test

• 1) prac issue of animals in research

  against: hard to generalise animals to humans as humans have more complex brain function = results from animals may not reflect the way humans would behave

  for: animals can be bred faster and die faster, data can be measured over generations and it is faster than using humans to do that
• 2) operant


  suggests we learn through consequences of reinforcement (increasing chance of behaviour, two types - primary = satisfies biological needs, secondary = can be exchanged for primary) and punishment (decreasing chance). learning occurs when we form a link between a behaviour and a consequence which then leads to an increase or decrease in the behaviour. consequences can be positive or negative - PR = giving something pleasant, NR = removing something unpleasant, PP = giving something negative, NP = removing something pleasant. we can reinforce things at different times - continuous R = reinforcing each time behaviour occurs, fixed ratio/interval = R every Nth time it occurs/ every N secs, variable ratio/interval = R after random amount of behaviours/time. we shape the behaviour by rewarding approximate behaviours until the desired one is achieved. created by skinner - trapped animals in box with lever for food, speaker to trigger behaviour and shocker to respond to behavior. found positive consequence following behaviour increased behaviour, negative weakened the behaviour
• 3) observation
• 4) systematic desensitisation process

  1) functional analysis - client and therapist have conversation about phobia to understand it and its triggers

  2) develop an anxiety hierarchy - start with least frightening phobic stimulus, end with most, client works on this mainly with some guidance from therapist

  3) relaxation methods eg breathing exercises, imagination tricks taught to client

  4) gradual exposure - client works through the hierarchy only moving to next stimuli when completely relaxed with the previous
• 5) alt to sys de

  . flooding: exposing patient to the phobic stimulus without gradual build up and in a place where avoidance is not possible - patients anxiety will peak and will have urge ti escape however will then begin to drop. use anxiety scales to communicate throughout, only one session usually needed of 2-3 hours
• 6) strengths and weaknesses of SD

  S: S: practical - gives a clear rationale that the client can use in a daily setting so helps form healthy associations which are more likely to be maintained outside of the clinical setting

  CA: relaxation may only occur due to the therapists presence = lacks practicality outside of therapy setting

  SW: however techniques are taught so clients should be able to work o their phobias outside of clinical settings = practical

  W: W: appropriateness = can't treat all phobias eg agoraphobia or phobias with an underlying survival component due to them potentially being an evolutionary fear = hard to remove so treatment is ineffective and can't help everyone

  CA: is appropriate for learnt phobias so can treat some

  SW: can treat some phobias however there will still be phobias that can't be treated meaning it lacks appropriateness and can't be used throughout the whole of society
• 7) ethical concerns of bandura 1961

  . children not old enough to give full informed consent

  . could cause psychological harm to watch adults being aggressive

  . socially sensitive as promotes aggression in children
• 8) capafon evaluate (AO1)

  A: assess effectiveness of SD as a treatment for fear of flying

  M: volunteer sample, 41 ppts, matched groups, independent measures

  P: 2 groups - treatment (8male, 12 female), waiting control (9 male, 12 female)

  1) measures taken pre treatment of self report scales for fear of flying and expectations of danger and anxiety, heart rate measured

  2) ppts watch video tape of plane trip, 1.8m from tv screen, heart rate measured.

  3) treatment group given 12-15 1 hour sessions and exposed to flying via imagination, videos, real life situations. taught relaxation methods

  4) after 8 weeks, groups retook same self report scales, watched same video and had heart rate taken

  R: no difference in mean scores before treatment of both groups, 90% of treatment group had much lower scores after treatment (fear of flying 25.6 to 13.3), treatment goroups scores were different to control in all but 2 after

  C: intervention programme successfully reduced fear of flying, no corresponding reduction in fear in control group = passage of time has no effect in phobias
• 8) AO3 strength

  S: reliability - many controls eg matching ppts on age sex and fear levels, each ppt 1.8m from screen = replicable, scales used to assess fear = standardised = reliable and replicable

  CA: self report questionnaires used = may be inconsistencies in how ppts interpreted data

  SW: results looked at the differences in before and after so it wouldn't matter how ppts interpreted as long as it was same each time, more than one measure used eg heart rate = objective = triangulated and more reliable
• 8) AO3 weakness

  W: generalisability - participants part of a volunteer sample = may be more motivated to overcome their phobia so try hard = not representative of the population with the phobia = lacks population validity, only uses people with fear of flying so can't show effectiveness of SD in other phobias = not generalisable to wider society

  CA: used both make and female ppts = findings not gender bound and can be applied to both women and men with fear of flying

  SW: still not generalisable to wider society due to small focus on just one phobia and sample type