Our behaviour isn't just
influenced by learning,
innate abilities such as
emotion influence
Determinist Approach
People are controlled
by external factors
rewards/punishments
provided by our
environment
Doesn't consider thought
processes, which suggest
we have no free will
Weakness as it
suggests we can't be
held responsible for our
behaviour
Strengths
Scientific Approach
Pavlov's work is scientific
Objective and replicable
Operationalised variables
mean we can analyse and
compare behaviour
Scientific approach is
advantageous as we can
distinguish facts from beliefs
Successful Applications
Classical conditioning is
used in Aversion
Therapy and SD
Operant conditioning is
used in education to shape
behaviour in the classroom
Teaching machine;
letting students work at
their own pace
Systematic Desensitisation
1: Patient is taught
how to relax
2: Therapist and P create
a heirarchy of fears
3: P works way through HoF
4: When P is relaxed, they
can progress to next step
5: Patient overcomes the fear
Wolpe 1950's
Masserman (1943) -cats had
electric shocks when they were
put in a box, so then developed
a fear of boxes
Wolpe (1958) - put food
closer and closer to the box,
until the cat went in the box
to get the food (conditioning)
Suggested fears are not
so fearful, but we only
think they are because we
are too anxious to
re-experience it
Desensitisation
Heirarchy
Different forms of SD
In vivo desensitisation
P's would
have to face
the fear until
they're relaxed
More
successful
In vitro desensitisation
Therapist asks
P's to imagine
the fear
Menzies and Clarke (1993)
- in vivo is more successful
Comer (2002) - P's watch
someone else overcome a
fear
Humphrey (1973) -
an alternative is
self-administered
SD is effective
Flooding
Direct experience
with the fear until
reciprocal enhibition
takes place
Counterconditioning: Aim is
to acquire a new
stimulus-response link
Reciprocal Inhibition: we
cannot experience fear and
relaxation at the same time
Effectiveness of SD
McGrath (1990) found
that 75% of P's respond to
SD
Is counterconditioning necessary?
Success of SD may be down to
exposure than relaxation, and the
fact that the P's expect an
improvement
Klein et al (1983) compared SD with psychotherapy and
found no difference which could show that they only
overcome the phobias as they expect to
Capafons et al (1998) treated 41
aerophobics. 21 were in a control and were
compared to the 20 that underwent SD.
Those who recieved SD reported lower levels
of fear which shows SD is successful
However, 2 in the SD group showed
no improvement, so SD is not 100%
effective
Methodology
Use of animals in research
Behaviourists believe there's only
quantitative differences between
humans and animals. e.g. brain
size.
Strengths
Animal learning has
successful applications,
they were used to
develop ideas for SD.
Less emotional
involvement with
animals, less demand
characteristics and
experimenter bias
Weaknesses
Generalisability factors
as how can we say
animals learn the same
way as humans. Human
behaviour far more
complexed than animal
behaviour
Ethical issues; is it ethical to
experiment on animals or put
them in harmful conditions
Lab Experiments
Strengths
Best way to find C&E as
extraneous varibles are
controlled.
Objective, standardised procedures
increases replicability and validity
Quanitative date; easily analysed
and comparitable
Weaknesses
Lacks ecological validity as it's in
an artifical environment.
P's might try and guess the
purpose of the study
(Demand Characteristics)
SDB
Experimenter could display
behaviour that influences P's to
act differently (Experimenter Bias)
Only observable
behaviour is worth of
study
If Psy was a Science then scientific
methods should be used to study
behaviour
Objective, replicable,
quanitifiable
Behaviourists believe our behaviour is shaped
by the environment so manipulating the
environment means we can establish causes of
behaviours
Establish cause and effect
Does the IV affect the DV
Social Learning Theory
Behaviourists believe
aggression by
imitating behaviour
Observable behaviour; need
to be directly experienced to it
Bandura doesn't ignore
biological factors, as he
says we all have to potential
to be aggressive
The Bobo Doll Study
1961
3-5 y/o
B&G
The Motivation for Aggression
Bandura's experiment doesn't tell
us why children imitate aggressive
behaviours
Film ending influenced
the child's behaviour
Those who saw the model
being PUNISHED were
significantly LESS likely to
imitate behaviour
Those who saw the
model being REWARDED
were significantly MORE
likely to imitate behaviour
VICARIOUS LEARNING
Those who were in the
CONTROL were
somewhere in between
Bandura and Walters (1963) -
children divided into 3 groups and
each saw a different ending to the
film of an aggressive modeel
1. Rewarded
2. Punished
3. Nothing
Taken into a room with toys and
an adult. Half of the children
were exposed to the model
beating the doll, half weren't
Children were then taken into a room
with a Bobo doll. Those who were
experienced to aggression imitated it,
and those who weren't didn't.
Observation
Observe role models and
imitate their behaviour
Observational Learning
Vicarious Reinforcement;
children observe people
getting rewarded or
punished for behaviour
Learn behaviours (OL)
and then choose whether
to imitate them (VR)
Mental Representation
Bandura (1986) in order for
social learning to take place,
children must imagine these
behaviours in their environment
Represent possible
rewards/punishments
(expectancies of future
outcomes)
When opportunities arise,
behaviour is provided when
the expectation of the
reward > the punishment
Maintenence through
direct experience
If a child is rewarded for
aggressive behaviour, they
are more likely to repeat it
Aggression will then
have a higher value
Assumptions
Behaviour can be explained in terms of Classical Conditioning
Behaviours are learnt
through association
A behaviour is a
stimulus-response
unit
Pavlov's
dogs (1904)
US --> UR
NS --> Nothing
US + NS --> UR
CS --> CR
After
During
Before
Behaviour can be explained in terms of Operant Conditioning
Behaviours are learnt
through reinforcement
Behaviours either result
in positive/negative
consequences
Skinner's Rats
(1938) -Reinforcers
Reinforcers can also be
positive/negative
Shaping - reinforcing successively
closer approximations to a desired
performance