AQA A-level Psychology · 4.1.1

Social influence

50 exam-style questions with answers for 4.1.1 Social influence in AQA A-level Psychology (spec 7182). Practise with flashcards, a topic quiz, a random quiz across the course, 5 crosswords, or read every question and answer below. Not official AQA material.

All 50 questions and answers

Question 1 · Spec 4.1.1 · Types of conformity
Define internalisation as a type of conformity. [2 marks]
Answer:
A person genuinely accepts the group's norms (1); so the change is both public and private and continues when the group is absent (1).
Question 2 · Spec 4.1.1 · Types of conformity
Define compliance as a type of conformity. [2 marks]
Answer:
A person goes along with the majority in public (1); but privately does not change their own view, so the behaviour stops when group pressure stops (1).
Question 3 · Spec 4.1.1 · Types of conformity
Outline identification as a type of conformity. [2 marks]
Answer:
A person conforms because they value a group and want to be part of it (1); they publicly change and may privately accept the views, but only while they remain a member/identify with the group (1).
Question 4 · Spec 4.1.1 · Explanations for conformity
Outline informational social influence (ISI) as an explanation for conformity. [3 marks]
Answer:
People conform because they want to be right (1); they look to others they believe have better knowledge (1); most likely in new, ambiguous or crisis situations, and usually leads to internalisation (1).
Question 5 · Spec 4.1.1 · Explanations for conformity
Outline normative social influence (NSI) as an explanation for conformity. [3 marks]
Answer:
People conform because they want to be liked/accepted by the group (1); they fear rejection or ridicule for being different (1); usually leads to compliance, especially with strangers or people we know (1).
Question 6 · Spec 4.1.1 · Explanations for conformity
Give one piece of research support for informational social influence. [2 marks]
Answer:
Lucas et al. (2006) found students conformed more to incorrect answers on difficult maths problems than easy ones (1); showing people conform more when unsure of the right answer, as ISI predicts (1).
Question 7 · Spec 4.1.1 · Explanations for conformity
Explain one limitation of the distinction between NSI and ISI. [2 marks]
Answer:
The two processes often work together, so it is hard to tell which is operating (1); e.g. a dissenter in Asch's study may reduce NSI by giving support and also reduce ISI by providing an alternative source of information (1).
Question 8 · Spec 4.1.1 · Asch
Outline the procedure of Asch's (1951) line judgement study. [4 marks]
Answer:
123 American male student participants (1); each tested in a group with 6–8 confederates who gave the same wrong answer on some trials (1); task was to say which of three comparison lines matched a standard line (1); naive participant answered last or next to last, over 18 trials of which 12 were critical trials (1).
Question 9 · Spec 4.1.1 · Asch
State two findings from Asch's (1951) baseline study. [2 marks]
Answer:
Any two from: participants conformed on 36.8% of critical trials (1); 75% conformed at least once (1); 25% never conformed (1).
Question 10 · Spec 4.1.1 · Variables affecting conformity
Explain how group size affected conformity in Asch's variations. [3 marks]
Answer:
With one confederate conformity was about 3% (1); it rose to about 32% with three confederates (1); adding more than three made little further difference, so conformity levelled off (1).
Question 11 · Spec 4.1.1 · Variables affecting conformity
Explain how unanimity affected conformity in Asch's variations. [2 marks]
Answer:
When one confederate disagreed with the majority, conformity fell sharply, to around a quarter of the baseline level (1); a dissenter frees the participant to follow their own judgement because the group is no longer unanimous (1).
Question 12 · Spec 4.1.1 · Variables affecting conformity
Explain how task difficulty affected conformity in Asch's variations. [2 marks]
Answer:
When the lines were made more similar in length the task became harder (1); conformity increased, as people looked to others for the answer (ISI) (1).
Question 13 · Spec 4.1.1 · Asch evaluation
Explain one limitation of Asch's research relating to the historical period. [2 marks]
Answer:
The study took place in 1950s America, a conformist era (McCarthyism) (1); Perrin and Spencer (1980) found only one conforming response in 396 trials with UK students, so findings lack temporal validity (1).
