approaches content Flashcards
outline the behaviourist approach
classical conditioning:
UCS —> UCR
UCS + NS —> UCR
CS —> CR
Pavlov
- UCS of food = UCR of salivating
- UCS paired with NS of bell = UCR
- CR (bell) = UCR (salivating)
little Albert
- Had UCR of fear to a hammer hitting a metal bar (UCS)
- This was paired with NS white rat and over time he was conditioned to be fearful of rat alone.
- This fear was maintained through operant conditioning - the fear was negatively reinforced through avoidance of white rat, therefore removing fear response.
- When white rat was repeatedly presented without fear to create extinction, it didn’t work as he had already generalised his phobia from white rats to all other white objects he had been presented with.
operant conditioning
- positive reinforcement - adding something good to increase beh
- negative reinforcement - removing something bad to increase beh
- punishment - adding something bad to decrease beh
Skinners rat study
- measured change in lever pressing when presenting rats with food pellets.
- it was clear that the food pellet (positive reinforcement) caused an increase in lever processing.
- This is due to standardised procedures such as the same cage.
outline evaluation for the behaviourist approach.
highly scientific
- Ev - Pavlov cut dog cheek and inserted tube to collect saliva.
- Ex - suggests learning theory beloved only in using empirical methods where behaviour can be directly observed and objectively measured. Provides high level of causation, increases validity of findings that CC/OC causes learning to occur
- L - but studies of animals - inability to generalise to humans. Humans aren’t just reacting to innate reflexes (S-R), there is cognition (S-O-R)
we have larger frontal lobes which can inhibit the instinctual responses that animals may show (e.g. flight/fight)
reductionist, only considered environment
- Ev - phobias = due to CC +OC, ur biological explanation- faulty MAOA gene creates high levels of noradrenaline and hyperactive SNS
- Ex - so to assume all human beh results from env is simplistic. If it was all responses same in all humans.
cognition may influence how we respond to phobic stimulus, which is further reinforced by our bio
-L - but even though relying purely on empirical research reduces the explanatory power of RL human beh, when combined with other app (e.g. cog+bio), can present more holistic view of beh.
treatments support explanatory power of learning approach
-Ev - SD is 75% effective in reducing symptoms of phobias.
-Ex - so counter conditioning techniques are effective, so two process model must have strong explanatory power.
-L - But not all phobias are treated effectively with these methods (25% in SD)
So maybe more evolutionary explanation for human beh. e.g. phobias are a way of increasing survival of the fittest as phobic stimulus is dangeruous, hence being passed down gens. Learning approach ignores this.
What are the comparison points for the learning approach?
- external learning
- hard env determinism
- nurture only
- reductionist - reduced beh to effects of env, animal studies and ignores thought processes and emotions
- nomothetic
- highly scientific
describe the social learning theory approach
- beh is learnt though observing and imitating role models through vicarious reinforcement
- Learn through identification with role models
meditational processes
- more likely to pay attention if of a higher status or similar.
- retention- will retain the modelled beg
- motor reproduction - person will imitate when have self-efficacy
- motivation - more likely to motor reinforce if role model was vicariously reinf. - if punished less likely
Bandura’s Bobo doll exp
- one group saw models aggression being rewarded, another punished and a 3rd control group saw no consequences.
- was found children in reward and control conditions imitated more aggressive actions of the model (vicarious reinf)
outline evaluation for the social learning theory
highly scientific
-Ev - Bandura Bobo doll same room, toys and role model
-Ex - very standardised procedure, only change was consequence. so high level of causation. shows human beh is a result of SLT
-L - but lack of mundane realism, bobo doll designed to be punished. doesn’t react back like a human would. could have been demand characteristics. so SLT = poor explanation.
useful RLA
- Ev - James Bulger case - Thompson and Venevals imitated child’s play 3 in their offence against James Bulger.
- Ex - so SLT has explanatory power in explaining aggression, e.g. domestic abuse, other offending beh, how prejudice forms.
-L - can’t assume all beh is learnt through imitation alone - some child re shows novel beh that hasn’t been modelled in bandura,e.g. holding gun at doll. But this beh could be learnt though imitation of parents.
