Social Influence: past paper questions

Question 1

(paper 1 specimen 1)

Question 2

(paper 1 specimen 1)

Question 3

(paper 1 specimen 1)

Question 4

(paper 1 specimen 1)

Question 5

Outline 2 explanations of obedience

(paper 1, specimen 2)

Question 6

Briefly evaluate one of the explanations you have outlined in your answer to Q1. (paper 1, specimen 2)

Question 7

(paper 1, specimen 2)

Question 8

(paper 1, specimen 3)

Question 9

(paper 1, specimen 3)

Question 10

(paper 1, specimen 3)

Question 11

(paper 1, 2017)

Question 12

Outline what is meant by ‘agentic state’ as an explanation for obedience.
[2 marks] (paper 1, 2018)

Answer 12

Possible content:
 when a person acts on behalf of an authority figure/person of higher status
 the actor feels no personal responsibility/does not feel guilty for their actions
 the opposite of an autonomous state in which people act according to their own principles

Question 13

Jenny is a psychology teacher who works with six other teachers in the department.
Jenny believes strongly that homework should not be graded as it distracts students from
reading verbal feedback on their work. She would like her colleagues to stop grading
work. The other members of the department do not agree but have told Jenny they are
willing to have a meeting about it.
Using your knowledge of minority influence, explain how Jenny might be able to persuade
the rest of the department to accept her view.
[6 marks]

(paper 1, 2018)

Answer 13

Possible content:
 Jenny should demonstrate consistency by not deviating from her view that not grading work is a
good idea despite social pressure – she could point out that this is a view that she has held
throughout her teaching career
 Jenny should demonstrate commitment by placing herself at some risk/inconvenience – she may
volunteer to field criticisms from students, parents, other departments, etc. This will draw more
attention to her ‘cause’ (augmentation principle)
 Jenny should demonstrate flexibility by adapting her view/accepting other valid
counterarguments. Perhaps some pieces of work could be ungraded but not all – for instance,
grading mock exams but not homework
 over time, the rest of the department may become ‘converted’ (snowball effect) – for example, if
Jenny’s students start to perform particularly well

Question 14

Discuss what psychological research has told us about why people conform.
[16 marks]

(paper 1, 2018)

Answer 14

Knowledge of reasons why we conform.
 normative social influence – going along with the majority through fear of rejection/being seen as
an outcast; a desire to be liked; leads to compliance; conforming for emotional reasons – a
temporary change in view/behaviour
 informational social influence – going along with the majority through acceptance of new
information; a desire to be right; leads to internalisation; conforming for cognitive reasons – a
permanent change in view/behaviour
 conformity to social roles
 accept types of conformity: identification – wanting to have affinity with a group that we value;
internalisation – private acceptance of the majority view; compliance – public acceptance despite
private disagreement
 accept variables affecting conformity as reasons – group size; unanimity; task difficulty
 accept dispositional explanations such as having an external locus of control

Discussion of reasons why we conform.
 use of evidence to discuss the reasons (eg Sherif (1935), Asch (1951), Anderson et al (1992),
Baron, Vandello & Brunsman (1996), Zimbardo (1973) )
 normative social influence can explain the results of conformity studies in unambiguous
situations eg Asch
 informational influence can explain conformity in ambiguous situations in which both public and
private agreement occurs, eg Sherif, Jenness
 analysis of Asch variations when linked to discussion of reasons
 discussion of difficulty measuring and/or distinguishing between reasons why conformity occurs
 discussion of individual differences in reasons for conformity, eg gender, culture, locus of
control, level of expertise, nAffiliators

Question 15

Outline two explanations of resistance to social influence.
[4 marks]
(paper 1, 2019)

Answer 15

Possible explanations (likely to be those named on the specification):
* locus of control – people with an internal locus of control are more likely to resist pressure to
conform/less likely to obey/more resistant to social influence than those with an external locus of
control; people with an internal locus of control believe they control own circumstances
* social support – defiance/non-conformity more likely if others are seen to resist influence; seeing
others disobey/not conform gives observer confidence to do so.