Question 14 · Spec 4.1.1 · Asch evaluation
Explain one limitation of Asch's research relating to the task. [2 marks]
Answer:
The task was artificial: judging lines is trivial, so there was little reason not to conform (1); the findings may not generalise to real-life situations where conformity matters more (low mundane realism) (1).
Question 15 · Spec 4.1.1 · Asch evaluation
Identify one ethical issue in Asch's research and explain why it was an issue. [2 marks]
Answer:
Deception (1); participants believed the confederates were genuine participants, so could not give fully informed consent (1).
Question 16 · Spec 4.1.1 · Asch evaluation
Explain one limitation of Asch's sample. [2 marks]
Answer:
All participants were American men (1); so findings may not apply to women, who may be more concerned with social relationships, or to collectivist cultures where conformity is higher (1).
Question 17 · Spec 4.1.1 · Zimbardo
Outline the procedure of Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment (1973). [4 marks]
Answer:
A mock prison was set up in the basement of Stanford University (1); 24 emotionally stable male student volunteers were randomly given the role of guard or prisoner (1); prisoners were arrested at home and given smocks and numbers, guards had uniforms, sticks and mirror sunglasses (1); the study was planned for two weeks (1).
Question 18 · Spec 4.1.1 · Zimbardo
Outline the findings of Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment. [3 marks]
Answer:
Guards became increasingly brutal and aggressive towards prisoners (1); prisoners became passive and depressed, and some were released early with severe reactions (1); the study was stopped after six days instead of 14 (1).
Question 19 · Spec 4.1.1 · Zimbardo
What does Zimbardo's study suggest about conformity to social roles? [2 marks]
Answer:
People quickly conform to the social roles they are given, even when they behave against their usual character (1); the situation/role was a more powerful influence on behaviour than personality (1).
Question 20 · Spec 4.1.1 · Zimbardo evaluation
Explain one strength of Zimbardo's research. [2 marks]
Answer:
He had control over key variables, e.g. emotionally stable participants were randomly allocated to roles (1); so behaviour was due to the role rather than personality, increasing internal validity (1).
Question 21 · Spec 4.1.1 · Zimbardo evaluation
Explain one limitation of Zimbardo's research. [2 marks]
Answer:
Banuazizi and Movahedi (1975) argued participants were play-acting stereotypes they had seen in films (1); so the study may show acting rather than genuine conformity to roles, lacking realism (1).
Question 22 · Spec 4.1.1 · Zimbardo evaluation
Explain why Zimbardo's study has been criticised for exaggerating the power of roles. [2 marks]
Answer:
Only about a third of the guards behaved brutally; others applied the rules fairly or tried to help prisoners (1); this suggests dispositional factors also matter, which Zimbardo's situational account understates (1).
Question 23 · Spec 4.1.1 · Milgram
Outline the procedure of Milgram's (1963) obedience study. [4 marks]
Answer:
40 American men recruited through a newspaper advert, paid $4.50 (1); a rigged draw made the participant the 'teacher' and a confederate the 'learner' (1); the teacher gave apparent electric shocks, rising in 15-volt steps to 450 volts, for each wrong answer (1); an experimenter in a grey lab coat used four standard prods such as 'The experiment requires that you continue' (1).
Question 24 · Spec 4.1.1 · Milgram
State two findings from Milgram's (1963) baseline study. [2 marks]
Answer:
Any two from: 65% of participants continued to 450 volts (1); all participants went to at least 300 volts (1); many showed signs of extreme tension such as sweating, trembling and nervous laughter (1).
Question 25 · Spec 4.1.1 · Situational variables
Explain how proximity affected obedience in Milgram's variations. [3 marks]
Answer:
When teacher and learner were in the same room, obedience fell to 40% (1); when the teacher had to force the learner's hand onto a shock plate, it fell to 30% (1); when the experimenter gave instructions by phone, it fell to 20.5% (1).
Question 26 · Spec 4.1.1 · Situational variables
Explain how location affected obedience in Milgram's variations. [2 marks]
Answer:
When the study moved from Yale University to a run-down office block, obedience fell to 47.5% (1); the prestigious university setting gave the experimenter more legitimate authority (1).
