Behaviourist - Therapy Flashcards
How does the behaviourist approach explain behaviour?
The behaviourist approach assumes that the underlying cause of all normal behaviour is through learning (conditioning).
Classical conditioning is where new behaviour is learnt through the process of association, whereby an unconditioned stimulus becomes associated with a neutral stimulus, learning the same response to both. Operant conditioning assumption - behaviour is learned through reinforcement.
How does the behaviourist approach explain abnormal behaviour
This approach assumes that the cause of abnormal behaviour is a result of maladaptive faulty learning; for example, a person with an addiction could become addicted to drugs through classical conditioning. The person may ‘pair’ the pleasures associated with drug taking with environmental cues. The enjoyable effects of taking drugs acts as a positive reinforcement; therefore, it is something we would wish to repeat again. As a result, the aim of aversion therapy is to break down faulty maladaptive learning and help the person re-learn a more functional response.
What is the aim of aversion therapy
Aversion therapy aims to cause individuals to cause an individual to develop an intense dislike or feeling of disgust – an aversion – to the addicted behaviour, replacing the previous feeling of pleasure.
How is classical and operant conditioning used in AV?
Aversion therapy uses classical conditioning to gradually and systematically break down the faulty association (i.e. pleasure) and replace it with a more functional response (i.e. aversion). This is known as counter-conditioning.
Punishment in Operant Conditioning is used in the form of punishment as the Client is punished for their engagement in the behaviour that is considered maladaptive e.g through an electric shock.
Operant conditioning is also key to this therapy as the client experiences unpleasant consequences of the addiction and, as such, no longer wants to repeat the addicted behaviour giving the client negative reinforcement
What is ‘covert sensitisation’?
It is a unique type of aversion therapy that follows the same basic principles of aversion therapy in how it has a negative consequence for a specific behaviour. However, it is more ethical as the participant does not directly suffer the unpleasant consequences and instead relies on the clients imagination.
They are asked to imagine scenarios that get progressively worse each time they do a specific behaviour. It is used much less commonly than other forms of aversion therapy.
What are the ‘new developments’ of aversion therapy?
Researchers have discovered drugs such as ANTABUSE that make users sick if they mix them with alcohol. These drugs also reward abstinence by the use of negative reinforcement of not being ill.
The compounds prevent alcohol being properly digested within the body, turning it into a chemical which results in nausea, vomiting and hot flushes
Evaluative points for Aversion Therapy
Effectiveness:
Strength: Research support (smith et al)
Weakness: Research Support (Bancroft)
Weakness: Research Support (Miller)
Ethics:
BPS guidelines
Social sensitive history
Describe a strength of the effectiveness of Aversion therapy
AT appears to be an effective treatment for certain addictions. Evidence to support this was carried out by Smith et al. (1997) who treated 249 patients addicted to alcohol with AT using either shock treatment or nausea-inducing drugs.
Smith et al. found patients had higher abstinence rates after one year than those who had undertaken counselling alone. This evidence shows that AT is an effective treatment for addictions such as alcoholism and the effects are apparent both immediately as well as some time after therapy is completed.
Describe a Weakness of the effectiveness of Aversion therapy
However, A weakness of the effectiveness of Aversion therapy is that studies have shown that studies involving this therapy have extremely high drop out rates, where the participant drops out of the study before it is over.
This was seen in Bancroft et al where 50% of patients either refused treatment or dropped out of the study.
This is a weakness of the effectiveness as it makes it difficulty to evaluate when only willing and motivated participants will finish the study. Decreasing the internal validity of the research.
Describe a Weakness of the effectiveness of Aversion therapy
A weakness of the effectiveness of Aversion therapy comes from MILLER who compared:
1.Aversion therapy to
2.counselling and aversion therapy as well as
3.counselling alone.
The results showed the recovery was the same for all three groups suggesting aversion therapy is ineffective and offers no benefit to the participant.
Name a weakness of the ethics of Aversion therapy
One weakness of aversion therapy is that it may breach some ethical guidelines. One of which is risk of stress, anxiety, humiliation or pain. This guideline outlines how, during therapy, nothing should happen that may physically or psychologically harm the patient.
However, in AV this ethical-guideline is not followed as the client is often exposed to noxious substances such as Antabuse, which results in extremely unpleasant side effects such as sickness and headaches as well as shock therapy where the client experiences painful electric shocks.
Give a second weakness of the ethics of aversion therapy?
Another weakness of aversion therapy is that in the past, aversion therapy was used as treatment for socially sensitive topics. For example aversion therapy was commonly used to ‘treat’ homosexuality, where patients were made to be nauseous whilst looking at pictures of men in hopes to condition an aversion to them.
This by todays standards would be considered an extremely unethical practise, and aversion therapy’s past association with this practise could mean the whole therapy is seen as unethical in modern day psychology as a result.
Conclusion on aversion therapy evaluation
In conclusion, aversion therapy causes both physical and psychological harm, which are major ethical issues of this therapy.
However, it could be argued that the physical harm from nausea-inducing drugs and electric shocks may not be as damaging, in the long term, as the addiction itself.
It should be noted that there are strict ethical guidelines in place when working with vulnerable individuals, such as those with an addiction that may influence their understanding of being able to withdraw from therapy at any point during the process – this may not always be expressed by the therapist. The client has a condition that may impede their understanding of what the therapy will entail and are unable to give valid consent. Those experiencing aversion therapy may not always be aware of their rights, including their right to withdraw.
