AQA PSYCHOLOGY PAPER 1 2024 VERIFIED
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Outline \one \ethical \issue \that \has \arisen \in \social \influence \research. \Refer \to \one \or \more \social \
influence \studies \in \your \answer \(4 \marks) \- \ANS-Social \influence \research \has \issues \with \the \
deception \of \its \participants \which \leads \to \a \further \issue \of \a \lack \of \informed \consent \to \take \
part. \For \example \in \Asch's \study \on \majority \influence \participants \were \told \they \were \taking \part \
in \a \test \of \visual \perception \and \in \Milgram's \research \into \obedience \they \were \told \it \was \a \study
\into \the \effects \of \punishment \on \learning. \However \these \levels \of \deception \are \necessary \in \
social \influence \research \as \telling \the \participants \that \your \will \be \studying \their \levels \of \
conformity \to \a \social \group, \or \their \levels \of \obedience \would \result \in \demand \characteristics \
and \invalidate \the \results \obtained.
Charlie \has \just \started \at \a \new \school. \He \has \become \friendly \with \a \group \of \boys \in \his \year \
group. \Charlie \thinks \they \are \'cool'.
One \day, \one \of \the \more \popular \boys \in \the \group \suggests \they \all \wear \their \school \jumpers \
inside-out \for \a \week, \'just \to \see \what \will \happen'. \Charlie \worries \about \this \all \night \but \still \
goes \to \school \the \following \day \wearing \his \jumper \inside-out.
Use \your \knowledge \of \conformity \to \explain \Charlie's \behaviour \(6 \marks) \- \ANS-Conformity \refers \
to \changing \one's \behaviour \or \beliefs \to \align \with \those \of \a \group \due \to \real \or \perceived \
group \pressure. \Several \factors \explain \why \Charlie \conformed \in \this \situation.
One \factor \is \Normative \Social \influence. \Charlie \likely \conformed \to \avoid \rejection \or \disapproval \
from \his \new \group \of \friends, \who \he \perceives \as \"cool" \and \more \popular. \He \doesn't \want \to \
stand \out \or \be \ridiculed \for \not \participating, \so \he \follows \the \group's \behaviour \to \fit \in \and \be \
accepted.
Another \factor \is \identification, \since \Charlie \admires \the \group \and \views \them \as \"cool," \he \may \
want \to \be \accepted \by \them. \This \admiration \can \lead \him \to \identify \with \their \behaviours, \
leading \him \to \conform \to \what \the \group \does, \such \as \wearing \the \jumper \inside-out.
Informational \Social \Influence: \There \may \also \be \an \element \of \informational \influence. \Charlie \
may \believe \that \because \the \popular \boys \are \suggesting \this, \they \know \something \he \doesn't \
about \the \social \dynamics \of \the \school, \and \so \he \goes \along \with \the \behaviour \thinking \they \
might \be \right.
, Later \that \day, \the \headteacher \calls \each \of \the \boys \in \the \group \to \his \office \one \by \one, \
including \Charlie. \He \explains \that \the \school \jumper \should \not \be \worn \inside-out \and \that \a \
detention \will \be \given \to \any \boy \who \disobeys. \From \then \on, \each \boy \wears \their \jumper \
correctly.
Use \your \knowledge \of \obedience \to \explain \the \boys' \behaviour \(6 \marks) \- \ANS-Legitimacy \of \
authority \is \an \explanation \for \obedience, \which \suggests \that \we \are \more \likely \to \obey \people \
who \we \perceive \to \have \authority \over \us. \This \authority \they \have \is \legitimate \because \of \the \
individual's \position \of \power \within \society, \and \they \will \likely \be \part \of \an \institutional \
structure, \such \as \a \headteacher \in \a \school. \The \boys \perceive \the \headteacher \as \an \authority \
figure \and \having \power \of \them, \therefore \the \boys \obey \the \headteacher.
