explaining phobias(behavioural approach)

• classical and operant conditioning:

  • Mowrer = argued that phobias are learned by classical conditioning and then maintained by operant conditioning (2 processes are involved)
• acquisition by classical conditioning:

  • classical conditioning involves association
  • UCS triggers a fear response (fear is a UCR), eg being bitten creates anxiety
  • NS is associated with the UCS, eg being bitten by a dog (the dog previously did not create anxiety)
  • NS becomes a CS producing fear (which is now the CR), the dog becomes a CS causing a CR of anxiety/fear following the bite
• Little Albert (conditioned fear):

  • Watson and Rayner showed how fear of rats can be conditioned in 'Little Albert':
  • whenever Albert played with a white rat, a loud noise was made close to his ear. the noise (UCS) caused a fear response (UCR)
  • rat (NS) did not create fear until the bang and the rat had been paired together several times
  • Albert showed a few response (CR) every time he came into contact with the rat (now a CS)
• generalisation of fear to other stimuli

  • eg = Little Albert also showed a fear response to other white furry objects (incl a fur coat and a Santa Claus beard)
• maintenance by operant conditioning (negative reinforcement)

  • operant conditioning takes place when our behaviour is reinforced or punished
  • negative reinforcement = an individual produces behaviour that avoids something unpleasant
  • when a person with a phobia avoids a phobic stimulus, they escape the anxiety that would have been experienced
  • this reduction in fear negatively reinforces the avoidance behaviour and the phobia is maintained
• example of negative reinforcement

  • if someone has a morbid fear of clowns (coulrophobia) they will avoid circuses and other situations where they may encounter clowns
  • the relief felt from avoiding clowns negatively reinforces the phobia and ensures it is maintained rather than confronted
• strength = 2 process model has RWA

  • the idea that phobias are maintained by avoidance is important in explaining why people with phobias benefit from exposure therapies (eg SD)
  • once avoidance behaviour is prevented it ceases to be reinforced by the reduction of anxiety - avoidance behaviour therefore declines
  • shows the value of the two-process approach because it identifies a means of treating phobias
• limitation = inability to explain cognitive aspects of phobias

  • behavioural explanations (like the two-process model) are geared towards explaining behaviour - in this case the avoidance of the phobic stimulus
  • BUT = we know that phobias also have a significant cognitive component (eg people hold irrational beliefs about the phobic stimulus)
  • => two-process model doesn't fully explain the symptoms of phobias
• strength = evidence linking phobias to bad experiences

  • De Jongh et al = found that 73% of dental phobics had experienced a trauma (mostly involving dentistry), => evidence of link between bad experience and phobias
  • in the control group of people with low dental anxiety, only 21% had experienced a traumatic event
  • this confirms the association between stimulus (dentistry) and an unconditioned response (pain) does lead to the phobia
• counterpoint to link between bad experiences and phobias

  • not all phobias appear following a bad experience
  • snake phobias still occur in populations where very few people have any experience of snakes
  • also not all frightening experiences lead to phobias
  • means that behavioural theories probably do not provide an explanation for all cases of phobias
• extra evaluation = learning and evolution

  • the two-process model provides a credible explanation for how a person might develop and maintain a particular phobia
  • BUT = preparedness is an alternative explanation:
  • this is the tendency to develop phobias for things that presented a danger in our evolutionary past (eg snakes and the dark)
  • => the two-process model doesn't explain some important properties of phobias