-L - also if SLT is correct, cannot hold people responsible for their beh, e.g. prosecuting offenders, as model is to blame.
ignores role of biology and emotions
- Ev - aggressive beh may not be initiated but due to testosterone/ violence gene (CDH-13), that runs in families.
-Ex - so familial aggression may not be due to initiation in environment but a genetic predisposition. Also ignored role of emotions stemming from low self esteem/unresolved conflicts in persons unconscious mind, so reductionist.
-L - but more holistic than LT. SLT can explain why individual beh is diff to same stimuli. Also incorporates internal processes and external processes from env to form a mental representation, rather than purely external (LT) and purely internal (bio)
what are the comparison points for SLT?
- external learning but some internal cognition
-reciprocal determinism (persons beh is determined by and determine others beh)
- nurture mostly
- reductionist (reduced beh to effects of learning)
- nomothetic
- scientific ish
describe the cognitive approach
- considers internal mental processes, e.g. S-O-R model and that humans are rational.
- sensory info gets manipulated internally prior to a response being made which is influenced by our beleifs and motivations
- We develop schemas which are mental building blocks of knowledge about the world, e.g. a gender schema assume how males and females behave and how is best to respond accordingly.
- humans process like computers (input-process-output).
- uses theoretical models such as MSM to show this
outline evaluation for the cognitive approach
highly scientific
- Ev - uses scientific experiments such as P+P trigrams. Standardised procedure: same nonsense letters, count back in 3’s for same time intervals so no MR etc.
- Ex - so high causation and proof for theoretical models. e.g. can be sure duration of STM is 18-30 seconds without MR. So MSM is correct as an explanation of memory. So cog approach to human beh =correct.
-L - not completely scientific. Makes inferences about what results mean for the internal process as mental processes are unobservable.
cog approach could be making inaccurate subjective inferences.
has machine reductionism
- Ev - MSM assumes all humans take in input into the sensory register, process through MR in STM and output into LTM for later retrieval.
- Ex - Machine reductionist as it assumes all humans process memories rationally, in a serial process like computers. Ignores role of emotions.
Traumatic memories don’t require MR due to the high level of arousal when processing the events. Cog had difficulty explaining this.
- L - But provides useful RLA. e.g. by police and courts when using EWT to ensure memory recall is reliable and not reconstructed through leading Q’s/ post-event discussion.
treatments support explanatory power of cog approach
- Ev - CBT has been found to be 90% effective in treating depression by challenging irrational thinking through Ellis’ ABCDEF model.
- Ex - So, cog approach has strong explanatory power if challenging irrational thinking to more rational resolves a mental health disorder like depression.
- L - But can’t presume just because the treatment works by challenging irrational thoughts that irrational thinking is responsible.
Why did the thoughts become rational in the 1st place? e.g. low levels of serotonin. So cog exp needs to incorporate bio to ensure a fuller exp. (cog neuroscience)
what are the comparison points for the cognitive approach?
- highly scientific
- machine reductionist - ignores emotions, compared to computers
- internal and external (mental processes and env. events - ABC model)
- nurture mostly
- nomothetic
- soft determinism (some free will over thought processes, but determined by env)
describe the biological approach
- Biology affects behaviour (nurture). Behaviour is innate
- Our neurophysiology & neurochemistry affects our behaviour.
- We have evolved our behaviour = survival of the fittest & natural selection of advantageous characteristics
- genotype - genetic makeup
- phenotype - expression of genetic makeup, affected by env
- localisation of brain functions - Broca’s (speech production) and Wernicke’s (language comprehension)
- neurotransmitters - dopamine (reward), serotonin (calming), noradrenaline (flight or fight - stimulates adrenal medulla to secrete adrenaline, increases heart rate etc)
- Faulty MAOA gene (creates high levels of noradrenaline and hyperactive SNS)/ testosterone/ CDH-13 (aggression gene)
evaluate the biological approach
Highly scientific
-Ev - Maguire’s Taxi drivers study (London taxi drivers undergone knowledge test and non taxi drivers) PET scan, Voxel pixel counting, double blind trial.
