Q5
Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Discuss the significance of single blind-double blind procedures for establishing soundness of an experiment. (10 marks) (b) How do psychologists conceptualize creativity? Explain the confluence approach to creativity. (10 marks) (c) Do we need 16 factors to describe human personality? Illustrate your answer in the light of big five-factor theory of personality. (10 marks) (d) Discuss the techniques to assess patients with memory disorders. (10 marks) (e) "Emotional competency is more important than intellectual competency." Discuss in the context of schoolchildren. (10 marks)
हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें
निम्नलिखित प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में दीजिए : (a) एक प्रयोग की सुदृढ़ता स्थापित करने के लिए एकल अंधा-द्वैत अंधे प्रक्रिया के महत्व की चर्चा कीजिए। (10 अंक) (b) मनोवैज्ञानिक सर्जनात्मकता की संकल्पना कैसे करते हैं? सर्जनात्मकता के संगम दृष्टिकोण की व्याख्या कीजिए। (10 अंक) (c) क्या मानव व्यक्तित्व का वर्णन करने के लिए 16 कारकों की आवश्यकता है? व्यक्तित्व के पाँच बड़े कारक सिद्धांत के आलोक में अपने उत्तर का वर्णन कीजिए। (10 अंक) (d) स्मृति विकारों के रोगियों के आकलन करने की तकनीकों पर चर्चा कीजिए। (10 अंक) (e) "भावनात्मक योग्यता बौद्धिक योग्यता से अधिक महत्वपूर्ण है।" स्कूली बच्चों के संदर्भ में चर्चा कीजिए। (10 अंक)
Directive word: Discuss
This question asks you to 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 'discuss' demands a balanced, analytical treatment across all five parts with ~30 words each. Structure: brief definitional opening for each sub-part, followed by elaboration of 2-3 key arguments, and a concise evaluative closing. Allocate roughly equal time (~3 minutes per part) given equal marks distribution, prioritizing precision over depth due to severe word constraints.
Key points expected
- (a) Distinguish single-blind (participants unaware) from double-blind (both participants and experimenters unaware); explain how each controls for demand characteristics and experimenter bias respectively; cite placebo effects as illustration
- (b) Define creativity as novel and useful output; contrast process vs. product vs. person approaches; explain Sternberg-Lubart's confluence model requiring domain-relevant skills, creativity-relevant processes, task motivation, and environmental support
- (c) Contrast Cattell's 16PF with Big Five (OCEAN); argue parsimony vs. comprehensiveness; illustrate how Big Five captures variance through Neuroticism-Extraversion-Openness-Agreeableness-Conscientiousness with Indian examples like rural-urban personality patterns
- (d) Distinguish retrograde vs. anterograde amnesia assessment; mention clinical techniques: Wechsler Memory Scale, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, autobiographical memory interview, and everyday memory questionnaires
- (e) Define emotional competency (Goleman's EQ dimensions) vs. intellectual competency; present balanced argument citing Indian education context (RTE, SEL programs); conclude with integration (both competencies as complementary, not hierarchical)
Evaluation rubric
| Dimension | Weight | Max marks | Excellent | Average | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concept correctness | 20% | 10 | Accurately defines single/double-blind procedures, confluence model components, Big Five factors, memory assessment types, and emotional competency dimensions without conflation; distinguishes similar concepts precisely (e.g., 16PF vs. Big Five) | Definitions broadly correct but minor errors (e.g., confusing single-blind with control group, vague on confluence elements) or incomplete coverage of one sub-part | Major conceptual errors (e.g., double-blind described as two control groups), misidentifies Big Five factors, or conflates memory disorders with intelligence testing |
| Theory & studies cited | 20% | 10 | Cites Rosenthal's Pygmalion effect for (a); Sternberg-Lubart investment theory for (b); McCrae-Costa or Goldberg for Big Five in (c); Baddeley/Warrington for memory in (d); Goleman or Mayer-Salovey for (e); includes Indian research (e.g., Singh & Sharma on personality) | Mentions 2-3 theorists correctly but lacks specificity (e.g., 'a psychologist said' without naming Sternberg) or omits Indian context entirely | No theorist names, fabricated citations, or completely irrelevant studies cited across multiple sub-parts |
| Application examples | 20% | 10 | Provides contextual illustrations: drug trials for blind procedures; Indian educational innovations for creativity; workplace/cultural applications of Big Five; clinical case vignettes for memory; SEL programs like Delhi's Happiness Curriculum for emotional competency | Generic examples (e.g., 'in hospitals' without specifying memory clinic) or one sub-part lacks illustration while others have adequate ones | No concrete examples, purely theoretical treatment, or examples factually wrong (e.g., Rorschach for memory assessment) |
| Multi-perspective analysis | 20% | 10 | For (a) weighs ethics vs. practicality; for (b) contrasts cognitive vs. systems approaches; for (c) evaluates trait stability vs. cultural variability; for (d) compares standardized vs. ecological assessment; for (e) balances individual vs. societal benefits of each competency | Acknowledges two sides in 2-3 sub-parts but treatment superficial or one-sided in others; limited critical engagement | Purely descriptive with no evaluation, no counter-arguments presented, or consistently one-sided treatment across all parts |
| Conclusion & evaluation | 20% | 10 | Each sub-part ends with succinct synthesis: (a) double-blind as gold standard; (b) confluence as integrative; (c) Big Five's predictive validity justifying parsimony; (d) multimethod assessment essential; (e) balanced integration—emotional competency enables intellectual deployment | Conclusions present but generic (e.g., 'thus it is important') or missing for 1-2 sub-parts; weak evaluative stance | No conclusions, abrupt endings, or conclusions contradict earlier arguments; no evaluative judgment offered |
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 2022 Paper I
- Q1 Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Describe the applications of psychological principles in managing drug abuse in…
- Q2 (a) State the assumptions and merits of two-way ANOVA. Explain the applications of the same in psychological research with an appropriate e…
- Q3 (a) Is problem solving a psychological process? Illustrate your answer with the steps and methods involved in problem solving. Differentiat…
- Q4 (a) Can human beings be fully functioning and self-actualized? Evaluate it from humanistic and psychoanalytic perspectives of personality.…
- Q5 Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Discuss the significance of single blind-double blind procedures for establishi…
- Q6 (a) Explain the nature of human attitudes. How is the knowledge of attitude change process helpful in bringing religious harmony in the Ind…
- Q7 (a) Is intelligence a univariate or multivariate concept? Discuss in the light of Spearman's and J. P. Das's theories of intelligence. (20…
- Q8 (a) "Learning occurs not only through conditioning but also from our observations of others." Discuss this statement from children's point…