Question 16

The survey shows that fewer young people are smoking today than in 1987.
Using your knowledge of social influence processes in social change, explain possible
reasons for this change in behaviour.
[6 marks]
(paper 1, 2019)

Answer 16

Possible content/application:
Minority influence processes:
* examples of the influence of pressure groups/anti-smoking lobbies and how they may convince the
majority through consistency, commitment (augmentation principle), flexibility
* the snowball effect – how smoking behaviour/views on smoking change gradually over time.
Conformity processes:
* normative social influence/compliance – the group norm among young people is to maintain health
and fitness; people who go against this norm (by smoking) risk rejection from the group; smoking is
anti-social, violates social norms, so young people who smoke are less likely to fit in
* informational social influence/internalisation – more is known now about the harmful effects of
smoking, young people may have become convinced by such evidence.
Obedience processes:
* laws on smoking have changed, e.g. banned in public places, which may have influenced young
people’s behaviour.

Question 17

Discuss ethical issues in social influence research.
[8 marks] (2019)

Answer 17

Possible content:
* knowledge of ethical issues in social influence research and/or specific examples of where they occur
in studies
* deception/lack of informed consent – when participants are misled or information is withheld, e.g.
Asch’s participants were told the study was investigating visual perception and knew nothing of the
confederates; Milgram’s participants were unaware the shocks were not real
* protection from harm/psychological distress – participants should not be placed ‘at risk’; gain new
negative knowledge of themselves, e.g. prisoners in the Stanford prison experiment (SPE) were
humiliated, showed signs of severe distress; some guards felt pressured to follow the more dominant
guards
* right to withdraw – participants should be free to leave when they choose to, e.g. Milgram’s
participants were given ‘verbal prods’ to encourage them to remain within the experiment; prisoners in
SPE pressurised to stay.

Possible discussion points:
* cost-benefit analysis – studies may be justified on the grounds of what we learn, e.g. Milgram – the
dangers of ‘blind obedience’
* validity – deception/lack of informed consent justified as demand characteristics are reduced, e.g. in
Asch; would be difficult to investigate processes such as obedience without deception
* use of debriefing in studies – retrospective consent, psychiatric follow-up assessments, etc.;
participants confirmed they were happy to have taken part, etc.
* counterarguments/discussion points related to specific studies, e.g. Zimbardo’s study led to reform of
real prisons; Milgram awarded prize by APA
* research was conducted at a time when ethical guidelines had not been established; could be argued
that studies led to introduction of guidelines which protected future participants.

Question 18

Which one of the following is most associated with informational social influence?
A It is an emotional, rather than cognitive, process.
B It is based on a desire to be liked, rather than a desire to be right.
C It is more likely to lead to a permanent, rather than temporary,
change in attitude.
D It occurs in unambiguous situations, rather than those where
there is no obvious answer.
[1 mark] (2020)

Answer 18

C

Question 19

In a sixth form debating society, Samina is the only student in a group of six who does not
believe that drugs should be legalised.
Using your knowledge of minority influence processes, explain two ways in which Samina
could convince the other students in the debating society to agree with her.
[4 marks]
(2020)

Answer 19

Possible content:
* Samina could demonstrate consistency by not deviating from her view that drugs should not be
legalised – she could point out that this is a view she has held for many years
* Samina could demonstrate commitment by defending her view that drugs should not be legalised
through some personal investment – for instance, offering to speak in assembly about the dangers of
drugs. This will draw more attention to her case (augmentation principle)
* Samina should demonstrate flexibility by adapting her view/accepting other valid counterarguments.
Perhaps some ‘softer’ drugs could be decriminalised, rather than legalised
* over time, the rest of the debating society may become ‘converted’ (snowball effect) – for example, if
Samina makes her case particularly well
* credit other valid points, eg persistence, confidence.

Question 20

Researchers have identified different features of science, including:
* replicability
* theory construction
* hypothesis testing.

Explain how Asch’s conformity research illustrates one of these features of science.
[3 marks]
(2020)

Answer 20

Possible content:
* replicability – Asch’s studies had standardised procedures (eg the number of confederates; length of
lines etc) which meant that they could be repeated/replicated to assess consistency/reliability of the
findings; this increased the validity of the conclusions drawn
* theory construction – Asch’s findings led to the development of explanations/theories of conformity, eg
that people will conform to group pressure to avoid ridicule (normative social influence)
* hypothesis testing – Asch’s research tested the assumption that naive participants would conform to
an obviously wrong answer when placed under group pressure; this was achieved by manipulating an
IV (fake/genuine answer) to measure the effect on the DV and keeping other (possible confounding)
variables constant.

