Evaluate social identity theory.

Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks.

The command term “evaluate” requires candidates to make an appraisal by weighing up the strengths and limitations of social identity theory. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.

Studies related to social identity theory may include but are not limited to:

Tajfel’s studies on social groups and identities

• Sherif et al.’s Robbers Cave study (1961)
• Cialdini et al.’s Basking in Reflected Glory study (1976)
• Abrams’s study of the role of social identity on levels of conformity (1990)
• Maass’s study of the role of social identity on violence (2003).

Evaluation may include, but is not limited to:

• the effectiveness of the theory in explaining inter-group behaviour
• the productivity of the theory in generating psychological research
• methodological, cultural and gender considerations
• contrary findings or explanations
• applications of the theory.

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

If a candidate only evaluates research and does not directly evaluate the theory, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2] for criterion C, organization. Up to full marks may be awarded for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension.