The SO Statement Secret: How to Triple Your AO3 Marks With Better Paragraph Structure

The SO Statement Secret

How to Triple Your AO3 Marks With Strategic Paragraph Structure
By Mr K – Psychology A* Specialist

The Truth About High-Level Evaluation

“I know loads of evaluation points, but I’m still only getting 2-3 marks per paragraph. What am I doing wrong?”

After analysing thousands of psychology exam responses, I’ve discovered that most students lose marks not because they lack knowledge, but because they structure their evaluation paragraphs poorly. They’re working harder, not smarter.

The difference between Level 2 and Level 4 evaluation isn’t about knowing more evaluation points – it’s about structuring each point strategically to maximise marks. One well-structured paragraph can earn 4-5 marks, while multiple poorly structured points might only score 1-2 marks total.

This blog reveals the exact paragraph structure that separates A* students from the rest.

What Mark Schemes Actually Reward

After analysing every AQA Psychology mark scheme from 2015-2024, the pattern is clear: top-band responses demonstrate sophisticated reasoning through structured paragraphs that link evaluation points to broader significance.

Level 2 Response

  • Multiple brief evaluation points
  • Little explanation of significance
  • No clear link back to the question
  • Points feel disconnected and shallow

Level 4 Response

  • Fewer, but fully developed evaluation points
  • Clear explanation of why each point matters
  • Strong links back to the original question
  • Coherent, sophisticated reasoning throughout

The secret: Quality over quantity. One perfectly structured paragraph can outscore three superficial evaluation points.

The PEEL + SO Framework

This is the exact paragraph structure that consistently achieves Level 4 evaluation in AQA Psychology:

P – Point (Clear Evaluative Statement)

Start with a clear evaluative statement that directly addresses the question.

Weak: “Asch’s study has problems.”
Strong: “One limitation of Asch’s research into conformity is its lack of temporal validity.”

Key principles:

  • Use evaluative language: “strength,” “limitation,” “however”
  • Be specific about what you’re evaluating
  • Link to the question topic immediately
E – Evidence (Specific Supporting Details)

Provide specific evidence, studies, or examples that support your evaluation point.

Example: “Asch’s foundational conformity study was conducted in 1950s McCarthyist America, a period when social conformity was highly valued and dissent viewed suspiciously. When Perrin and Spencer (1980) replicated the study with British engineering students, they found much lower conformity rates (1 conforming response in 396 trials compared to Asch’s 37% conformity).”

Key principles:

  • Name specific studies, researchers, or statistics
  • Provide concrete details, not vague references
  • Show clear knowledge of research evidence
E – Explanation (How the Evidence Supports Your Point)

Explain how your evidence supports your evaluative point – don’t assume it’s obvious.

Example: “This dramatic difference in results suggests that Asch’s findings about conformity behaviour may be specific to particular historical and cultural contexts rather than representing universal human behaviour. The conformist pressures of 1950s America may have artificially inflated conformity rates.”

Key principles:

  • Explicitly connect evidence to your evaluation point
  • Explain the logical reasoning
  • Make the connection clear for the examiner
L – Link + SO Statement (Significance and Question Connection)

This is where most students fail. You must explain WHY your evaluation point matters and link back to the question.

This temporal validity issue significantly undermines the reliability of conformity theories for understanding contemporary social influence phenomena, such as social media peer pressure or workplace dynamics, limiting the practical applications of conformity research in modern psychological interventions.

Your SO statement should address:

  • Significance: Why does this limitation/strength matter?
  • Implications: What are the consequences?
  • Link back: How does this affect our understanding of the topic?
  • Real-world relevance: What does this mean for applications?

The Strategic Advantage

Using PEEL + SO structure transforms your evaluation efficiency:

1-2 Marks from superficial evaluation points
3-5 Marks from one structured PEEL + SO paragraph

This means you can memorise fewer evaluation points but score significantly higher marks by structuring them strategically.

Common SO Statement Patterns That Work

For Research Limitations:

  • “This reduces the validity/reliability of conclusions about [topic]…”
  • “This limits the generalisability to [population/context]…”
  • “This undermines the practical applications for [real-world use]…”

For Research Strengths:

  • “This increases confidence in [theory/explanation] because…”
  • “This validates the practical importance of [research area] for…”
  • “This demonstrates the real-world relevance of [findings] in…”

The Most Expensive Mistakes

  1. Generic SO statements: “This is important because psychology needs to be scientific” (doesn’t link to specific topic)
  2. Missing the “SO”: Identifying limitations without explaining why they matter
  3. No question link: Evaluation that could apply to any psychology topic
  4. Repetitive structure: Using identical paragraph structure for every evaluation point
  5. Weak evidence: Vague references instead of specific studies and details

Practice Scenarios

Test your understanding of PEEL + SO structure. Click the cards to reveal expert analysis!

Scenario 1: Improving a Weak Evaluation

Student writes: “Milgram’s study was unethical because he deceived participants and caused them psychological harm.”

Your task:

  1. Identify what’s missing from this evaluation
  2. Rewrite using PEEL + SO structure
Click to see the expert improvement

Scenario 2: Creating an SO Statement

Evaluation point identified: “Research into the working memory model uses artificial laboratory tasks that lack ecological validity.”

Your task: Write a strong SO statement explaining why this limitation matters for memory research.

Click to compare with expert SO statement

Scenario 3: Strategic Paragraph Planning

Question: “Evaluate research into social influence.” (16 marks – need 10 AO3 marks)

Your task: How many PEEL + SO paragraphs should you write, and what should each focus on?

Click to see the strategic approach

The Bottom Line

PEEL + SO structure isn’t just about following a formula – it’s about demonstrating the sophisticated reasoning that examiners expect at Level 4.

Students who master this strategic approach consistently achieve higher AO3 marks with less memorisation. They work smarter, not harder.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top