asimmm196@gmail.

com
+923002626209

SOCIAL APPROACH PRACTICE QUESTIONS

PILIAVIN:
1) State the aim of the study (2 marks)
2) Describe the background of the study (4 marks)
3) Describe the psychology being investigated (4 marks)
4a) Describe how the IV of the ‘drunk victim’ condition was operationalized (4
marks)
b) Outline one strength of operationalizing this condition of the IV this way (2
marks)
5a) Describe how the IV of the ‘ill victim’ condition was operationalized (4
marks)
b) Outline one strength of operationalizing this condition of the IV this way (2
marks)
6) Describe the critical-early modelling condition (2 marks)
7) Describe the critical-late modelling condition (2 marks)
8) Describe the adjacent-early modelling condition (2 marks)
9) Describe the adjacent-late modelling condition (2 marks)
10) Outline two results of the passengers in the critical area (4 marks)
11) Outline one result of the median-latency of helping (2 marks)
12) Outline one result of helping behaviour for the ill victim, compared to the
drunk victim (3 marks)
13) Describe the sample of the study (4 marks)
14) Describe what the two observers were required to record during each trial
(4 marks)
asimmm196@gmail.com
+923002626209

15) Describe the role of the ill victim (4 marks)

16) Describe the role of the drunk victim (4 marks)
17) Outline one result that supports the individual explanation and one that
supports the situational explanation (6 marks)
18) Outline one real world application of the study (2 marks)
19) Outline one conclusion of the study (2 marks)
20) Describe whether each of the following ethical guidelines were followed or
not in the study:
Informed Consent
Deception
Confidentiality
Debriefing
(8 marks)
21) Outline one result that supports the diffusion of responsibility hypothesis
and one result that does not support the diffusion of responsibility
hypothesis (8 marks)
22) Outline one similarity and one difference between Piliavin and any other
core study from the social approach (8 marks)
23) Outline two similarities between Piliavin and any other core study from the
social approach (8 marks)
24) Two friends Ali and Ahmed are discussing the study in terms of its
generalisability. Ali says the study is generalizable while Ahmed says it is
not. Outline why both are correct (6 marks)
25) Two friends Sarah and Sana are discussing the study in terms of its validity.
Sarah says the study is valid while Sana says it is not valid. Outline why both
are correct (6 marks)
26) Two friends Obama and Trump are discussing the study in terms of its
reliability. Obama says the study is reliable while Trump says it is not.
Outline why both are correct (6 marks)
asimmm196@gmail.com
+923002626209

27) Explain why the study is part of the social approach (2 marks)
28a) Outline two assumptions of the social approach (4 marks)
b) Describe one result from the study that supports either of the two
assumptions stated in part (a) (2 marks)
29) Describe the cost-benefit model from the study (4 marks)
30) Evaluate the study in terms of two strengths and two weaknesses. At least
one of your evaluative points must be about field experiments (10 marks)

MILGRAM:
1) Outline one aim of the study (2 marks)
2) Describe the background of the study (4 marks)
3) Describe the psychology being investigated in the study (4 marks)
4) Describe the preliminary notion of the study (2 marks)
5) Describe the sample of the study (4 marks)
6) Describe two features of the experimenter (2 marks)
7) Describe two features of the stooge (2 marks)
8) Describe the pre-text given to the participants by the experimenter before
beginning the procedure (4 marks)
9) Describe the preliminary run part of the procedure (4 marks)
10) Outline how the roles of the teacher and learner were allocated (4 marks)
11) Outline two verbal prods that were used by the experimenter during the
procedure (2 marks)
12) Outline the two special prods used by the experimenter during the
procedure (4 marks)
asimmm196@gmail.com
+923002626209

