Psychology Notes:
Contents:
0. Welcome
0. Key Studies
1. Social influence (paper 1)
2. memory (paper 1)
3. Attachment (paper 1)
4. Psychopathology (paper 1)
5. Approaches In Psychology (Paper 2)
6. Biopsychology (Paper 2)
7. Research methods (Paper 2)
Welcome:
Welcome to my notes! These were used when I was studying for Paper 1 and 2 of my
Psychology A-Level for the AQA Exam Board. There may be a few spelling errors, but as far
as I know everything is as it should be. Paper 3 includes optional topics, and therefore I’ve
put that one up separately to this, which convers the compulsory material.
Before we start, here’s the quizlet I made/used alongside these notes:
Paper 1: https://quizlet.com/fleurcasson/folders/psychology-paper-1/sets
Paper 2: https://quizlet.com/fleurcasson/folders/psychology-paper-2/sets
I hope you find everything in here useful and get the grades you want!
Key Studies:
1. ASCH (1956), HANEY ET AL (1973), MILGRIM (1963), ELMS AND MILGRAM (1966),
MOSCOVICI ET AL (1969)
2. Loftus and Palmer (1974), Johnson and Scott (1976)
3. LORENZ (1935), HARLOW (1959), AINSWORTH ET AL (1971-1978), VAN
IJZENDOORN AND KROONENBERG (1988), BOWLBY (1944), RUTTER AND SONUGA-
BARKE (2010), HAZAN AND SHAVER (1987)
, 1. SOCIAL INFLUENCE
Type of conformity and explanations for conformity
Information
Conformity is a social influence that results from exposure to a majority position. A
tendency to adopt the behaviour, attitudes, and values of members of a reference group.
There are three types of conformity:
1. Compliance- Going along with the group to gain approval/avoid disapproval. They
may engage in social comparison, seeing how they differ from the group and how
they can fit in more. Only a public change.
2. Identification- Accepting the influence because they want to be associated with the
group/person. Adopting the belief means they feel more a part of it. A mix of
compliance and internalisation as they accept the beliefs to be true, but only to be
accepted.
3. Internalisation- An acceptance of the group beliefs. When exposed to the views of
another group, individuals are encouraged to go through a validation process of
examining their own beliefs to see whose right. It’s more likely to happen if they
group is trustworthy, and they’ve agreed on the past. Both public and private belief.
There are 2 reasons as to explain why people conform:
1. Normative Social Influence- Humans are a social species, so we crave
companionship and fear rejection. Normative social influence is the want to be
accepted, and only occurs when the individual believes they’re under the surveillance
of the group. They don’t necessarily internalise the view and it doesn’t endure over
time or in private.
2. Informational Social Influence- Occurs when the induvial accepts the information
given from others as evidence about reality. Humans need to feel confident about the
fact their beliefs are correct, and without objective tests the opinion of others must be
taken into account. It’s more likely to occur if the answer is ambiguous. It involves a
public and private chance, making it an example of internalisation.
Evaluation
Limitation: Difficulties in distinguishing between compliance and internalization- It’s
possible the reason someone doesn’t believe in something in private is because they’ve
forgotten the information, or they received new information. It’s hard to tell in the moment
if the person truly believes the information, lowering the reliability.
Limitation: Normative influence may not be detected- Researchers have questioned whether
people release others effect their own behaviour. In a study people rated others as the lowest
factor effecting their energy conservation, but it was found to be the highest. This mean
normative social influence may be under-detected in other research, lowering the
reliability.
,Limitation: Informational Social Influence is moderated by task type- With non-social criteria
for determining the answer (facts), informational social influence is low. However, for
opinions with no objective criteria, other opinions influence people more. This means it
doesn’t work in a consistent manner.
Strength: Research Support for Normative Social Influence- US research found teens are less
likely to smoke if they’re exposed to the simple message that other teens don’t. This means
the theory has real work application and is supported by other studies.
Strength: Research Support for Informational Social Influence- A study found that exposing
people to negative information about African Americans (which they were deceived into
believing was the view of the majority) led them to report more negative beliefs about a black
induvial later. Watching other’s reactions to a candidates performance in the US presidential
debate also effected how the induvial felt the candidate preformed. The theory is supported
by other research.
, Variables affecting conformity
Information
KEY STUDY: ASCH (1956)
Procedure: Asch asked 123 male US undergraduates to take part in a visual discrimination
task. They were the only non-confederate, as the real test was into conformity. They were sat
around a table and asked to look at 3 lines of different lengths, taking turns to call out which
one was the same length as the standard line. The real participant answered second to last.
Despite there being an obvious answer, for 12 out of 18 trials the participants were instructed
to get the answer wrong.
Findings: On the 12 critical trials, the conformity rate was 33%. ¼ never conformed, ½
conformed on 6 or more trials, and 1/20 conformed to all 12 critical trails. In the control
group he wasn’t to see if the lines were really unambiguous and found a mistake margin of
1%. He had no explanation for why there was such high conformity in the original study. In
the after interview, most said the participants trusted their own judgement but said the wrong
thing to avoid judgement. It was compliance.
In Asch’s variations, he found 3 variables that affected conformity:
1. Group Size- there’s very little conformity with 1 or 2 confederates, but with 3
conformity jumps to 30%. Increasing the group size beyond 3 didn’t change
conformity that much. Others have theorised that it depends on the question, as if
they’re asked to make a subjective judgement the larger majority would cause larger
conformity. However, if it’s factual a smaller number of confederates would be
sufficient.
2. The unanimity of the majority- With one confederate giving the right answers
throughout, conformity dropped to 5.5%. With a dissenter giving a different answer to
the one of the confederates, but still not the right answer, the conformity rate dropped
to 9%.
3. The difficulty of the task- In one variation, Asch made the differences between the
lengths smaller, so the correct answer was less obvious, and conformity rose. Another
study found that if participants were self-efficient (the believed they could do it), they
would conform less than participants who weren’t very self-efficient. Situational
differences and individual differences effect conformity.
Evaluation
Limitation: Low temporal validity- During 1956 the US was under the grip of McCarthyism.
This was a time where people were scared to stand out. In the UK in the 1980s Asch’s study
was repeated and they found that the levels of conformity were similar only when they tested
youths on probation and had the confederates as the probation officer. It lacks temporal
validity.
Limitation: Problems with determining the effect of group size- Researchers were quick to
accept Asch’s conclusions about 3 confederates are enough, so not many other studies use
more than 3. A psychologist points out that no other study have used more than 9