Question 21

It is the end of the school day and Freddie is pushing other students in the bus queue.
“Stop it, will you?” protests one of Freddie’s classmates.
“You can’t tell me what to do!” laughs Freddie.
At that moment, Freddie turns to see the deputy head, wearing a high-visibility jacket,
staring angrily at him. Without thinking, Freddie stops pushing the other boys and waits
quietly in line.
Discuss the legitimacy of authority and agentic state explanations of obedience.
Refer to Freddie’s behaviour in your answer.
[16 marks]
(2020)

Answer 21

Legitimacy of authority:
* when a person recognises their own and other’s position in a social hierarchy
* legitimacy is increased by visible symbols of authority, eg uniform
* legitimacy of setting, order, system.
Agentic state:
* when a person acts on behalf of an authority figure/person of higher status
* the actor feels no personal responsibility/does not feel guilty for their actions
* the opposite of an autonomous state in which people act according to their own principles
* reference to binding factors.

Possible application:
Legitimacy of authority:
* Freddie pays no attention to his friend as they have equal status in the social hierarchy
* the deputy head is a legitimate authority within the social system (school)
* the deputy head is a visible symbol of authority (high-vis jacket).
Agentic state:
* when making fun of his friend’s request, Freddie is in an autonomous state
* when he sees the deputy head, Freddie enters the agentic state ‘without thinking’ and observes school
rules (queuing in line).

Possible discussion:
* use of evidence to support/contradict the explanations, eg Milgram variations, Bickman, Hofling
* use of real-life examples to illustrate explanations, eg My Lai massacre
* neither explanation can account for rates of disobedience in studies
* obedience may be dispositional, not situational, eg authoritarian personality
* discussion of difficulty measuring and/or distinguishing between reasons why obedience occurs

Question 22

Describe how Zimbardo investigated conformity to social roles.
[4 marks]
(2021)

Answer 22

Possible content:
* set up mock prison in the basement of Stanford University
* observational study – controlled, participant, overt
* emotionally stable volunteers were assigned to roles of either prisoner or guard
* prisoners ‘arrested’, blindfolded, strip searched, etc
* guards given a night stick, dark glasses, uniform etc and told to maintain order
* prisoners’ daily routines were heavily regulated by guards working in shifts
* dehumanisation of prisoners, eg wearing nylon stocking caps and numbered smocks, etc
* the study was planned to run for two weeks, but was stopped early.

Question 23

Fewer and fewer people use single-use plastic items, such as water bottles and plastic
straws.
Using your knowledge of social influence processes in social change, explain why fewer
and fewer people are using single-use plastic items.
[6 marks]
(2021)

Answer 23

Possible content/application
Minority influence processes:
* examples of the influence of environmental campaign groups/celebrities and how they may convince
the majority through consistency, commitment (augmentation principle), flexibility
* the snowball effect – how behaviour/views on use of plastic change gradually over time.
Conformity processes:
* normative social influence/compliance – the group norm among young people particularly is to care
about the environment; people who go against this norm (by ignoring the costs to the planet) risk
rejection from the group/are less likely to fit in
* informational social influence/internalisation – more is now known about the harmful effects of
single-use plastic items on the environment/climate change, people may have become convinced by
such evidence.
Obedience processes:
* rules on single-use plastic items have changed, eg charges for plastic shopping bags, etc.

Question 24

A researcher wanted to investigate whether there was a relationship between locus of
control and resistance to social influence. Before the investigation began, he devised a
questionnaire to measure locus of control.
Why would the researcher’s questionnaire produce primary data? Suggest one limitation
of primary data.
[2 marks] (2021)

Answer 24

Possible content:
* the questionnaire will be used to collect data specifically for the purpose of the investigation
* the questionnaire data will be gathered first-hand from the participants themselves

Possible limitations:
* requires time and effort on the part of the researcher (to develop resources, etc)
* may be costly compared to secondary data which can be easily accessed.

Question 25

To assess the questionnaire’s validity, the researcher gave it to 30 participants and
recorded the results. He then gave the same 30 participants an established questionnaire
measuring locus of control. The researcher found a weak positive correlation between the
two sets of results, suggesting that his questionnaire had low validity.

