University Degree: Social Psychology

Conclusion analysis

Good conclusions usually refer back to the question or title and address it directly - for example by using key words from the title.
How well do you think these conclusions address the title or question? Answering these questions should help you find out.

1. Do they use key words from the title or question?
2. Do they answer the question directly?
3. Can you work out the question or title just by reading the conclusion?

• Compare and Contrast the Processes Involved in Majority and Minority Social Influence.

  "To conclude, people are influenced by the majority so they can be right and make a good impression on others. Minorities influence with consistency, both over time which is called diachronic consistency and with each other or synchronic consistency. A consistent minority is effective because it is coherent, it disturbs the group norm(s) by creating conflict and it has an innovative impact. Those who can do this have an envied talent."

• Evaluate The Influence Of Nature And Nurture On The Development Of Aggression

  "In conclusion, the fact that modern humans are much more aggressive than their ancestors shows that environment and upbringing definitely effect levels of human aggression. In the modern world, factors such as "influence of media, smoke, noise pollution, air pollution, abusive parenting, overcrowding, heat, and even atmospheric electricity" can lend a hand in aggravating the aggressiveness in humans. Behaviourists generally view aggression as a set of acquired behaviours and attach less emphasis on biological determinants. These scientists commonly apply the "principles of social learning theory" when addressing aggression. People tend to vary their views on nature versus nurture. They are ready to accept that it is genes that cause diseases and cancer, even obesity and homosexuality. Of course, this takes the blame off of human lifestyle. If it is written into their genes, there is nothing they can do about it. However, the public tends to favour the nurture side of the argument when it breaches sensitive topics such as aggression or intelligence."

• "Only a critical political economy approach can adequately explain how the media work today". Discuss the pros and cons of this statement, with reference to the following sector of modern media: Advertising.

  "CONCLUSION Though the statement holds a considerable amount of weight, we have to acknowledge that advertising is largely responsible for a critical connection between economics, society, politics, and culture that is at the center of important social issues. The power of advertising is therefore complex: it is a communicator in a "new symbolic environment" which 'moulds' consumption, as well as the form and content of media, politics, perception and behavior. "Consumer capitalism" is unthinkable without its advertising and marketing tools, and advertising really can only be comprehended within the framework of modern free enterprise. Only a "multi-faceted social theory" which merges historical, political, cultural, psychological, economic, and ideological analysis can be capable of providing an important theory of advertising which identifies its social effects from a critical viewpoint that can specify exactly how advertising harms the foundations of social, political, and cultural life."