13) One way the trial would conclude would be if the participant went up to
the maximum 450V shock. Outline the other way the trial would conclude
(2 marks)
14) Describe the de-hoax procedure once the trial would conclude (4 marks)
15) State how many participants administered the maximum 450V shock (1
mark)
16) State how many participants did not administer the maximum 450V shock
(1 mark)
17) Suggest two real world applications of the study (4 marks)
18) Outline one result that supports the individual explanation and one result
that supports the situational explanation (6 marks)
19) Outline one result that supports the concept of obedience and one result
that does not support the concept of obedience in the study (8 marks)
20) Outline one similarity and one difference between Milgram and any other
core study from the social approach (8 marks)
21) Outline two similarities between Milgram and any other core study from
the social approach (8 marks)
22) Outline one conclusion from the study (2 marks)
23) Outline two examples of extreme signs of stress the participants went
through (4 marks)
24) Explain whether each of the following ethical guidelines was followed or
broken:
Informed Consent
Right to withdraw
Debriefing
Protection from harm
(8 marks)
asimmm196@gmail.com
+923002626209

25) Two friends Virat and Babar are discussing the study in terms of its validity.
Virat says the study is valid while Babar says it is not. Outline why both are
correct (6 marks)
26) Describe the shock generator used in the procedure (4 marks)
27) Outline the fake aim that was told to the participants (2 marks)
28) Describe how the participants were recruited for the study (2 marks)
29) Outline one way the procedure was standardized (2 marks)
30) Evaluate the study in terms of two strengths and two weaknesses. At least
one of your evaluative points must be about volunteer sampling (10 marks)

PERRY:
1) Describe the background of the study (4 marks)
2) Describe the psychology being investigated (5 marks)
3) Outline the aim of the study (2 marks)
4) Describe the sample of the study (4 marks)
5) Describe the OT administration for the participants in the study (4 marks)
6) Describe the assessment of empathy part of the procedure (4 marks)
7) Describe the IRI online questionnaire the participants had to complete (4
marks)
8) Describe how the IV of empathy was operationalized (2 marks)
9) Describe how the IV of treatment was operationalized (2 marks)
10) Describe how the IV of ‘condition’ was operationalized in experiment 1 (2
marks)
11) Describe the procedure for experiment 1 for the CID design after the
participants had been told to wait in a room for 45 minutes (5 marks)
asimmm196@gmail.com
+923002626209

12) Describe the ‘choosing rooms’ part of the procedure during experiment 2 (5
marks)
13) Two friends Anant and Radhika are discussing the study in terms of its
validity. Anant says the study is valid while Radhika says it is not valid.
Outline why both are correct (6 marks)
14) Explain why the participants were told to wait in a room for 45 minutes
after being administered with OT (2 marks)
15) State the range of the distance between the two chairs for the 84 pairs of
images in experiment 2 (1 mark)
16) Outline the result in experiment 1 for the condition of ‘stranger’ for the
‘high empathy and placebo’ group compared to the ‘low empathy and
placebo’ group (3 marks)
17) Outline the result in experiment 1 for the condition of ‘friend’ for the ‘high
empathy and OT’ group compared to the ‘low empathy and OT’ group (3
marks)
18) Outline the results in experiment 2 for preferred distance between chairs
for the ‘high empathy and OT’ group compared to the ‘low empathy and
placebo’ group
19) Outline one result that supports the individual explanation and one result
that supports the situational explanation (6 marks)
20) Outline one result that supports the nurture side and one result that
supports the nature side of the debate (6 marks)
21) Two friends, East and West are discussing the study in terms of its ethics.
Easy says the study is ethical while West says the study is not ethical.
Outline why both are correct (6 marks)
22) Explain why this study is part of the social approach (2 marks)
23) Outline one similarity and one difference between Perry and any other core
study from the social approach (8 marks)
24) Outline one conclusion from the study (2 marks)
asimmm196@gmail.com
+923002626209

25) Outline one real world application of the study (2 marks)

26a) Outline two assumptions of the social approach (4 marks)
b) Describe one result of the study that supports either of the two
assumptions mentioned in part (a) (2 marks)
27) Explain why the sample is not generalizable (4 marks)
28) Outline two ways the procedure for experiment 1 was standardized (2
marks)
29) Outline two ways the procedure for experiment 2 was standardized (2
marks)
30) Evaluate the study in terms of two strengths and two weaknesses. At least
one of your evaluative points must be about reliability (10 marks)