answer
The biochemical explanation links impulse control disorders to neurotransmitters. Low serotonin activity is associated with impulsivity and reduced behavioural inhibition, so the person struggles to 'put the brakes on' an urge. The brain's dopamine reward system is also involved: performing the act activates this pathway, producing pleasure that drives repetition, much as in addiction. Drugs affecting these systems (e.g. opioid antagonists or SSRIs) can reduce the behaviour, supporting the account.

The behavioural explanation uses operant conditioning. The act is positively reinforced by the pleasure or excitement it brings, and negatively reinforced by the relief from built-up tension; both make the behaviour more likely to recur. In gambling, wins occur on a variable (intermittent) reinforcement schedule, which produces behaviour that is especially resistant to extinction, helping explain why gambling is so persistent.
Why this scores
Why this scores well. Both explanations are accurate and developed (serotonin + dopamine reward; positive + negative reinforcement + variable schedule) with supporting points — strong AO1.
Question 2
9990 Paper 3 (evaluate with named debate) style10 marks
Q (10 marks). Evaluate explanations and treatments of impulse control disorders, including a discussion of free will and determinism.
Model answer
Strength 1 — complementary explanations and treatments. Biochemical, behavioural and cognitive accounts each lead to a treatment (drugs, covert sensitisation, CBT), and combining them can be effective — a practical strength with real-world application, especially for gambling.

Strength 2 — supporting evidence. The addiction parallel is well supported: the dopamine reward system and the variable reinforcement schedule explain the persistence of gambling, and drugs that dampen reward (e.g. naltrexone) can reduce urges, giving the biochemical account credibility.

Weakness 1 — free will vs determinism (named debate). The explanations are largely deterministic: they imply biochemistry and reinforcement drive the behaviour, leaving little room for choice. This raises a serious ethical and legal issue — if a person with kleptomania or pyromania cannot resist the urge, are they responsible for the resulting crime? Yet therapies such as CBT assume people can learn to resist, implying some free will, so a soft-determinist position (influences shape but do not wholly determine behaviour) fits best.

Weakness 2 — reductionism and cause-effect. Biochemical accounts are reductionist, reducing complex behaviour to chemistry, and much evidence is correlational — low serotonin or cognitive distortions may be a result of the behaviour rather than its cause.

Conclusion. The explanations are useful and have produced effective treatments, but their determinism (with its responsibility implications) and reductionism mean a soft-determinist, multi-factor view is most defensible.
Why this scores
Why this reaches the top band. Two strengths and two weaknesses, the named debate (free will–determinism) developed with the responsibility angle and a soft-determinist resolution, plus a reasoned conclusion (AO3).
Question 3
9990 Paper 3 (describe) style6 marks
Q (6 marks). Describe two impulse control disorders and how they are diagnosed.
Model answer
Kleptomania is the recurrent failure to resist urges to steal objects that are not needed for personal use or monetary value. The person feels rising tension before the theft and relief/pleasure during it, often followed by guilt; crucially, the stealing is not done for gain or out of anger.

Pyromania is deliberate, purposeful fire-setting on more than one occasion, with tension/arousal beforehand and fascination with fire; importantly, it is not done for profit, to conceal a crime, or out of revenge.

For both, diagnosis (using DSM-5/ICD-11) requires the behaviour to be recurrent, driven by an urge with the tension–relief pattern, and to cause distress or impairment, and not be better explained by another disorder or rational motive. The 'not for gain/profit/revenge' clauses are essential to distinguish these disorders from ordinary crime.
Why this scores
Why this scores well. Two disorders are accurately described with the tension–relief cycle AND the diagnostic 'not for…' exclusions, plus the general diagnostic threshold — precise AO1.
Question 4
9990 Paper 4 (application) style8 marks
Q (8 marks). A therapist wants to evaluate whether covert sensitisation reduces stealing in a person with kleptomania. Suggest how this could be investigated, with reference to research methods.
Model answer
Because the disorder is rare and individual, a case study with a structured self-report and observation design would be appropriate. The therapist could measure the frequency of stealing urges and acts (operationalised, e.g. recorded in a daily diary) over a baseline period, deliver covert sensitisation, then measure the same behaviour afterwards (an ABA-style design comparing before and after).