The \Agentic \state \is \a \mental \state \where \a \person \feels \no \personal \responsibility \for \their \
behaviour \because \they \are \acting \on \behalf \of \an \authority \figure. \When \the \boys \speak \to \the \
headteacher, \a \symbol \of \authority, \the \boys \shift \to \the \agentic \state \from \an \autonomous \state \- \
in \which \they \broke \the \school \rules, \following \the \school \rules. \This \shows \how \an \agentic \shift \in \
the \boys \has \occurred \due \to \the \presence \of \a \legitimate \authority \figure
Discuss \consistency \and \flexibility \as \processes \involved \in \minority \influence \(8 \marks) \- \ANS-
Consistency \refers \to \the \minority's \ability \to \maintain \a \stable \and \coherent \stance \over \time. \
Research \shows \that \when \a \minority \is \consistent, \they \are \more \likely \to \be \taken \seriously \and \
gain \influence. \Consistency \can \be \diachronic \(the \minority \remains \consistent \over \time) \or \
synchronic \(all \members \of \the \minority \present \a \united \front). \Moscovici's \(1969) \study \on \
minority \influence \found \that \a \consistent \minority \was \more \successful \in \changing \the \majority's \
views \than \an \inconsistent \one. \This \is \because \consistency \suggests \confidence, \commitment, \and \
clarity, \prompting \the \majority \to \reconsider \their \own \position.
Moscovici \used \a \bias \sample \of \172 \female \participants \from \America. \As \a \result, \we \are \unable \to
\generalise \the \results \to \other \populations, \for \example \male \participants, \and \we \cannot \conclude \
that \male \participants \would \respond \to \minority \influence \in \the \same \way. \Furthermore, \research \
often \suggests \that \females \are \more \likely \to \conform \and \therefore \further \research \is \required \
to \determine \the \effect \of \minority \influence \on \male \participants.
Flexibility, \however, \is \also \essential. \If \a \minority \is \seen \as \rigid \or \dogmatic, \they \may \be \
dismissed \as \extreme \or \unreasonable. \Nemeth \(1986) \argued \that \minorities \need \to \be \willing \to \
adapt \their \viewpoints \and \compromise, \as \this \shows \open-mindedness. \Flexibility \demonstrates \
that \the \minority \can \consider \other \perspectives \and \negotiate, \which \makes \them \appear \less \
threatening \and \more \approachable. \
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Outline \one \ethical \issue \that \has \arisen \in \social \influence \research. \Refer \to \one \or \more \social \
influence \studies \in \your \answer \(4 \marks) \- \ANS-Social \influence \research \has \issues \with \the \
deception \of \its \participants \which \leads \to \a \further \issue \of \a \lack \of \informed \consent \to \take \
part. \For \example \in \Asch's \study \on \majority \influence \participants \were \told \they \were \taking \part \
in \a \test \of \visual \perception \and \in \Milgram's \research \into \obedience \they \were \told \it \was \a \study
\into \the \effects \of \punishment \on \learning. \However \these \levels \of \deception \are \necessary \in \
social \influence \research \as \telling \the \participants \that \your \will \be \studying \their \levels \of \
conformity \to \a \social \group, \or \their \levels \of \obedience \would \result \in \demand \characteristics \
and \invalidate \the \results \obtained.
Charlie \has \just \started \at \a \new \school. \He \has \become \friendly \with \a \group \of \boys \in \his \year \
group. \Charlie \thinks \they \are \'cool'.
One \day, \one \of \the \more \popular \boys \in \the \group \suggests \they \all \wear \their \school \jumpers \
inside-out \for \a \week, \'just \to \see \what \will \happen'. \Charlie \worries \about \this \all \night \but \still \
goes \to \school \the \following \day \wearing \his \jumper \inside-out.
Use \your \knowledge \of \conformity \to \explain \Charlie's \behaviour \(6 \marks) \- \ANS-Conformity \refers \
to \changing \one's \behaviour \or \beliefs \to \align \with \those \of \a \group \due \to \real \or \perceived \
group \pressure. \Several \factors \explain \why \Charlie \conformed \in \this \situation.
One \factor \is \Normative \Social \influence. \Charlie \likely \conformed \to \avoid \rejection \or \disapproval \
from \his \new \group \of \friends, \who \he \perceives \as \"cool" \and \more \popular. \He \doesn't \want \to \
stand \out \or \be \ridiculed \for \not \participating, \so \he \follows \the \group's \behaviour \to \fit \in \and \be \
accepted.
