AQA A-level Psychology (7182): Paper 3 – Aggression – Practice Questions

These are original questions written for Marlbridge, for revision and practice on this content. They are not reproduced past-paper questions, and they do not replicate the exam’s exact structure, question count or mark tariffs – examination boards hold copyright in their own papers. Use these alongside the official past papers from your board or school.

This set follows the AQA AS and A-level Psychology (7181, 7182) specification, Version 1.4 (1 September 2025), for teaching from September 2025. It covers section 4.3.8, Aggression, which the specification assesses in Paper 3, Issues and Options in Psychology, Section D (“one topic from option 3, 15–17”, 24 marks, with multiple choice, short answer and extended writing). Penmoor College, HMP Ashcombe, Bramford, the Corran cichlid, the podcast host and all people and figures in the questions are fictional.

Learn the content first with the aggression study guide and the aggression revision notes. The 7182 course hub and 7182 checklist cover the rest of the course.

Questions

1. Which one of the following is a feature of a fixed action pattern? Choose one letter.

A Learned by observing other members of the species B Once started, it runs to completion C Varies widely between members of the same species D Released by many different stimuli

[1]

2. Outline the role of the limbic system in aggression. [3]

3. Explain what is meant by de-individuation. [2]

4. The Corran cichlid is a fictional fish. In the breeding season, a male develops a bright blue throat. A zookeeper notices that resident males charge at a blue ball dropped into the tank, but ignore a lifelike model of a male with a grey throat. Each charge always ends with the same three tail-beats, even if the ball is removed mid-charge.

Use your knowledge of the ethological explanation to explain the zookeeper’s observations. [4]

5. Outline research into the role of the MAOA gene in aggression. [4]

6. A psychologist at Penmoor College randomly allocated 60 students to play either a violent or a non-violent computer game for 15 minutes. Each student then played a reaction-time task against an unseen opponent and set the length of a loud noise blast the opponent would hear on losing. The mean noise-blast lengths are below.

Condition	Number of students	Mean noise-blast length (seconds)
Violent game	30	4.8
Non-violent game	30	3.2

(a) Calculate the percentage increase in mean noise-blast length for the violent-game condition compared with the non-violent condition. Show your working. [2] (b) Explain how cognitive priming could account for the difference in the results. [3] (c) Explain one limitation of using noise-blast length to measure aggression. [2]

7. HMP Ashcombe is a fictional prison. Wing A holds 180 prisoners in a space designed for 120. Wing B holds 120 prisoners in a space designed for 130. Last year there were 42 recorded assaults on Wing A and 14 on Wing B. The governor notes that 60% of Wing A prisoners have a previous violent conviction, compared with 25% on Wing B.

(a) Calculate the number of assaults per 100 prisoners on each wing. [2] (b) Explain how the deprivation model could account for the difference between the wings. [3] (c) Explain why the importation model offers an alternative explanation. [3]

8. Tom, aged 9, has an older cousin, Ellis, whom he admires. Ellis plays for a local rugby team. Tom has seen Ellis shove an opponent after a tackle and then be cheered by teammates. At school the next week, Tom shoves a classmate who took his ball.

Use social learning theory to explain Tom’s behaviour. [4]

9. Explain one limitation of the frustration-aggression hypothesis as an explanation of human aggression. [3]

10. After a cup final, a group of fans in matching masks damaged the centre of Bramford. Evaluate de-individuation as an explanation of aggression by crowds such as this one. [8]

11. A podcast host claims that “jealous violence in relationships is simply part of male nature”. Discuss evolutionary explanations of human aggression. Refer to the host’s claim in your answer. [16]

12. A parent asks whether letting a teenager play violent computer games will make them more aggressive. Discuss media influences on aggression. Refer to desensitisation, disinhibition and cognitive priming in your answer. [16]

Answers

1. B [1] [1] Examiner insight: “Ballistic” is the key feature here; A and C describe learned behaviour, which is the opposite of an FAP.

2. The limbic system is a set of subcortical structures that process emotion [1]. The amygdala assesses threat and triggers a rapid emotional response that can become aggression [1]. Its activity is normally regulated by the orbitofrontal cortex, so weak regulation can allow reactive aggression [1]. [3] Examiner insight: Naming “amygdala” earns little on its own; the mark comes for saying what it does in relation to aggression.

3. De-individuation is a psychological state in which people lose their sense of personal identity, for example in a crowd or when anonymous [1]. Self-awareness falls, so people stop checking behaviour against their usual norms, making aggression more likely [1]. [2] Examiner insight: Two-mark definitions need both the cause (anonymity or crowd) and the effect (reduced self-awareness or weakened norms).