To improve validity, the diary could be supplemented by objective records (e.g. reported incidents), and measures taken at follow-up to test whether effects last. Standardising the therapy sessions and using the same measures throughout controls extraneous variables. Ethical safeguards are essential: informed consent, confidentiality (sensitive/illegal behaviour), the right to withdraw, and protection from harm (covert sensitisation uses distressing imagery). Strengths are rich, in-depth data and high ecological validity; weaknesses are that findings from a single case cannot be generalised and self-reported urges may be subjective or under-reported.
Why this scores
Why this scores well. It matches the method to a rare disorder (case study), operationalises the DV, builds in baseline/follow-up and ethics, and evaluates generalisability — strong Paper 4 application.

Key Definitions and Keywords — Impulse Control Disorders

Definitions to memorise and the exact keywords mark schemes credit for impulse control disorders answers — sharpened from recent examiner reports for the 2026 Cambridge International A Level 9990 sitting.

Impulse control disorder
Examiner keyword
A recurrent failure to resist an urge to perform an act harmful to oneself or others.
Kleptomania
Examiner keyword
Recurrent urges to steal objects not needed for use or monetary value (not for gain).
Pyromania
Examiner keyword
Deliberate, recurrent fire-setting for tension relief or fascination (not for profit or revenge).
Intermittent explosive disorder (IED)
Examiner keyword
Recurrent aggressive outbursts grossly out of proportion to the trigger and not premeditated.
Gambling disorder
Examiner keyword
Persistent, problematic gambling causing distress/impairment; classified with addictive disorders in DSM-5.
Variable (intermittent) reinforcement schedule
Examiner keyword
Reinforcement given unpredictably; produces persistent behaviour that is highly resistant to extinction (e.g. gambling).
Gambler's fallacy
Examiner keyword
The mistaken belief that a win is 'due' after a run of losses — a cognitive distortion maintaining gambling.
Covert sensitisation
Examiner keyword
A behavioural therapy pairing the imagined unwanted act with a vivid imagined aversive consequence (counter-conditioning).
Opioid antagonist (e.g. naltrexone)
A drug that dampens the reward/pleasure of the act, used to reduce urges in some impulse control disorders.
Determinism
Examiner keyword
The view that behaviour is caused by factors beyond our control (here, biochemistry/reinforcement) rather than free choice.

Common Mistakes and Misconceptions — Impulse Control Disorders

The traps other students keep falling into on impulse control disorders questions — taken from recent Cambridge International A Level 9990 examiner reports and mark schemes — and how to avoid them.

✕Describing kleptomania/pyromania as ordinary crime
9990 Paper 3 mark schemes
Why it happens
Both involve illegal acts.
How to avoid it
State the exclusions: kleptomania is NOT theft for gain; pyromania is NOT arson for profit/revenge. The urge/tension-relief pattern is key.
✕Saying covert sensitisation uses real punishment
Why it happens
It is an aversion therapy.
How to avoid it
The aversive stimulus is IMAGINED (covert) — vivid imagery paired with the imagined act, not real physical punishment.
✕Writing 'faulty thinking' without naming distortions
Why it happens
Partial recall.
How to avoid it
Name specific distortions: illusion of control, gambler's fallacy, selective recall.
✕Ignoring the reinforcement schedule for gambling
Why it happens
Students stop at 'reinforced'.
How to avoid it
Gambling persists because of a VARIABLE (intermittent) reinforcement schedule — highly resistant to extinction.
✕Evaluating without the named debate
Why it happens
Generic evaluation habit.
How to avoid it
Use free will vs determinism (and the responsibility angle) explicitly to reach the top band on Paper 3.

Practice questions

Exam-style questions with step-by-step worked solutions. Try one before checking the method.

Past paper style quiz

Get a report showing which sub-topics you've nailed and which ones still need work.

Impulse Control Disorders

Short Study Notes in the form of Slides

Short Study Notes — Impulse Control Disorders

Detailed Notes

What you’ll learn

How it’s examined

1Define an impulse control disorder (2 marks)

2Identify a type and its feature (2 marks)

3Explain the behavioural account (4 marks)

4Explain cognitive distortions in gambling (4 marks)

5Describe covert sensitisation (6 marks)

6Evaluate — free will vs determinism (4 marks)

Impulse control disorder

Kleptomania

Pyromania

Intermittent explosive disorder (IED)

Gambling disorder

Variable (intermittent) reinforcement schedule

Gambler's fallacy

Covert sensitisation

Opioid antagonist (e.g. naltrexone)

Determinism

✕Describing kleptomania/pyromania as ordinary crime

✕Saying covert sensitisation uses real punishment

✕Writing 'faulty thinking' without naming distortions

✕Ignoring the reinforcement schedule for gambling

✕Evaluating without the named debate

Practice questions

Past paper style quiz

Assess your understanding