IB Psychology SL 2.3 Sociocultural Approach Questions

Refer to the paper 1 section A markbands below when awarding marks.
The command term "explain" requires candidates to give a detailed account, including reasons or causes, of one compliance technique.

Acceptable compliance techniques include, but are not limited to:
- reciprocity
- foot-in-the-door
- door-in-the-face
- low balling
- bait and switch.

If a candidate explains more than one compliance technique, credit should be given only to the first explanation.

Although an example should be given to illustrate the technique, it is not required that the example be an empirical study.

Candidates may address principles and/or factors such as evolutionary arguments, social comparison, cognitive dissonance, cultural norms, goal gradients (commitment) and/or preservation of self-image as part of an explanation of the compliance technique. However, if a candidate explains factors without reference to a specific compliance technique, a maximum of [3 marks] should be awarded.

If a candidate only describes an appropriate study without identifying or explaining a compliance technique, apply the markbands up to a maximum of [3 marks].

Section A markbands

Marks Level descriptor 0 The answer does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1 to 3 There is an attempt to answer the question, but knowledge and understanding is limited, often inaccurate, or of marginal relevance to the question.

4 to 6 The question is partially answered. Knowledge and understanding is accurate but limited. Either the command term is not effectively addressed or the response is not sufficiently explicit in answering the question.

7 to 8 The question is answered in a focused and effective manner and meets the demands of the command term. The response is supported by appropriate and accurate knowledge and understanding of research.

Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "evaluate" requires candidates to make an appraisal of the strengths and limitations of research on conformity. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.

Relevant theories may include, but are not limited to:
- informational/normative social influence theory
- social comparison theory
- bystander effect
- groupthink.

Relevant studies may include, but are not limited to:
- Sherif (1935) testing conformity with autokinetic effect illusion
- Asch (1951,1952,1956) testing conformity under unambiguous conditions
- Crutchfield (1955) on the influence of intellectual competence and personality
- Moscovici et al. (1969,1976,1985) on minority influence
- Kagitcibasi's (1984) study on cultural norms and conformity
- Berry's (1967) study on the cultural differences in conformity.

Evaluation may address issues such as:
- methodological, cultural, ethical and gender considerations
- empirical support
- applications of the theory and/or empirical findings
- contrary explanations or findings.

If research addressing obedience, rather than conformity, is discussed, no marks should be awarded for this. No marks should be awarded for a discussion of the Stanford Prison Study unless it clearly addresses the influence of societal roles on conformity.

Candidates may evaluate a small number of theories and/or studies in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may evaluate a larger number of theories and/or studies in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

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

If a candidate discusses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5 marks] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2 marks] for criterion C, organization. Up to full marks may be awarded for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension.

Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "discuss" requires candidates to offer a considered and balanced review, supported by appropriate evidence, of the role of a specific cultural dimension on human behaviour.

Cultural dimensions include, but are not limited to:
- power distance: the way people perceive power differences and how they react to power relations
- individualism versus collectivism: how much people define themselves apart from their group memberships and how it affects their behaviour
- masculinity versus femininity: differences between "masculine" and "feminine" cultures and their effects on individual behaviour
- uncertainty avoidance: society's tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity and its effect on behaviour
- long- versus short-term orientation (Confucian dynamism): time perspective in a society for the gratification of people's needs and its effect on behaviour
- monochronous versus polychronous time orientation: another form of time perspective in which punctuality, deadlines, and future orientation affect behaviour.

It is important that candidates make a link between the cultural dimension and human behaviour, demonstrating how the selected cultural dimension affects human behaviour. For example, when examining the role of Confucian dynamism, responses may refer to how it affects management leadership, creative behaviour, identification with workplace, perseverance, and/or respect for tradition.

Discussion may include but is not limited to:
- methodological issues
- empirical evidence
- application of the findings
- other contributing factors.

If a candidate discusses the role of more than one cultural dimension, credit should be given only to the first discussion.