Question 27 · Spec 4.1.1 · Situational variables
Explain how uniform affected obedience in Milgram's variations. [2 marks]
Answer:
When the experimenter was replaced by an 'ordinary member of the public' in everyday clothes, obedience fell to 20% (1); a uniform such as a lab coat signals legitimate authority (1).
Question 28 · Spec 4.1.1 · Situational variables
Outline one study that supports the effect of uniform on obedience, other than Milgram. [2 marks]
Answer:
Bickman (1974) had confederates dressed as a security guard, milkman or in a jacket and tie give orders to people in the street (1); people were about twice as likely to obey the 'security guard' (1).
Question 29 · Spec 4.1.1 · Explanations for obedience
Outline the agentic state explanation of obedience. [3 marks]
Answer:
A person sees themselves as acting on behalf of an authority figure, not as responsible for their actions (1); this is a shift from the autonomous state, called the agentic shift (1); binding factors, such as shifting responsibility to the victim, allow the person to ignore the damaging effects of their behaviour (1).
Question 30 · Spec 4.1.1 · Explanations for obedience
Outline the legitimacy of authority explanation of obedience. [3 marks]
Answer:
Society is organised in a hierarchy where some people hold authority over others (1); this authority is agreed by society and people learn in childhood to accept it from parents, teachers and so on (1); we give up some independence to people we trust to use authority properly, which can lead to destructive authority (1).
Question 31 · Spec 4.1.1 · Explanations for obedience
Explain one limitation of the agentic state explanation. [2 marks]
Answer:
It cannot explain why some participants disobeyed (35% in Milgram's baseline) (1); and Rank and Jacobson (1977) found 16 of 18 nurses refused a doctor's order to give an excessive drug dose, so not everyone shifts into the agentic state (1).
Question 32 · Spec 4.1.1 · Explanations for obedience
Explain one strength of the legitimacy of authority explanation. [2 marks]
Answer:
It can explain cultural differences in obedience (1); e.g. Kilham and Mann (1974) found only 16% of Australian women went to the highest voltage, while Mantell (1971) found 85% in Germany, reflecting how cultures view authority (1).
Question 33 · Spec 4.1.1 · Dispositional explanation
Outline the Authoritarian Personality as an explanation for obedience. [3 marks]
Answer:
Adorno et al. (1950) proposed people with this personality are especially obedient to authority (1); they have extreme respect for authority, view society as 'weaker' than it was, and hold fixed, conventional attitudes (1); it is thought to form in childhood through harsh, strict parenting, with hostility displaced onto weaker others (1).
Question 34 · Spec 4.1.1 · Dispositional explanation
Outline how Adorno et al. measured the Authoritarian Personality. [2 marks]
Answer:
They studied over 2000 middle-class white Americans using the F-scale (potential for fascism) (1); high scorers identified with 'strong' people, were contemptuous of the 'weak', and saw things in black-and-white categories (1).
Question 35 · Spec 4.1.1 · Dispositional explanation
Explain one limitation of the Authoritarian Personality explanation. [2 marks]
Answer:
It cannot explain obedience across a whole society, e.g. most Germans obeyed in Nazi Germany despite having different personalities (1); a social identity or situational explanation is more realistic for large-scale obedience (1).
Question 36 · Spec 4.1.1 · Dispositional explanation
Explain one methodological limitation of the F-scale. [2 marks]
Answer:
All items are worded in the same direction, so agreeing with any statement scores as authoritarian (1); this acquiescence bias means it may measure a tendency to agree rather than authoritarianism (1).
Question 37 · Spec 4.1.1 · Resistance to social influence
Explain how social support can help people resist social influence. [3 marks]
Answer:
Pressure to conform is reduced when another person also refuses to conform (1); the dissenter acts as a model and shows the majority is not unanimous (1); for obedience, a disobedient peer models disobedience, e.g. obedience fell to 10% in Milgram's study when a confederate refused (1).
Question 38 · Spec 4.1.1 · Resistance to social influence
Outline locus of control as an explanation of resistance to social influence. [3 marks]
