Psychology 2025 Paper I 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Critically evaluate

Q1

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Why did behaviourists avoid the topics of thought and knowledge ? Discuss. (10 marks) (b) Highlight the major factors that influence the psychological well-being of youth in the Indian setting. (10 marks) (c) Do attribution processes explain success and failure behaviour in social context ? Answer this in the light of Weiner's model of attribution. (10 marks) (d) Critically evaluate the role of facial-affect programme and display rules in the expression of emotions by citing relevant examples. (10 marks) (e) 'IQ tests are too narrow in focus.' Evaluate the statement from the perspectives of Sternberg and Gardner's theories of intelligence. (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में दीजिए : (a) व्यवहारवादी, सोच और ज्ञान के विषयों से क्यों बचते थे ? विवेचना कीजिए । (10 अंक) (b) भारतीय परिवेश में युवाओं के मनोवैज्ञानिक कुशल-क्षेम (वेल-बीइंग) को प्रभावित करने वाले मुख्य कारकों पर प्रकाश डालिए । (10 अंक) (c) क्या सामाजिक संदर्भ में गुणारोपण प्रक्रियाएँ सफलता और विफलता के व्यवहार की व्याख्या करती हैं ? गुणारोपण के वेनर मॉडल के प्रकाश में इसका उत्तर दीजिए । (10 अंक) (d) प्रासंगिक उदाहरण देते हुए भावनाओं की अभिव्यक्ति में फेशियल-अफेक्ट प्रोग्राम और प्रदर्शन नियमों की भूमिका का आलोचनात्मक मूल्यांकन कीजिए । (10 अंक) (e) 'आईक्यू मापनों (परीक्षणों) का फोकस बहुत संकीर्ण है ।' स्टर्नबर्ग और गार्डनर के बुद्धि सिद्धांतों के परिप्रेक्ष्य में इस कथन का मूल्यांकन कीजिए । (10 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2025 Psychology questions

Directive word: Critically evaluate

This question asks you to critically evaluate. 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 demands critical evaluation across five distinct psychological domains. Allocate approximately 30 words per sub-part (150 words total), spending roughly equal time on each since all carry 10 marks. For (a), discuss Watson's and Skinner's rejection of mentalism; for (b), enumerate Indian youth-specific factors; for (c), apply Weiner's three-dimensional model; for (d), contrast universal facial-affect programmes with culturally learned display rules using Indian examples; for (e), compare Sternberg's triarchic theory and Gardner's multiple intelligences to critique IQ narrowness. Structure each sub-part with brief definition, theoretical exposition, and evaluative conclusion.

Key points expected

  • (a) Watson's methodological behaviorism rejecting introspection; Skinner's radical behaviorism treating thoughts as covert behavior; focus on observable stimulus-response; criticism of mentalism as unscientific
  • (b) Academic pressure and competitive exam stress; digital/social media influence and cyberbullying; family expectations and intergenerational conflict; economic uncertainty and employment anxiety; cultural identity tensions in globalizing India
  • (c) Weiner's locus-internal/external, stability, controllability dimensions; attribution of success/failure affecting achievement motivation; self-serving bias and learned helplessness in social contexts
  • (d) Ekman's universal facial-affect programme (innate, cross-cultural); display rules as culturally learned modifications; Indian examples: suppression of anger in hierarchical relationships, exaggerated grief at funerals, 'masking' emotions in collectivistic settings
  • (e) Sternberg's analytical-creative-practical intelligences beyond IQ; Gardner's eight intelligences including musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal; critique of g-factor and psychometric tradition; educational implications for diverse assessment

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Precise definitions across all sub-parts: correctly identifies behaviorism's rejection of mentalism (a), operationalizes psychological well-being (b), accurately describes Weiner's three attribution dimensions (c), distinguishes facial-affect programme from display rules (d), and correctly contrasts Sternberg's triarchic components with Gardner's eight intelligences (e)Generally accurate concepts with minor errors: vague on radical vs methodological behaviorism, conflates attribution dimensions, or oversimplifies Gardner's intelligences as 'talents' rather than autonomous cognitive capacitiesFundamental conceptual errors: treats behaviorism as ignoring cognition entirely without nuance, confuses attribution theory with dispositional attribution only, or equates Sternberg and Gardner without distinguishing their theoretical foundations
Theory & studies cited20%10Cites Watson (1913 manifesto), Skinner (Verbal Behavior), Weiner's attribution theory research, Ekman-Friesen cross-cultural studies, and both Sternberg's triarchic theory and Gardner's Frames of Mind with appropriate specificity for each sub-partNames major theorists without specific works or dates: mentions Watson, Skinner, Weiner, Ekman, Sternberg, Gardner correctly but lacks specificity on research methodologies or theoretical developmentsMissing key theorists or misattributing concepts: attributing display rules to Ekman without mentioning cultural learning, or confusing Sternberg's triarchic with his later theory of successful intelligence
Application examples20%10Rich Indian-context illustrations: for (b) cites NEET/JEE pressure, Instagram validation seeking, or arranged marriage expectations; for (d) gives specific display rules like controlled anger in guru-shishya tradition or performative joy at Indian weddings; examples are concrete and culturally groundedGeneric or Western-biased examples: mentions 'exam stress' without Indian specificity, or uses American workplace emotions for display rules; examples relevant but lacking cultural contextualizationAbsent, irrelevant, or confused examples: using Freudian concepts for behaviorism, or providing examples that contradict the theory (e.g., suggesting facial expressions are entirely learned)
Multi-perspective analysis20%10Demonstrates critical balance: for (a) acknowledges Tolman's cognitive behaviorism as partial exception; for (c) notes attribution theory's limitations in collective cultures; for (d) evaluates evidence for universality vs cultural specificity; for (e) compares how both theories address IQ narrowness while noting their different emphases (process vs content)One-sided presentation with token critique: mentions limitations briefly without development, or presents theories as complementary without analyzing tensions between themPurely descriptive or dogmatic: uncritical acceptance of all theories presented, or dismissive rejection without engagement with evidence; fails to compare Sternberg and Gardner's distinct approaches to intelligence
Conclusion & evaluation20%10Synthesizes across sub-parts where possible: notes how behaviorism's limitations led to cognitive revolution relevant to attribution and intelligence theories; for (e) specifically evaluates whether Sternberg's process-oriented or Gardner's content-oriented critique more effectively addresses IQ narrowness; conclusions are measured and theory-informedSeparate conclusions for each sub-part without integration: competent summaries that restate main points without evaluative depth or cross-thematic connectionsAbsent, abrupt, or contradictory conclusions; mere repetition of introduction; or unsupported value judgments ('therefore all IQ tests should be banned') without theoretical grounding

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 2025 Paper I