Download essay - WordPress.com

_________________________________________________________
The behavioural approach proposes 3 things;
1) ___________________________
2) That whatever is learned can then be unlearned
3) That abnormal behaviour is learned in the same was as normal behaviour.
The behavioural approach sees abnormal behaviour as the problem and explains
how this behaviour has been learned through a process of either social learning,
through observing and copying the behaviour and attitudes of others, or through
operant and classical conditioning.
Phobias for example can be explained through classical conditioning. Evidence for
this comes from Watson’s ‘Little Albert’ experiment.
This experiment shows how classical conditioning can account for abnormal
behaviour such as phobias.
The strength of this explanation is that it can be used to explain other types of
abnormal or deviant behaviour. For example some people engage in abnormal
behaviour like taking off their clothes and “streaking” at football matches. It could be
that this behaviour gives them a ‘’buzz”, and this feeling is then associated with the
deviant behaviour. In this way it becomes a learned behaviour. OCD and eating
disorders could also be explained in terms of classical conditioning, this means
this explanation for abnormal behaviour is useful as it has real world
application.
An alternative explanation comes from operant conditioning. This suggests learning
is through C________________. Skinner’s research with rats suggests that
behaviour can be learned or changed through positive or negative reinforcement or
by P______________.
This is a useful way of understanding eating disorders like anorexia nervosa. For
example if a person diets to lose weight they may be rewarded by praise, social
recognition and increased status among their friends. They may also get extra
attention from concerned parents and teachers if the weight loss continues. This
means weight loss is being positively reinforced. If the person then eats something
calorific they may feel guilty and ashamed of their lack of will power – this is a
negative feeling. To avoid the negative feeling the person will avoid eating. This is
called negative reinforcement. Social learning theory could be used to explain how
the dieting behaviour started in the first place. Social Learning theory…
Overall, the behaviourist explanation for abnormality seems to make sense. The
biggest strength of this approach is that it suggests that abnormal behaviour
could be “unlearned. This has led to the development of therapies such as
systematic desensitization which has been effective in helping people with phobias.
Another strength is that there is a great deal of experimental research to support
learning theories. Because most of this research has been conducted in
laboratories, like the Little Albert study for example, we assume the findings are
reliable (consistent over time) as laboratory experiments can be properly
controlled and the procedure standardised and therefore replicated to ensure
reliable results.
However the behaviourist explanation is also limited. This is because it cannot
fully explain nor treat all disorders such as schizophrenia for example which has
been linked to biological causes (high dopamine). The behaviourist explanation
would therefore result in behaviourist treatments. The problem here is that this may
only treat the symptoms rather than the true underlying cause which means the
treatment may not lead to long lasting solutions with the true cause persisting. It
could be that the symptoms are behavioural while the cause could be biological.
Another criticism is that this approach is too deterministic. It assumes behaviour
will always remain the same unless it is unlearned. This is not necessarily true as
people sometimes change their behaviour dramatically and without any obvious
reason due to free will. This means the behavioural explanation for mental disorder
seems to ignore the role of freewill which is a weakness of this explanation.
Furthermore the behaviourist explanation for abnormality has also been criticized as
being too mechanistic with people being reduced to simple stimulus-response units.
The theory could therefore be described as reductionist as it portrays humans as
being far less complex that they are.
major cornerstone for the behavioural explanations is based on classical
and operant conditioning. This concept has been mainly tested
in animal studies which while providing us the ability to test various
conditions that may be inhumane and unethical with humans, the results
may not generalize over to humans and abnormal behaviour being
necessarily learned in the same way. Animals are far simpler
while humans can “think” beyond simple scenarios. Also with little
Albert, although he may express a phobia at a young age this may
be due to his lack of understanding and he may in turn outgrow this
response over time.
____________________________________________________
The cognitive approach to abnormality explains mental illnesses in terms
of disordered, faulty and irrational thinking patterns. These could be due
to cognitive deficiencies such as inability to forward think and plan, or
cognitive distortions in the way the person sees the world which in turn
leads to abnormal behaviour. For example
A popular way of understanding the cognitive approach is through the
ABC model suggested by ____________________;
A) Stands for the activating event or “trigger” and this is what creates
the situation. It may be a large animal, a situation, or even a person.
B) Stands for belief or “thinking”. The person has a choice in terms
of how they view this activating event. This could be a rational thought
such as “this bird is harmless” or an irrational one like “this bird will attack
me and peck my eyes out”.
C) Stands for consequence and this could either be the resulting
behaviour or feelings that are the consequence of the thought. E.g.
If the person ‘chooses’ to think rationally about the situation this would
result in rational behaviour. If the person ‘chooses’ to think irrationally
they will behave in a way that expresses fear and also feelings of anxiety.
The strength of the cognitive model is that the individual is seen as in
complete control of their thinking patterns as they can ‘choose’ a suitable
response which means they have the power to modify their thinking and
behaviour. Therefore if the person has irrational thoughts these could in
turn be challenged by more rational positive thoughts through practice
with the aim of reducing abnormal behaviour.
A strength of the cognitive approach is it focuses on the individual’s
experience of the world around them and their feelings rather than the
interpretations of other people. This would lead to more effective
treatment because if the abnormality is caused by problems in a person’s
thinking (cognition) then cognitive therapy can go directly to the cause,
i.e. the faulty thinking.
Another strength of the cognitive model of abnormality is that there is a
great deal of research evidence supporting the use of cognitive
behavioural therapy (CBT) as a form of treatment. CBT is effective for a
variety of disorders, particular depression. Research evidence for this
comes from Thase et al who compared cognitive therapy with antidepressant drug therapy to treat patients with depression. Results
found that cognitive therapy was actually no less effective than antidepressants. Also cognitive therapy could be seen as treating the cause
of the problem, unlike drugs which may only deal with the symptoms.
This also helps us understand the nature of depression because it
demonstrates that depression can be linked to cognitive deficiencies.
A limitation however is that the cognitive approach suggests it is the
patient themselves who is responsible for their mental disorder or
abnormality. Little attention is given to the biological or situational factors
that may be causing the abnormality e.g. ignoring major life events, and
biological explanations such as high dopamine (Schizophrenia). In some
ways this approach may indirectly blame patients for their own disorders
implying the patient can simply choose to act differently if they wished
and this minimizes the disorder suggesting “it’s all in their head”. We now
know this is not completely accurate, particularly with disorders such as
Schizophrenia which is believed to have a biological cause and cannot
simply be explained by the cognitive approach. Therefore the cognitive
explanation for mental disorder is limited as it ignores the role of
environmental and biological factors.
People suffering from mental disorders often report that it is their
‘thoughts’ which lead to their abnormal behaviour. This supports the
cognitive approach and provides evidence for its validity. However we
cannot be certain whether it is the irrational thoughts causing abnormality
or whether it’s the abnormality causing the irrational thoughts. Therefore
we cannot be sure of cause and effect with the cognitive explanation
which is a weakness. Furthermore, Alloy et al also suggests that not all
irrational beliefs are in fact irrational and actually they are more realistic
than other peoples’ perception of the world who may see it through ‘rosetinted glasses’. In one study depressed participants gave a more realistic
estimate of disaster than those not suffering from depression highlighting
that some so called ‘irrational thoughts’ may actually be more realistic.