Another \factor \is \identification, \since \Charlie \admires \the \group \and \views \them \as \"cool," \he \may \
want \to \be \accepted \by \them. \This \admiration \can \lead \him \to \identify \with \their \behaviours, \
leading \him \to \conform \to \what \the \group \does, \such \as \wearing \the \jumper \inside-out.
Informational \Social \Influence: \There \may \also \be \an \element \of \informational \influence. \Charlie \
may \believe \that \because \the \popular \boys \are \suggesting \this, \they \know \something \he \doesn't \
about \the \social \dynamics \of \the \school, \and \so \he \goes \along \with \the \behaviour \thinking \they \
might \be \right.
, Later \that \day, \the \headteacher \calls \each \of \the \boys \in \the \group \to \his \office \one \by \one, \
including \Charlie. \He \explains \that \the \school \jumper \should \not \be \worn \inside-out \and \that \a \
detention \will \be \given \to \any \boy \who \disobeys. \From \then \on, \each \boy \wears \their \jumper \
correctly.
Use \your \knowledge \of \obedience \to \explain \the \boys' \behaviour \(6 \marks) \- \ANS-Legitimacy \of \
authority \is \an \explanation \for \obedience, \which \suggests \that \we \are \more \likely \to \obey \people \
who \we \perceive \to \have \authority \over \us. \This \authority \they \have \is \legitimate \because \of \the \
individual's \position \of \power \within \society, \and \they \will \likely \be \part \of \an \institutional \
structure, \such \as \a \headteacher \in \a \school. \The \boys \perceive \the \headteacher \as \an \authority \
figure \and \having \power \of \them, \therefore \the \boys \obey \the \headteacher.
The \Agentic \state \is \a \mental \state \where \a \person \feels \no \personal \responsibility \for \their \
behaviour \because \they \are \acting \on \behalf \of \an \authority \figure. \When \the \boys \speak \to \the \
headteacher, \a \symbol \of \authority, \the \boys \shift \to \the \agentic \state \from \an \autonomous \state \- \
in \which \they \broke \the \school \rules, \following \the \school \rules. \This \shows \how \an \agentic \shift \in \
the \boys \has \occurred \due \to \the \presence \of \a \legitimate \authority \figure
Discuss \consistency \and \flexibility \as \processes \involved \in \minority \influence \(8 \marks) \- \ANS-
Consistency \refers \to \the \minority's \ability \to \maintain \a \stable \and \coherent \stance \over \time. \
Research \shows \that \when \a \minority \is \consistent, \they \are \more \likely \to \be \taken \seriously \and \
gain \influence. \Consistency \can \be \diachronic \(the \minority \remains \consistent \over \time) \or \
synchronic \(all \members \of \the \minority \present \a \united \front). \Moscovici's \(1969) \study \on \
minority \influence \found \that \a \consistent \minority \was \more \successful \in \changing \the \majority's \
views \than \an \inconsistent \one. \This \is \because \consistency \suggests \confidence, \commitment, \and \
clarity, \prompting \the \majority \to \reconsider \their \own \position.
Moscovici \used \a \bias \sample \of \172 \female \participants \from \America. \As \a \result, \we \are \unable \to
\generalise \the \results \to \other \populations, \for \example \male \participants, \and \we \cannot \conclude \
that \male \participants \would \respond \to \minority \influence \in \the \same \way. \Furthermore, \research \
often \suggests \that \females \are \more \likely \to \conform \and \therefore \further \research \is \required \
to \determine \the \effect \of \minority \influence \on \male \participants.
Flexibility, \however, \is \also \essential. \If \a \minority \is \seen \as \rigid \or \dogmatic, \they \may \be \
dismissed \as \extreme \or \unreasonable. \Nemeth \(1986) \argued \that \minorities \need \to \be \willing \to \
adapt \their \viewpoints \and \compromise, \as \this \shows \open-mindedness. \Flexibility \demonstrates \
that \the \minority \can \consider \other \perspectives \and \negotiate, \which \makes \them \appear \less \
threatening \and \more \approachable. \