Explain how the validity of the researcher’s questionnaire could be improved.
[4 ma rks] (2021)

Answer 25

Possible content:
* the researcher could compare the two questionnaires and note any differences
* the researcher could (identify and) remove/deselect any items on his questionnaire that are
problematic
* items might be problematic because they are leading, ambiguous, too complex, double-barrelled etc
* the researcher could incorporate a lie scale, so respondents are less aware that locus of control is being tested.

Question 26

Discuss legitimacy of authority as an explanation for obedience.
[8 marks] (2021)

Answer 26

Possible content:
* when a person recognises their own and other’s positions in a social hierarchy
* leading to recognition of the authority figure’s right to issue a demand
* legitimacy is increased by visible symbols of authority, eg uniform
* legitimacy of setting, order, system
* description of relevant evidence, eg Milgram variations (location), Bickman (uniform).
Accept other valid points.
Possible discussion:
* use of evidence to support/contradict the explanations, eg Milgram variations, Bickman, Hofling
* use of real-life examples to illustrate explanations, eg My Lai massacre
* explanation cannot account for rates of disobedience in studies
* obedience may be dispositional, not situational, eg authoritarian personality
* discussion of difficulty measuring and/or explaining why obedience occurs
* cultural differences in respect for and responses to authority.

Question 27

Which factors affecting minority influence are illustrated by the following examples?

For each example, write the correct factor in the space provided.
[3 marks]

Members of a religious group give up their Saturday mornings to distribute leaflets
about the importance of worship.

An environmental group acknowledges that recycling can be time-consuming while
emphasising its importance for the future of the planet.

All of the members of the ‘Flat Earth Society’ agree that the Earth is flat and not round

(2022)

Answer 27

Commitment
Flexibility
Consistency (or synchronic consistency)

Question 28

Name one explanation of resistance to social influence.
[1 mark]
(2022)

Answer 28

Locus of control (not external locus of control)
OR
* Social support (accept ‘presence of an ally’ or similar)

Question 29

A teacher was absent and left work for students to complete during the lesson. Some
students in the class did not do the work their teacher had left for them.
Use one possible explanation of resistance to social influence to explain why this
happened.
[4 marks]

(2022)

Answer 29

Social support:
* disobedience/resistance/defiance is more likely to occur in the presence of others who are
disobeying/disobedient role models
* ‘some students’ suggests there was more than one who did not complete the work
* this would have given others more confidence to ignore the teacher’s instructions
* social support is associated with diffusion of responsibility/the more people who disobey the less
severe the consequences are likely to be – the students may have reasoned that the more of them
who disobey, the less likely they are to be in trouble
* credit use of evidence to support explanation/application, eg Milgram – two confederates-one naive
participant variation.

Locus of control:
* disobedience/resistance/defiance is more likely to occur in those who have an internal locus of control
* the students who disobeyed the instructions may all have had this personality trait in common
* this meant they relied on their own judgement of whether to complete the work, rather than the
teacher’s
* credit use of evidence to support explanation/application, eg Holland – 37% of internals refused to
continue to maximum shock level.

Question 30

Describe how situational variables have been found to affect obedience.
Discuss what
these situational variables tell us about why we obey.
[16 marks]

                                      (2022)

Answer 30

Possible content:
* knowledge of procedure and/or findings of research into the effects of:
* proximity – Milgram – teacher and the learner were in the same room, obedience decreased; touch
proximity condition; experimenter leaves the room issues order over the phone, obedience
decreased
* location – Milgram – run-down office block vs Yale; Hofling hospital location
* uniform – Bickman – more likely to obey a man dressed as a guard. In Milgram’s experiment the
experimenter wore a grey lab coat.
Possible discussion:
* analysis/discussion of factors in the context of explanations: eg uniform as a visible sign of authority,
location/setting makes authority seem more/less genuine (legitimacy of authority)
* decreased proximity to authority figure meant that participants returned to a more autonomous state
(agentic state)
* discussion of relative power of factors, eg in Hofling study, 21/22 obeyed even though orders were
given over the phone (so legitimacy of setting more important than proximity)
* discussion of alternative theories, eg authoritarian personality (Adorno) suggests that dispositional
factors are more influential than situational variables
* methodological evaluation of studies/evidence if made relevant to discussion of the factors/why we
obey, eg field studies such as Bickman may have more relevance than lab studies in this context
* Mandel’s (1998) analysis of the ecological validity of Milgram’s research