4. The blue throat acts as a specific sign stimulus [1]. It triggers an innate releasing mechanism, which is why a blue ball works but a realistic grey-throated model does not [1]. The charge is a fixed action pattern released by the IRM [1]. It is ballistic: the three tail-beats continue even when the ball is removed [1]. [4] Examiner insight: Application marks go to answers that use the blue throat, the grey model and the tail-beats; a general definition of IRM and FAP scores little.

5. The MAOA gene codes for monoamine oxidase A, which breaks down serotonin [1]. A low-activity variant leads to less breakdown and has been linked to aggression [1]. Brunner et al. (1993) found a fault in the MAOA gene and low MAOA activity in men from a Dutch family with a history of impulsive violence [1]. Caspi et al. (2002) found the low-activity variant predicted antisocial behaviour mainly in men who had been maltreated as children, showing a gene-environment interaction [1]. [4] Examiner insight: “Outline research” can be answered with findings, but a vague “studies show MAOA causes aggression” will not get past the first mark.

6. (a) Difference = 4.8 - 3.2 = 1.6 seconds [1]. Percentage increase = 1.6 / 3.2 x 100 = 50% [1]. (b) The violent game activates aggressive thoughts and scripts in memory [1]. These stay accessible for a short time afterwards [1]. Losing to the opponent acts as a cue that triggers them, so violent-game players chose longer noise blasts [1]. (c) Setting a noise blast is not the same as real-world aggression, so the measure lacks validity [1]. Students may have treated it as part of the game rather than as harm to a person, so the results may not generalise to everyday aggression [1]. [7] Examiner insight: In percentage-change questions, divide by the comparison (non-violent) value; dividing by 4.8 is a common slip.

7. (a) Wing A: 42 / 180 x 100 = 23.3 assaults per 100 prisoners [1]. Wing B: 14 / 120 x 100 = 11.7 assaults per 100 prisoners [1]. (b) The deprivation model says prison conditions cause aggression [1]. Wing A is at 150% of its design capacity, so prisoners lose more privacy, autonomy and security [1]. These pains of imprisonment create frustration, which may explain why Wing A’s assault rate is double Wing B’s [1]. (c) The importation model says prisoners bring aggressive traits and norms into prison [1]. Wing A has a much higher proportion of prisoners with violent convictions (60% vs 25%) [1]. So the higher assault rate could reflect who is on the wing rather than the overcrowding, and the two factors are confounded [1]. [8] Examiner insight: Compare rates, not raw totals; using “42 vs 14” ignores the different wing sizes.

8. Tom identifies with Ellis, who is older and admired, so Ellis is a role model [1]. Tom paid attention to and retained the shove, and is physically able to reproduce it [1]. He saw Ellis cheered after shoving, which is vicarious reinforcement [1]. This gave Tom an expectation that aggression would bring reward, motivating him to shove his classmate when frustrated over the ball [1]. [4] Examiner insight: Each mark needs a scenario detail (Ellis, the cheering, the ball); naming mediational processes without them limits the answer to about half marks.

9. The original hypothesis claims frustration always leads to aggression [1]. But frustration can lead to other responses, such as sadness or problem-solving, so the claim is too absolute [1]. Bushman (2002) also found that venting anger increased later aggression, which contradicts the claim that aggression is cathartic [1]. [3] Examiner insight: A limitation needs the point, the evidence or reason, and why it weakens the theory; three separate sentences make the structure clear.

10. The real exam marks extended answers with levels of response, not point by point. These indicative points show the content a strong answer could use.

• Zimbardo (1969) found hooded, anonymous participants gave longer electric shocks than named ones, supporting the link between anonymity and aggression [1].
• Diener et al. (1976) found children who were anonymous and in groups were more likely to take extra Halloween sweets, showing reduced self-regulation [1].
• The theory fits the Bramford fans: matching masks gave anonymity, which may have lowered self-awareness and weakened their usual restraints [1].
• However, Postmes and Spears (1998) reviewed 60 studies and found only weak overall support [1].
• They argued anonymity increases conformity to local group norms rather than releasing aggression in general [1].
• So de-individuation can lead to pro-social behaviour if the group norm is peaceful, which the original theory cannot explain [1].
• Lab tasks such as giving shocks lack ecological validity, so the link to real aggression is uncertain [1].
• Judgement: the Bramford damage is better explained by anonymity plus an aggressive group norm than by anonymity alone [1].

[8] Examiner insight: “Evaluate” questions need sustained judgement; a paragraph describing the theory earns little AO3 credit.