Answer:
Rotter (1966) described locus of control as a person's sense of what controls events in their life (1); people with an internal locus believe they control what happens to them, while externals believe it is luck or fate (1); internals are more likely to resist pressures to conform or obey because they take personal responsibility (1).
Question 39 · Spec 4.1.1 · Resistance to social influence
Give one piece of research support for locus of control in resisting obedience. [2 marks]
Answer:
Holland (1967) repeated Milgram's study and measured locus of control (1); 37% of internals did not continue to the highest shock compared with 23% of externals (1).
Question 40 · Spec 4.1.1 · Resistance to social influence
Explain one limitation of the locus of control explanation. [2 marks]
Answer:
Twenge et al. (2004) found Americans became more resistant to obedience but also more external over 40 years (1); this is the opposite of what the theory predicts, so the role of locus of control may be exaggerated (1).
Question 41 · Spec 4.1.1 · Minority influence
Explain the role of consistency in minority influence. [2 marks]
Answer:
A minority that keeps the same view over time and agrees among its members gets attention (1); consistency makes others rethink their own views (synchronic and diachronic consistency) (1).
Question 42 · Spec 4.1.1 · Minority influence
Explain the role of commitment in minority influence. [2 marks]
Answer:
Showing commitment, e.g. through personal sacrifice or extreme action, makes the majority pay more attention (1); this is the augmentation principle: it shows the minority is not acting out of self-interest (1).
Question 43 · Spec 4.1.1 · Minority influence
Explain the role of flexibility in minority influence. [2 marks]
Answer:
Nemeth (1986) argued that a minority that is rigid and dogmatic is seen as unreasonable (1); being willing to accept reasonable counter-arguments and compromise is more persuasive (1).
Question 44 · Spec 4.1.1 · Minority influence
Outline Moscovici's (1969) blue-green slide study. [3 marks]
Answer:
Groups of six viewed 36 blue-coloured slides of varying intensity and said whether they were blue or green (1); two confederates consistently called them green, and participants agreed on 8.42% of trials (1); when the confederates were inconsistent, agreement fell to 1.25% (1).
Question 45 · Spec 4.1.1 · Minority influence
What is the 'snowball effect' in minority influence? [2 marks]
Answer:
As more people convert to the minority view, it gains momentum and spreads more quickly (1); eventually the minority view becomes the majority view (1).
Question 46 · Spec 4.1.1 · Minority influence
Explain one limitation of research into minority influence. [2 marks]
Answer:
Studies like Moscovici's use artificial tasks such as identifying slide colours (1); real minorities, e.g. political campaigners, have far more at stake, so findings may not generalise (1).
Question 47 · Spec 4.1.1 · Social change
Explain how minority influence can lead to social change, using an example. [4 marks]
Answer:
Drawing attention: e.g. the suffragettes/civil rights marches drew attention to injustice (1); consistency of the message over many years (1); deeper processing, as people began thinking about the unfairness of the issue (1); the augmentation principle and snowball effect, as sacrifices were made and support grew until the majority view changed (1).
Question 48 · Spec 4.1.1 · Social change
Explain how majority (normative) social influence can be used to bring about social change. [2 marks]
Answer:
People's behaviour can be changed by showing them what most others do (1); e.g. Nolan et al. (2008) found energy use fell when households were told their neighbours were saving energy (1).
Question 49 · Spec 4.1.1 · Social change
What is social cryptomnesia? [2 marks]
Answer:
People remember that social change has happened (1); but forget how it happened, i.e. that a minority brought it about (1).
Question 50 · Spec 4.1.1 · Social change
Explain how obedience can contribute to social change. [2 marks]
Answer:
Change can be imposed by authority through laws, e.g. a smoking ban, and people obey (1); Zimbardo suggested gradual commitment: once a small instruction is obeyed it becomes harder to resist a larger one, so behaviour changes step by step (1).

4.1.2 Memory →

Social influence

All 50 questions and answers

More AQA A-level Psychology topics

Cookies on Knowledge Noodles

Cookie settings