AQA A Psychology AS PSYA1 PSYA2 June 2013

its linked to independent behaviour - why people resist pressures to conform and pressures to obey authority.
hope it helped

anyone got any advantages and disadvantages for Normative Social Influence and Informational Social Influence ??
didn't realise that I had to know them, just seen a past paper question on it and the mark scheme wasn't very helpful

Can someone do a response for why people don't conform or why people don't obey? I just can never get them into my head its so annoying

Which past paper? As far as I'm aware you don't need advantages or disadvantages for NSI or ISI

Which past paper? As far as I'm aware you don't need advantages or disadvantages for NSI or ISI

I didn't think I needed to either I may have got completely the wrong end of the stick. It's Q8 Jun10.....
'Outline and Evaluate explanations of conformity' (8 marks)
I thought that explanations of conformity was normative and informational social influence and then you outline and evaluate them. Evaluation being advantages and disadvantages .... ?

Can anyone briefly point out what they would write if the 12 marker was about obedience?

Oh I see now. For evaluation you would put Asch's study as she tested the effects of normative social influence and Sheriff tested the effects of Informational social influence

Could they ask a 12 mark question on biological treatements alone? If so how do we write 12 marks worth ??

I'm sorry but are variations of kilogram A01 or A02! For a question on obedience how would you plan it??

Please.

yes they could so biological treatments to treat psychopathology include drug treatments and ECT.

so you do your first AO1 for drug treatments, outlining (very briefly) how antipsychotics and antidepressants work

then you evaluate drug treatments for AO2, so you could mention the WHO and how they found 55% relapse rate for placebos on schizophrenics, 25% with chlorpromazine alone and 2-23% for drug with social support, as well as kirsch et al finding placebos being just as effective as a limitation.

do another AO1 for ECT, outlining how it works, who it should be used on and quoting Abrams as having studied it for fifty years yet still having no idea how it works

then AO2 evaluating it, so its strengthened by Comer who found that 60-70% of patients improved, yet Sackheim et al found that 84% relapsed within six months. as a limitation, mention how sham ECT has sometimes helped people recover so it could be attention rather than treatment that helps.

Overview: people don't conform when they have an ally and when they are tested on their morals. people don't obey when they have an ally, are not protected by the role of buffers, when the setting of the study lacks importance/is less impressive and when they are tested on their morals. people can resist pressures easier if they have a high internal locus of control.

so if you're asked a question like question 6 in january 2012 which says "Using your knowledge of psychology, explain why some people might resist pressures to conform" you should have in mind Asch's study, Allen and Levine and also the Hornsey et al.

Basically you would look at how in Asch's study, when they were given an ally conformity dropped from 36.8% to 5.5%, and even when the ally chose the OTHER line (the one that neither the majority nor the participant chose) conformity dropped to 9%. Allen and Levine tested valid and invalid social support by using three conditions. The invalid social support had the ally wear thick glasses to show poor vision, and in valid social support the ally had normal vision. Conformity dropped in both but VALID social support was more effective in reducing conformity, suggesting that its not only support, but VALID social support that helps people to resist.

Then you could make a brief point about how when people are tested in their moral principles (i.e. things that matter like whether they would cheat on someone) they are less likely to conform because it's something that matters to them, which Hornsey et al showed.

On resisting pressures to obey, you look at Milgram's variations (there were 18) - when he moved the study away from the prestigious setting of Yale, obedience dropped to less than 50% suggesting that people are more able to act independently when the setting is less oppressive. You can also mention the role of buffers (when they were in the touch-proximity variation, even less people obeyed at only 30%). You can evaluate that with Lawrence Kohlberg, who like Hornsey et al looked at moral dilemmas and WHY people would act that way. He found that people who followed general moral principles were less likely to obey, unlike people with limited moral development who would.

Then finally you have the locus of control - those with high internal locus are better able to resist coercion and seek information that will help themselves rather than relying on the opinion of others. Therefore, they believe they are in control of their futures and will not conform/obey as easily as a person with a high external locus.

Sorry i wrote so much but better you have a lot and can forget loads than have nothing at all!

so for variations on Milgram - i literally never touch them because it's confusing and you can use so much other information.

BUT you could do milgram, and then evaluate with one of his variations, for example touch proximity , and say it could be that it's easier to commit atrocities when you can't see it , so the reaction once they were forced to hold the hand down shows you can't make comparisons between the holocaust and this because people no longer found it so easy to obey as only 30% did

OR you could outline milgram , evaluate with baumrind, darley, lifton, hofling et al whatever you want , then outline a variation and evaluate but i wouldn't - they are written in the textbook as though they should be used as AO2, but you can always change the material to fit you

oh so it would be for abnormality and not a 12 marker on just drug treatements for stress (beta blockers and bz's)