-Ex - Objective studies that use technology to empirically study the brain, e.g. PET scan. The data collected from bio experiments is objective, e.g. number of pixels and have control groups to enable causation (non taxi drivers)
-L - But still not full causation as extraneous variables, e.g. how long people have been driving for, gender differences.
Ignores role of nurture (env)
- Ev - Twin studies - Sz.
48% Mz both had Sz. 17% Dz
-Ex - so can see bio has an effect, however if purely genetic, MZ should have 100% concordance rate (share 100% genes). Also, Mz are reared more similarly than Dz due to them looking the same.
-L - so likely to be more an interaction of bio + env. so cannot take a purely bio approach to understanding human beh, but still need the approach to understand the interaction.
Treatments support explanatory power
-Ev - SSRI drug treatments found to be 50-80% effective in reducing OCD symptoms.
-Ex - Hence by increasing serotonin levels in the brain reduced OCD. This suggests that low serotonin levels are the cause of OCD. Therefore, bio approach is important in explaining a forming treatments for mental health disorders.
-L - But maybe more important to have an interaction of approaches to form the best treatment as treatments aren’t 100% effective (e.g. 50-80% in SSRI’s). So has to be some env causes, so bio approach alone cannot be the only approach within psych.
what are the comparison points for the biological approach?
- Highly scientific
- internal
- nature
- hard biological determinism
- biological reductionism
- nomothetic
describe the psychodynamic approach
- our unconscious drives our beh
-
tripartite personality -
Id - pleasure principle (selfish, unconscious)
Ego - reality principle (balance, conscious)
Superego - morality principle (based on societal and parents values, unconscious) - weak superego results from absent same sex parent. cannot resolve fear of castration by taking on same sex morals. Therefore lacks morals, so criminal.
-
psychosexual stages
Oral - pleasure
Anal - pleasure
Phallic - Oedipus/ Electra complex
Latency - same sex friendships
Genital - opposite sex friendships -
ego defence mechanisms
(resolve conflicts in our psyche - between id and superego)
Repression - unpleasant memory’s pushed into unconscious mind unconsciously.
Denial - conscious refusal to acknowledge reality of situation.
Displacement- strong emotion is expressed into a neutral person or object.
Little Han’s
- Freud interpreted his case, linked fear of horses to Oedipus complex - horse unconsciously representing his fear of his castration and sexual desire for his mother.
- the only way to get rid of fear of castration is to identify with father, leading to repression of thoughts of mother.
-treatments - psychoanalysis
evaluate the psychodynamic approach
Research support for Oedipus Complex
-Ev - Little hans case study
- Ex - resolving his fear of castration removed his phobia of unconscious. so unconscious mind can be seen to be responsible for dev of mental disorders, so strong explanatory power.
- L - But subjective and open to bias, e.g. secondary data from little hans’ father and was a subjective interpretation by Freud. so not valid explanation of human beh.
untestable
-Ev - even though he carefully recorded his observations from case studies such as little hans his theory can’t be falsified.
-Ex - not possible to empirically test the unconscious mind - unobservable so cannot be proven or disproven. More of a religion- believe or don’t. So has been criticised by more scientific approaches such as cognitive neuroscience.
-L - but just because something can’t be empirically observed doesn’t make it invalid. Emotions and through us cannot be observed either. so maybe being scientific could be considered inappropriate in study of mind.
Practical applications
- Ev - brought a new form of therapy - psychoanalysis. included techniques such as free association, dream analysis and thematic analysis.
-Ex - these therapies are still in existence to this day and have been reported success in dealing with patients with mind neuroses.
-L - but takes a long time and is very expensive and focuses on the clients past rather than current problems they are facing.
Doesn’t work for severe mental health disorders such as Sz as it relies on the clients memory and ability to engage with the therapists interpretations. So effectiveness of psychodynamic approach is called into Q.
describe the humanistic approach
– people are unique and have freewill and are viewed as a whole person - hollism
– focuses on *subjective experiences feelings and thoughts important to the person.
