IB Psychology SL 2.3 Sociocultural Approach Question Bank

The command term "discuss" requires candidates to offer a considered review of two compliance techniques. Although the response must address two techniques the discussion does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.

Compliance techniques that are addressed may include, but are not limited to:
- reciprocity (Lynne \& McCall,1998; Tiger \& Fox, 1989)
- foot-in-the-door (Petrova, 2007; Sherman, 1980; Freedman \& Fraser, 1966)
- door-in-the-face (Gueguen \& Meineri, 2011; Cialdini, 1975)
- low-balling (Burger \& Cornelius, 2003; Palak, 1980).

Discussion may include, but is not limited to:
- efficacy of the technique
- levels of compliance affected by factors such as liking, authority, etc
- the role of cognitive dissonance
- the need for social acceptance
- the role of goal gradients
- methodological and ethical considerations
- cultural and gender considerations
- contrary findings or explanations.

If a candidate discusses more than two compliance techniques, credit should be given only to the first two compliance techniques.

If a candidate discusses only one compliance technique, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5] for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension, up to a maximum of [4] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2] for criterion C, organization.

Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "examine" requires candidates to consider how two or more factors influence conformity in a way that uncovers the assumptions and relationships between each of these factors and conformity.

Appropriate factors influencing conformity may include but are not limited to: culture, minority influence, group size, unanimity, confidence, self-esteem, intellectual competence and leadership ability. Candidates may refer to normative influence and informational influence as factors leading to conformity.

Candidates may refer to a number of studies that may include but are not limited to:
- Asch's (1951,1952,1956) studies on the influence of group size, unanimity and the difficulty of the task
- Crutchfield's (1955) study on intellectual competence, ego strength, leadership ability and authoritarian personality
- Perrin and Spencer's (1988) study on confidence
- Moscovici et al.'s (1969,1976,1985) studies on the influence of a minority
- Berry's (1967) study or Bond and Smith's study (1996) on cultural differences.
- Abrams (1990) study on the role of social identity.

In order to respond to the command term "examine", candidates may refer to:
- our inherent need to belong and the role this plays in normative social influence
- that we understand ourselves through social comparison
- our behaviour is influenced by others, even when we believe that we are acting independently.
- gender and cultural considerations - such as the role of cultural dimensions on our behaviour.

Candidates may examine two factors influencing conformity in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may examine a larger number of factors in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

If a candidate examines only one factor influencing conformity, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5] for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension, up to a maximum of [4] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2] for criterion C , organization.

If factors influencing obedience or compliance, rather than conformity, are discussed, no marks should be awarded for this discussion. Marks should only be awarded for a discussion of the Stanford Prison Study if the response focuses on relevant factors influencing conformity, for example referent informational influence.

Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "discuss" requires candidates to offer a considered review of one or more cultural dimensions of human behaviour.

Responses should present the core traits that define the chosen cultural dimension(s). Candidates may address the chosen cultural dimension(s) generally, for example, that it is the effect of a culture on the beliefs and values of a society, or in a more detailed manner with explanations based on social mobility, agricultural versus urban, democratic principles, economic stability, etc. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

Relevant research may include, but is not limited to:
- Berry (1967); Kulkofsky et al. (2011); Wei et al. (2001) - individualism/collectivism
- Zhang et al. (2010); Eylon and Au (1999); Lynn et al. (1993) - power distance
- Chen et al. (2005); Hofstede and Bond (1988) - long-term/short-term orientation (Confucian dynamism)
- Vunderick and Hofstede (1998) - masculinity/femininity
- Shane (1995) - uncertainty avoidance

Discussion may include, but is not limited to:
- methodological considerations
- how the findings of research have been interpreted and applied
- implications of the findings
- assumptions and biases
- areas of uncertainty
- supporting and/or contradictory evidence
- alternative explanations.

Candidates may discuss one cultural dimension in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge or may discuss a larger number of cultural dimensions in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.