11. The real exam marks extended answers with levels of response, not point by point. A strong answer might use this plan.

AO1 (description)

• Aggression is seen as an adaptive behaviour that helped ancestors survive and reproduce [1].
• Men face paternity uncertainty and risk cuckoldry, investing in another man’s child [1].
• Sexual jealousy may have evolved to prevent cuckoldry [1].
• Mate retention strategies include direct guarding and negative inducements, such as threats or violence [1].
• Aggression may also raise status and access to resources, attracting mates [1].
• Wilson and Daly (1996) argued that male sexual proprietariness, a sense of ownership over a partner, underlies much violence against wives [1].

AO3 (evaluation)

• Shackelford et al. (2005) found men’s use of mate retention tactics predicted violence towards partners, supporting the theory [1].
• The theory explains why men show more physical aggression than women [1].
• But the evidence is largely correlational and self-reported, so cause cannot be established [1].
• Cultural variation in levels of aggression suggests learning plays a large role, which the theory underplays [1].
• The theory is hard to falsify, because the ancestral environment cannot be observed [1].
• The host’s claim that such violence is “simply” male nature is deterministic; it ignores cultural variation and could be misused to excuse partner violence [1].
• It cannot easily explain non-adaptive aggression, such as violence that damages the aggressor’s own reproductive chances [1].
• Social learning theory offers an alternative based on observed models and reinforcement [1].
• An interactionist view combines evolved tendencies with cultural and situational triggers [1].
• Judgement: the theory explains sex differences and jealousy well but is less convincing as a full account of human aggression [1].

[16] Examiner insight: Top-band answers link each piece of evidence back to the claim it supports or challenges, rather than listing studies.

12. The real exam marks extended answers with levels of response, not point by point. A strong answer might include the following.

AO1 (description)

• Anderson and Dill (2000) found that playing a graphically violent game in the laboratory increased aggressive thoughts and behaviour [1].
• Desensitisation: repeated exposure reduces emotional and physiological arousal to violence [1].
• Carnagey et al. (2007) found lower skin conductance to videos of real-life violence after playing a violent game than after a non-violent one [1].
• Disinhibition: media make violence seem normal and acceptable, especially when it is rewarded, weakening usual restraints [1].
• Cognitive priming: violent content activates aggressive thoughts and scripts that a later cue can trigger [1].
• Josephson (1987) found that violent TV plus a cue linked to it raised boys’ aggression in floor hockey, mainly in groups with more high-aggressive boys [1].

AO3 (evaluation)

• Computer games may have a stronger effect than film, because the player is active and rewarded for violence [1].
• However, lab measures such as noise blasts are not real-world aggression, which limits validity [1].
• Lab effects are short-term and may not show lasting change [1].
• Correlational research cannot rule out that aggressive people choose violent media [1].
• Ferguson (2015) pooled 101 studies of young people, found the effect on aggression was minimal and argued publication bias remains a problem [1].
• Josephson’s field setting gives more realism, supporting priming [1].
• Lower arousal (desensitisation) is not the same as behaving aggressively, so the mechanism is only partly shown [1].
• Effects may depend on the individual, such as existing aggressive traits, suggesting an interaction [1].
• Findings could inform age ratings and parental guidance, giving practical value [1].
• Judgement for the parent: violent games may raise short-term aggression, especially in already aggressive players, but long-term effects remain disputed [1].

[16] Examiner insight: The question names three mechanisms, so an answer that covers only desensitisation cannot reach the top band.

Where marks are usually lost

• Using raw totals instead of rates when groups are different sizes.
• Dividing by the wrong value in percentage-change calculations.
• Defining IRM and FAP without applying them to the scenario.
• Naming mediational processes without linking them to the people in the question.
• Saying the MAOA gene “causes” violence rather than raising vulnerability.
• Mixing up dispositional (importation) and situational (deprivation) explanations.
• Writing description-only answers to “Evaluate” and “Discuss” questions.
• Leaving out a reasoned judgement at the end of extended answers.

Next steps

Check your answers against the aggression study guide and revise weak areas with the aggression revision notes. Practise the biological and learning approaches behind these explanations with the approaches practice questions. Find your gaps with our free diagnostics, track topics on the 7182 checklist, browse the course hub, or Book a free trial class.

Official syllabus

AQA AS and A-level Psychology (7181, 7182) specification, Version 1.4 (1 September 2025), for teaching from September 2025. Section 4.3.8 Aggression; Paper 3 structure in section 2.2. Check aqa.org.uk/7182 for the current version.