– everyone has an innate need to self-actualise
-
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs:
physiological needs - air, water, food, shelter etc.
Safety needs - personal security, employment, health
Love and belonging - friendship, intimacy, family.
esteem - self-esteem, respect
self actualisation - desire to become most one can be.
— in order for an individual to achieve personal growth they must become congruent (in agreement/harmony) with their sense of self).
—The closer a person’s ideal self is to their actual self = congruent. higher self esteem.
-
Carl Rodger’s
-therapists shouldn’t impose any conditions of worth as they lower self-esteem and develops incongruence
Unconditional positive regard should be use to help remove these (acceptance without any conditions or judgement)
evaluate the humanistic approach
positive approach
- Ev - looks at beh in terms of people striving to be better (SA) rather than problems that people had in the past like psychodynamic.
-Ex - considers everyone is unique, is holistic in its exp of human
beh & looks from an individual
perspective, rather than creating universal laws for all humans.
-L - but means it has no explanatory power to explain all human beh, only beh at an individual level. This calls into Q the usefulness of the
it to further the field of Psychology.
_ assumes Self Actualisation is an innate desire for everyone but it is not_
- Ev - there are gender differences between males and females (Jonah Complex). Men desire to avoid responsibility and academic success (as does not make them popular); females fear success in their careers (as not
a feminine trait).
-Ex - Hence, humanistic app is wrong to assume that all people have an innate desire to SA as not everyone does.
- L - but, humanistic approach accepts people have freewill to choose
how to SA, e.g. for men, SA may
be social recognition and women be a
successful wife & mother.
Treatments support explanatory power of humanistic approach
-Ev - study of 700 people over 5 years in person centred therapy on patients suffering anxiety & depression found 70% showed significant improvement after therapy than before (using a Q-sort – selfreport).
-Ex - so, has good RLA as it can help to reduce mental disorders, and it proves that the Humanistic approach is valid as an explanation, and self esteem, congruence and SA are important in our mental wellbeing.
-L - but based on self-report,
subjective & unscientific. Clients are likely to rate the therapy positively after they have committed to therapy over 5 years.
describe Wundt and introspection
- first person to study human mind using scientific methods, used strictly controlled experimental conditions
- studies reaction time, using metronome to various sensations and perception tasks
- introspection = analysis of conscious present experiences
- analyses experiences in component parts (‘structuralism’), e.g. sensation, emotional reactions
- made theories from these studies to explain higher mental functions like language, accepted both hip and culture change our perception (cultural psychology)
Evaluate Wundt
Scientific
- Ev - empirical and objective in using a metronome and measuring reaction times.
-Ex - However, inferring from the reaction times what is happening as a mental process is subjective. Furthermore, pps reflections on their perception is also subjective. Hence not as scientific as first imagined.
-L - But even today, psychologists struggle to empirically observe internal
mental processes objectively, as they are
unobservable, e.g., cognitive psychology with memory & attention studies.
Led to a paradigm shift (non-scientific approach)
-Ev - e.g. Freud - Emotions are from the psyche and the unconscious mind. These are unobservable and cannot, nor should not be studies scientifically.
-Ex - so, many aspects of our minds are outside of our conscious awareness.
Therefore, this brought into question
whether Wundt’s approach of using controlled studies were invalid and scientific principles should be rejected.
-L - However, another paradigm shift towards an empirical method of early behaviourists, e.g., Pavlov & Skinner brought psych back closer to Wundt. but, these approaches were more reliable than Wundt’s as they could easily be replicated through better standardised procedures.
**_
what are the comparison points for psychodynamic approach?
- internal (unconscious mind)
- hard psychic determinism - unconscious determines beh.
- nature and nurture
- reductionist
- ideographic
- not scientific
what are the comparison points for humanism approach?
- internal
- freewill (have full choice over self-concept)
- nature and nurture (innate need to SA but need right env conditions to do so)
- holistic (looks at whole person and treats individual as unique, so can’t make universal laws)
- ideographic - only through studies of individuals
- not scientific
