Psychology 2024 Paper II 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Explain

Q5

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Explain multilevel marketing with the help of suitable examples. 10 (b) Describe the psychological approaches that can be utilised to motivate disadvantaged groups to move towards development. 10 (c) What is implicit prejudice ? How does it differ from explicit prejudice ? Explain with the help of examples. 10 (d) Discuss the impact of rapid technological growth on degradation of environment in Indian context. 10 (e) To what extent the role of ideology is critical for understanding terrorism ? 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में दीजिए : (a) उपयुक्त उदाहरणों की सहायता से बहुस्तरीय विपणन की व्याख्या कीजिए । 10 (b) उन मनोवैज्ञानिक उपागमों का वर्णन कीजिए जिन का उपयोग वंचित समूहों को विकास की दिशा में आगे चलने के लिए प्रेरित करने हेतु किया जा सकता है । 10 (c) अव्यक्त पूर्वाग्रह क्या है ? व्यक्त पूर्वाग्रह से यह कैसे भिन्न है ? उदाहरणों की सहायता से व्याख्या करें । 10 (d) भारतीय संदर्भ में तीव्र प्रौद्योगिक विकास का पर्यावरण के अपकर्ष (ह्रास) पर प्रभाव का विवेचन कीजिए । 10 (e) आतंकवाद को समझने के लिए विचारधारा की भूमिका किस हद तक क्रांतिकरूप से महत्त्वपूर्ण है ? 10

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 Psychology questions

Directive word: Explain

This question asks you to explain. 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

This multi-part question requires explaining five distinct applied psychology concepts within 150 words each. Begin with brief definitions, apply relevant psychological theories, and conclude with implications. Allocate approximately 30 words for (a) defining MLM and citing Amway/Herbalife India examples; 30 words for (b) outlining self-efficacy theory and empowerment approaches; 30 words for (c) contrasting implicit/explicit prejudice with IAT reference; 30 words for (d) linking e-waste and digital pollution to Indian environmental psychology; and 30 words for (e) evaluating relative deprivation versus ideological commitment in terrorism. No unified conclusion needed—each part stands independently.

Key points expected

  • (a) Multilevel marketing: definition as network/direct selling, pyramid scheme distinction, Indian examples (Amway, Herbalife, QNet controversy), psychological mechanisms (social proof, reciprocity, illusion of control)
  • (b) Disadvantaged group motivation: Bandura's self-efficacy, Sen's capability approach, participatory action research, empowerment psychology, Indian context (NRLM, Kudumbashree)
  • (c) Implicit prejudice: Greenwald & Banaji's automatic activation, IAT measurement; explicit prejudice: conscious endorsement; examples—caste-based automatic associations vs. stated egalitarian values
  • (d) Technology-environment degradation: e-waste psychology (planned obsolescence, consumption patterns), digital carbon footprint, Indian specificities (Mandoli e-waste hub, screen addiction reducing nature contact)
  • (e) Terrorism and ideology: assessing relative weight—Silber & Bhatt's radicalization pathway, Kruglanski's significance quest theory, Indian case (Kashmir militancy, left-wing extremism) showing ideology as necessary but insufficient factor

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10For (a), accurately distinguishes MLM from pyramid schemes using legal criteria; for (b), correctly identifies empowerment as process not charity; for (c), precisely defines implicit prejudice as unconscious automatic evaluation; for (d), recognizes technology-environment link as behavioral/systemic; for (e), nuances ideology as one variable among structural factorsBasic definitions correct but conflates MLM with pyramid schemes in (a), treats empowerment as top-down in (b), or presents ideology as sole terrorism cause in (e) without qualificationFundamental errors—describes MLM as pure fraud without network structure, confuses implicit with explicit prejudice, or reduces terrorism entirely to ideology or entirely to poverty
Theory & studies cited20%10Cites Cialdini (compliance) for (a); Bandura, Freire or Indian psychologists (Jai B.P. Sinha) for (b); Greenwald/Banaji IAT research for (c); Stern's environmental psychology or Indian studies (Kashyap on e-waste) for (d); Kruglanski, Sageman or Indian terrorism scholars (Ramana) for (e)Generic references to 'psychologists say' or 'studies show' without names; mentions Maslow for (b) without contextualization; cites only Western sources where Indian research existsNo theoretical grounding—purely descriptive answers; invents studies or misattributes theories (e.g., attributing IAT to explicit prejudice research)
Application examples20%10For (a), specific Indian MLM cases with regulatory action (Amway India enforcement, QNet arrests); for (b), concrete programs (Kudumbashree, SEWA); for (c), caste/gender implicit bias examples; for (d), Indian e-waste hubs and digital divide paradox; for (e), comparative Indian terrorism movementsGeneric international examples (Apple for obsolescence, 9/11 for terrorism) without Indian adaptation; mentions 'tribal development' without specificity in (b)No examples or irrelevant ones—foreign MLM cases without Indian relevance, or hypothetical 'villagers' without program names; complete absence of Indian context where explicitly demanded in (d)
Multi-perspective analysis20%10For (a), balances economic opportunity vs. exploitation perspectives; for (b), integrates individual motivation with structural barriers; for (c), contrasts measurement approaches (IAT limitations); for (d), weighs technological benefits against environmental costs; for (e), evaluates ideology against grievance, identity, and group dynamics factors with clear assessmentAcknowledges multiple factors but prioritizes one without justification; presents balanced view in (e) but fails to take evaluative stance on 'to what extent'Single-factor explanations—MLM as purely fraudulent, terrorism as purely ideological, technology as purely harmful; no recognition of complexity in any part
Conclusion & evaluation20%10Each part concludes with forward-looking implication: (a) regulatory psychology needs; (b) sustainable empowerment metrics; (c) prejudice reduction interventions; (d) green technology behavioral design; (e) nuanced synthesis—ideology as necessary but requiring contextual activation through grievance/networksSummarizes main points without extending to implications; generic 'more research needed' conclusions; restates thesis without developmentAbrupt endings without conclusion; or entirely missing conclusions for some parts; contradictory final statements that undermine earlier analysis

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 2024 Paper II