The behavioural appraoch to explaining phobias Flashcards
Define Behavioural approach
-A way of explaining behaviour
in terms of what is observable and in terms of learning.
Define Classical conditioning
- Learning by association.
Occurs when two stimuli are repeatedly paired together -
an unconditioned (unlearned) stimulus (UCS) and a new
‘neutral’ stimulus (NS).
-The neutral stimulus eventually
produces the same response that was first produced by
the unlearned stimulus alone.
Define Operant conditioning
- A form of learning in which
behaviour is shaped and maintained by its consequences.
-Possible consequences of behaviour include positive
reinforcement, negative reinforcement or punishment.
What is the two process model
-Hobart Mowrer (1960) proposed the two-process model based on the behavioural approach to phobias.
-This states that phobias are acquired (learned in the first place) by classical conditioning and then continue because of operant conditioning.
Little albert (not ao3 just ao1)
(Acquisition by classical conditioning)
Classical conditioning involves learning to associate something of which we initially
have no fear (called a neutral stimulus) with something that already triggers a fear
response (known as an unconditioned stimulus).
-John Watson and Rosalie Rayner (1920) created a phobia in a 9-month-old baby
called ‘Little Albert’. Albert showed no unusual anxiety at the start of the study. When
shown a white rat he tried to play with it. However, the experimenters then set out to
give Albert a phobia. Whenever the rat was presented they made a loud, frightening
noise by banging an iron bar close to Albert’s ear. This noise is an unconditioned
stimulus (UCS) which creates an unconditioned response (UCR) of fear. When the
rat (a neutral stimulus, NS) and the unconditioned stimulus are encountered close
together in time the NS becomes associated with the UCS and both now produce the
fear response - Albert became frightened when he saw a rat. The rat is now a learned
or conditioned stimulus (CS) that produces a conditioned response (CR).
This conditioning then generalised to similar objects. They tested Albert by
showing him other furry objects such as a non-white rabbit, a fur coat and Watson
wearing a Santa Claus beard made out of cotton balls. Little Albert displayed distress at
the sight of all of these.
Maintenance by operant conditioning
Responses acquired by classical conditioning usually tend to decline over time.
However, phobias are often long lasting. Mowrer has explained this as the result of
operant conditioning.
Operant conditioning takes place when our behaviour is reinforced (rewarded) or
punished. Reinforcement tends to increase the frequency of a behaviour. This is true of
both negative reinforcement and positive reinforcement. In the case of negative
reinforcement an individual avoids a situation that is unpleasant. Such a behaviour
results in a desirable consequence, which means the behaviour will be repeated.
Mowrer suggested that whenever we avoid a phobic stimulus we successfully escape
the fear and anxiety that we would have suffered if we had remained there. This
reduction in fear reinforces the avoidance behaviour and so the phobia is maintained.
Eval (good explantory power)
Good explanatory power
The two-process model was a definite step forward when it was proposed
in 1960 as it went beyond Watson and Rayner’s concept of classical
conditioning. It explained how phobias could be maintained over time and
this had important implications for therapies because it explains why patients
need to be exposed to the feared stimulus. Once a patient is prevented from
practising their avoidance behaviour the behaviour ceases to be reinforced
and so it declines.
The application to therapy is a strength of the two-process model (see
next spread).
Alternative explaination for avoidance behaviour
Alternative explanation for avoidance behaviour
Not all avoidance behaviour associated with phobias seems to be the result
of anxiety reduction, at least in more complex phobias like agoraphobia.
There is evidence to suggest that at least some avoidance behaviour appears
to be motivated more by positive feelings of safety. In other words the
motivating factor in choosing an action like not leaving the house is not so
much to avoid the phobic stimulus but to stick with the safety factor. This
explains why some patients with agoraphobia are able to leave their house
with a trusted person with relatively little anxiety but not alone (Buck, 2010).
This is a problem for the two-process model, which suggests that
avoidance is motivated by anxiety reduction.
An incomplete explaination of phobias
An incomplete explanation of phobias
Even if we accept that classical and operant conditioning are involved in
the development and maintenance of phobias, there are some aspects of
phobic behaviour that require further explaining. Bounton (2007) points out,
for example, that evolutionary factors probably have an important role in
phobias but the two-factor theory does not mention this.
For example, we easily acquire phobias of things that have been a source
of danger in our evolutionary past, such as fears of snakes or of the dark.
It is adaptive to acquire such fears. Seligman (1971) called this biological
preparedness – the innate predisposition to acquire certain fears. However,
it is quite rare to develop a fear of cars or guns, which are actually much
more dangerous to most of us today than spiders or snakes. Presumably this
is because they have only existed very recently and so we are not biologically
prepared to learn fear responses towards them.
This phenomenon of preparedness is a serious problem for the two-factor
theory because it shows there is more to acquiring phobias than simple
conditioning.
