The behavioural approach to explaining phobias: the two-process model - PSYCHOPATHOLOGY
The behavioural approach to explaining phobias: the
two-process model:
Mowrer (1947)
proposed the two-process model, which states that phobias are learnt via
classical conditioning and maintained through operant conditioning.
Classical
condition is learning to associate something which we have initially have no
fear of (NS) with something that already produces a fear response (UCS).
For example,
Watson and Rayner (1920) conditioned a little boy (Little Albert) to develop a
fear of white rats: they produced a phobia.
Loud Noise (UCS) -> Fear (UCR)
Rat (NS) -> No Fear/Response
Loud Noise (UCS) + Rat (CS) -> Fear (UCR)
Rat (CS) -> Fear (CR)
Rat (NS) -> No Fear/Response
Loud Noise (UCS) + Rat (CS) -> Fear (UCR)
Rat (CS) -> Fear (CR)
Operant condition
is used to explain how phobias are maintained. Operant condition takes place
every time our behaviour is reinforced (rewarded/punished). Every time our
phobic stimulus is avoided (eg. not having to present/speak in front of the
class because you were off school), our anxiety levels drop: this reduction in
anxiety reinforces (rewards) the avoidance behaviour – in turn, this increases
the likelihood that this behaviour will be repeated (staying off school every
time you have to do a presentation), and so the phobic response continues.
EVALUATION OF THE TWO-PROCESS MODEL:
Strength:
This model has led to real-life applications, such as the development of effective treatments: Systematic Desensitisation (SD) and Flooding. SD helps people unlearn their fears through the principles of Classical Conditioning, and Flooding prevents people from avoiding their phobias (stops the negative reinforcement!). This is a strength because these therapies have been extremely useful in helping people to overcome phobias, providing support for the behaviourist explanation.
This model has led to real-life applications, such as the development of effective treatments: Systematic Desensitisation (SD) and Flooding. SD helps people unlearn their fears through the principles of Classical Conditioning, and Flooding prevents people from avoiding their phobias (stops the negative reinforcement!). This is a strength because these therapies have been extremely useful in helping people to overcome phobias, providing support for the behaviourist explanation.
Weakness:
This behaviourist explanation has been criticised for being reductionist: the behaviourist approach ignores evolutionary explanations of the development of phobias: for example, Bounton (2007) has argued that we have developed some phobias overtime, in order to aid survival (such as a fear of snakes and a fear of the dark).
It additionally fails to acknowledge the role of biological and thought processes in the development of phobias. For example, cognitive psychologists have suggested that phobias may develop as a result of irrational thinking, not just learning. This is a major weakness as, for example, claustrophobia (a fear of confined spaces) sufferers may think ‘I am going to be trapped in this lift and suffocate’ – this is an irrational thought, and is not considered by this behaviourist explanation.
This behaviourist explanation has been criticised for being reductionist: the behaviourist approach ignores evolutionary explanations of the development of phobias: for example, Bounton (2007) has argued that we have developed some phobias overtime, in order to aid survival (such as a fear of snakes and a fear of the dark).
It additionally fails to acknowledge the role of biological and thought processes in the development of phobias. For example, cognitive psychologists have suggested that phobias may develop as a result of irrational thinking, not just learning. This is a major weakness as, for example, claustrophobia (a fear of confined spaces) sufferers may think ‘I am going to be trapped in this lift and suffocate’ – this is an irrational thought, and is not considered by this behaviourist explanation.
Weakness:
Moreover, another weakness is that the two-process model does not explain phobias that we have not had any prior negative experience with. For example, it does not explain someone having a phobia of snakes if they have never previously had an interaction with snakes. This is a weakness as it is impossible to classically condition a fear response to a stimulus that has never been encountered – and so this model is unable to explain all types of phobias, suggesting that the accuracy of it as a full explanation must be questioned.
Moreover, another weakness is that the two-process model does not explain phobias that we have not had any prior negative experience with. For example, it does not explain someone having a phobia of snakes if they have never previously had an interaction with snakes. This is a weakness as it is impossible to classically condition a fear response to a stimulus that has never been encountered – and so this model is unable to explain all types of phobias, suggesting that the accuracy of it as a full explanation must be questioned.
Comments
Post a Comment