A* PSYCHOLOGY ESSAY
PLANS
Based on the A-Level AQA Exam Board Specification
Hi! My name is Sarah and these are the revision notes I made and used for my A-Levels in 2023. For each
subtopic I have formed an essay plan template for the possible 16-mark (essay) questions that could
potentially be asked in your exam. During my exams, there were 7/8 16-mark questions across the 3
papers and as AQA frequently repeat the same questions, just worded differently, it is important you
learn all of them for your exam – not just the ones that haven’t come up!
Structure of a 16-mark question: KEY TIPS:
AO1 (description) – 6 marks If the questions say ‘Discuss…’ you
AO3 (evaluation) – 10 marks, 3/4 well elaborated paragraphs need to evaluate both the strengths
Structure of a 16-mark question with a and weaknesses of the debate, this
does not have to be balanced.
scenario/context:
AO1 (description) – 6 marks Never include your opinion in your
AO2 (application) – 4 marks, examiners are looking for you to essay just refer to key statistics and
identify the context in the scenario that relates to the question theories, instead suggest what this
and apply this, this is easiest to do when incorporated into the shows/infers.
AO1 by stating for example, ‘… conformity is … this is shown
Never say that a theory ‘proves’
when ‘[relate to the context]’. Or equally you can show your
something, psychology is a
application in AO3 to help strengthen one argument.
pseudoscience and you will be
AO3 (evaluation) – 6 marks, 2/3 well elaborated paragraphs
marked down for this.
Table of Contents: Social Influence
o Types and explanations for conformity
o Variables affecting conformity
o Conformity to Social Roles
o Research: Situational Variables Affecting Obedience
o Explanation of obedience: Agentic state and legitimacy of authority
o Dispositional Explanations for Obedience: The Authoritarian Personality
o Resistance to Social Influence
o Minority Influence
o Social Influence Processes in Social Change
,*AO3 paragraphs get progressively more detailed due to practice, extending to 4-5 in depth PEEL plans, 3-4
paragraphs are still recommended so feel free to pick whatever paragraphs you prefer and develop them
further if you wish.
**Disclaimer: Several months of hard work have gone into these essay plans therefore it is important to note
that it is prohibited to distribute or republish this work without prior permission under copyright protection.
, TYPES AND EXPLANATIONS FOR CONFORMITY
AO1
Kelman (1958) proposed three types of conformity:
Types:
Compliance → individuals go along with group to gain approval or avoid disapproval,
engage in social comparison (adjust actions and statements to fit in with group), desire
to fit in motivates conformity, no change in underlying attitudes only expressed belief to
public.
Internalisation → individuals go along with group because they accept its views, engage
in validation process (examine both beliefs, close examination may lead realisation that
group view is true, likely if group trustworthy and you tended to have same views on
previous occasions), acceptance publicly and privately
Identification → individuals temporarily accept influence because want to be associated
with group, accept views of group as correct (internalisation) with purpose to be
accepted as a member of group (compliance)
Explanations:
Normative Social Influence (COMPLIANCE) → individuals go along with majority because
they desire to be liked rather than acceptance of majority’s view
based on human’s fundamental need for social companionship and fear of rejection
must believe behaviour monitored by group to occur
conform in public not private (therefore short term)
Informational Social Influence (INTERNALISATION) → individual accept majority view most
likely be correct/as evidence of reality
based on human need to be confident that own perceptions and beliefs are correct
occurs when objective tests not possible, must rely on opinion of others
most likely in ambiguous situations or when others are seen as experts
conform in public and private (therefore long term)
AO3
P: Limitation - difficult to distinguish between compliance and internalisation because
unsure of when each is taking place
E: For example, someone agrees with majority view in public but disagrees in private
assumed to be compliance
E: However, possible groups view originally internalised but persons subsequently changed
mind after receiving new information
L: Therefore, difficult determine what is or is not compliance or internalisation
P: Supporting evidence for normative social influence has important role in shaping
behaviours such as smoking and energy conservation.
E: Shultz et al found that hotel guests exposed to the normative message that ‘75% of
guests reused their towels each day’ (an indication of energy conservation behaviour)
reduced their own towel use by 25%.
L: Supports claim people shape behaviour out of desire to fit in with reference group, and
therefore demonstrates the explanatory power of normative social influence.
P: Supporting evidence for role of informational social influence.
,E: Lucas et al found conformity to an obviously incorrect maths answer was greater when
the question was more difficult and the participant doubted their own maths ability.
E: This shows individuals are more likely to turn to others when they lack the information to
make their own informed decision, such as an ambiguous situation.
L: Therefore, increasing validity of ISI as an explanation for conformity.
P: Limitation of informational social influence as an explanation is that features of the task
moderate the impact of majority influence, some tasks may have clear physical criteria for
validation, others may not.
E: Example, deciding London most populated city in England determined objectively through
statistics, however other judgements (is London the most fun city in England?) cannot be
made using objective criteria because it does not exist.
E: These judgements are made on social consensus basis (what other people believe) which
is entirely subjective.
L: As a result, majorities exert greater influence on social issues rather than physical issues,
limiting the explanation.
, VARIABLES AFFECTING CONFORMITY
AO1
Key Study: Asch (1956)
Aim: Investigate conformity and majority influence
Ppt: 123 male undergrad, group of 6 → 1 real, 5 confederates
Procedure:
Ppt and confederates seated around table presented 3 comparison lines + 1 standard
line
Asked which 3 lines same length as standard line, real ppt always answered 2nd last
Confederates gave same incorrect answer 12/18 (critical trials), ppt observed see if they
gave same incorrect answer as majority vs correct answer
Findings:
33% average conformity on critical trials
25% never conformed
5% always conformed
1% incorrect response on control trial (no confederates), confirm unambiguous
situation, eliminating perception as extraneous variable, ↑ internal validity
Interview post-study: Majority ppt conformed privately trusted own perception,
publicly changed behaviour to avoid disapproval by group (compliance)
Variables Affecting conformity
Asch’s variations investigate which variable has most significant effect on levels of
conformity
Group Size
30% conformity group ≥3 confederates, limited, further increase in group size showed
little difference
Campbell & Fairey → found the effect different depending on type of judgement and
motivation. Ambiguous situations where individual concerned fitting in, ↑ majority,
more compliance. In objective situations, correct answer obvious individual wanted to
be right, so only 1 confederate view was sufficient for conformity
Unanimity of Majority
o 5.5% conformity presence of dissenter gave correct answer/against majority
o 9% conformity presence of dissenter gave other incorrect answer, social support
for individual to rebel against majority
o Major factor as always led to ↓ conformity
Task Difficulty
o ↑ difficulty (smaller differences in line length), ↑ conformity, situation more
ambiguous
o Lucas et al: found influence of task difficulty moderated by self-efficacy. Seen
maths problem tasks, those with high self-efficacy (confident own ability) remained
more independent/conformed less than low self-efficacy ppts. Shows situational
differences (task difficulty) and individual differences (self-efficacy) equally important.
AO3
