Q8
(a) Humans strive to assign causes to actions of self and others and fall into traps of biases and errors. Critically discuss. (20 marks) (b) Discuss the cognitive and motivational determinants of the belief in extra sensory perception. (15 marks) (c) Give a comparative analysis of the behaviouristic and nativistic perspective to language development. (15 marks)
हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें
(a) मनुष्य स्वयं और दूसरों के कार्यों के लिए कारण निर्धारित करने का प्रयास करता है और पूर्वाग्रहों और त्रुटियों के जाल में फंस जाता है । आलोचनात्मक चर्चा करें । (20 अंक) (b) अतिरिक्त संवेदी धारणा में विश्वास के संज्ञानात्मक और प्रेरक निर्धारकों का वर्णन कीजिए । (15 अंक) (c) भाषा के विकास के लिए व्यवहारवादी (बिहेवियरिस्टिक) और देशीयता (नेटिविस्टिक) दृष्टिकोण का तुलनात्मक विश्लेषण कीजिए । (15 अंक)
Directive word: Critically discuss
This question asks you to critically discuss. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.
See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.
How this answer will be evaluated
Approach
The directive 'critically discuss' for part (a) demands balanced exposition with evaluative judgment, while (b) requires 'discuss' and (c) demands 'comparative analysis'. Allocate approximately 40% word/time to part (a) given its 20 marks, and 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief integrative introduction → systematic treatment of (a) with attribution theories and biases, (b) with cognitive-motivational factors in ESP belief, (c) with behaviourist-nativist comparison → synthesized conclusion addressing why attribution matters for social harmony and scientific temper in Indian context.
Key points expected
- Part (a): Attribution theory (Heider's naive psychology, Jones & Davis's correspondent inference theory, Kelley's covariation model) with systematic coverage of self-serving bias, fundamental attribution error, actor-observer bias, and cultural variations (Miller's Indian vs. American attribution study)
- Part (a): Critical evaluation including moderating factors (cognitive load, cultural individualism-collectivism) and Irwin's critique of attribution as post-hoc rationalization
- Part (b): Cognitive determinants—confirmation bias, availability heuristic, illusory correlation, cognitive dissonance reduction; motivational determinants—need for control, terror management, self-esteem maintenance through 'special' abilities
- Part (c): Behaviourist perspective (Skinner's operant conditioning, Bandura's social learning, imitation, reinforcement schedules) with critical limitations regarding creativity and rule-governed behaviour
- Part (c): Nativist perspective (Chomsky's LAD, universal grammar, poverty of stimulus argument, critical period hypothesis) with supporting evidence from Genie and feral children studies
- Part (c): Comparative synthesis through interactionist position (Piaget, Vygotsky, Bruner) and relevance to bilingual education policies in India
Evaluation rubric
| Dimension | Weight | Max marks | Excellent | Average | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concept correctness | 20% | 10 | Precise definitions of attribution dimensions (consensus, distinctiveness, consistency), accurate distinction between internal/external and stable/unstable attributions; correct articulation of Chomsky's transformational grammar vs. Skinner's verbal behaviour; no conflation of ESP with parapsychology research methods | Generally correct but imprecise definitions; some confusion between fundamental attribution error and self-serving bias; oversimplified behaviourist-nativist distinction without nuance on language acquisition device | Major conceptual errors (e.g., attributing self-serving bias to others rather than self, confusing nativism with behaviourism, treating ESP as proven phenomenon without scientific skepticism) |
| Theory & studies cited | 20% | 10 | For (a): Heider (1958), Kelley (1967, 1973), Jones & Davis (1965), Ross (1977 FAE), Miller (1984 cross-cultural); for (b): Wiseman & Watt (2006), Alcock (2011), French (1992); for (c): Skinner (1957), Chomsky (1959 review, 1965), Lenneberg (1967), Curtiss (1977 Genie), Pinker (1994) | Mentions major theorists without specific years or studies; cites Bandura for language without specifying mechanism; references ESP research generically without naming cognitive psychologists of anomalistic psychology | Missing core theorists (no Chomsky or Skinner), anachronistic citations, or fabricated studies; confuses attribution theorists with personality theorists |
| Application examples | 20% | 10 | For (a): Indian workplace attribution patterns (Sinha's studies), caste-based attributions; for (b): prevalence of ESP beliefs in Indian spiritual traditions (Sai Baba phenomena), godmen exploiting cognitive biases; for (c): ASL in deaf communities, tribal language preservation, English-medium vs. mother-tongue debates | Generic Western examples (athletes' self-serving bias, horoscope reading); mentions Indian context superficially without specific application to social issues or education policy | No Indian examples, purely hypothetical illustrations, or inappropriate examples (attribution in animals for part a, animal language studies misapplied to human acquisition) |
| Multi-perspective analysis | 20% | 10 | For (a): integrates cognitive, motivational, and cultural perspectives with critique of Western bias in attribution research; for (b): balances believer and skeptic viewpoints with scientific methodology critique; for (c): presents interactionist/emergentist synthesis (Tomasello, usage-based theories) transcending false dichotomy | Presents both sides of debates but without genuine synthesis; mentions culture in attribution but doesn't apply to Indian collectivism; treats behaviourist-nativist as irreconcilable | Single-perspective treatment (only cognitive for attribution, only skepticism for ESP, only nativism for language); no recognition of theoretical evolution or contemporary integrations |
| Conclusion & evaluation | 20% | 10 | Synthesizes three parts through theme of human meaning-making: attribution as everyday theory construction, ESP belief as motivated epistemology, language as biological-cultural co-construction; evaluates implications for scientific temper, education policy, and social cohesion in diverse India; suggests future research directions | Summarizes main points without genuine synthesis; generic conclusion on 'more research needed'; no explicit connection between attribution biases and ESP belief maintenance | Missing conclusion, or mere repetition of introduction; no evaluative stance on why understanding these processes matters for civil services or national development |
Practice this exact question
Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.
Evaluate my answer →More from Psychology 2021 Paper I
- Q1 Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) What are the limits of intuition and common sense? Why do psychologists emphasi…
- Q2 (a) How do basic and applied research differ? Explain how knowledge from basic research helps solve practical problems. (20 marks) (b) Disc…
- Q3 (a) How much nature (genetic factors) and nurture (environmental factors) contribute to a person's physical, cognitive and socio-emotional…
- Q4 (a) Why is selective attention important? Discuss the theories of selective attention. (20 marks) (b) Which method is most appropriate to i…
- Q5 Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) "Some psychological measures can be reliable but not valid". Elaborate it with…
- Q6 (a) Are we born with personality? Critically evaluate with theoretical interpretation. (20 marks) (b) Describe the strategies of effective…
- Q7 (a) Which approaches to motivation are more commonly used in an organization? How these approaches might help to sustain or increase motiva…
- Q8 (a) Humans strive to assign causes to actions of self and others and fall into traps of biases and errors. Critically discuss. (20 marks) (…