comparison of approaches

• compare the behaviourist and biological approach

  similarities:

  scientific methodology

  reductionist

  differences:

  real-life application

  determinism
• evaluation (AO3) behaviourist vs biological approach: scientific methodology

  Both the behaviourist and biological approaches are praised for their scientific methodologies. The behaviourist approach uses controlled lab experiments and objective measurements such as Skinner's box to observe behavioural responses to reinforcement. Similarly, the biological approach uses brain scans, biochemical tests and genetic analysis, providing quantifiable and replicable data. McGuffin et al found 46% concordance rates between MZ twins and 20% concordance between DZ twins for depression, which shows empirical evidence that there is a genetic element to depression.This scientific focus enhances the reliability and internal validity of both approaches. However, the biological approach is arguably more advanced with its technology and precision, allowing researchers to study brain function in real time.
• evaluation (AO3) behaviourist vs biological approach: determinism

  One key difference is in their views on determinism. The behaviourist approach is environmentally deterministic, stating that behaviour is shaped by external stimuli and reinforcement history, leaving little room for free will. For example, Skinner argued that free will is an illusion and that all behaviour is as a result of reinforcement. The biological approach however, is biologically deterministic and see behaviour as being a product of internal factors such as, brain structure, neurotransmitters, hormones and genes. This is demonstrated through the biological explanation for OCD, which theorises that the COMT gene and the SERT genes are the candidate genes for OCD.
• evaluation (AO3) behaviourist vs biological approach: treatment

  The real life applications of both approaches differ. The behaviourist approach has led to effective behavioural therapies such as systematic desensitisation. This has been particularly effective in treating phobias and modifying undesirable behaviour. The biological approach, on the other hand, has led to the development of drug treatments such as SSRIs for depression or antipsychotics for schizophrenia. While biological treatments act quickly and are life-saving, they often treat symptoms and most causes and can have long-term effects. Behaviourist treatments, although slower, can offer long term solutions and may be more appropriate for certain conditions where learning processes are central.
• evaluation (AO3) behaviourist vs biological: reductionist

  However both approaches have been criticised for being reductionist. The behaviourist approach reduces complex human behaviours to simple stimulus-response units, overlooking the role of cognitive, emotional and social influences. Likewise the biological approach is also biologically reductionist as it overlooks the role of environment, learning and experience. For example even if someone has a genetic vulnerability to a disorder, it may only manifest under certain environmental triggers. This suggests that neither approach fully takes into account the interaction between nature and nurture and therefore more holistic approaches such as the cognitive approach may offer more complete explanations.
• compare the behaviourist and social learning theory approach

  similarities:

  environmental determinants

  scientific methodology

  differences:

  observation vs reinforcement

  determinism
• evaluation (AO3): behaviourist vs SLT: environmental determinants

  Both the SLT and behaviourist approaches focus of environmental determinants of behaviour. They both emphasise that in order for a behaviour to be repeated then reinforcement must occur. Reinforcement occurs in the form of direct reinforcement on the individual according to behaviourists, and in the form of vicarious reinforcement according to SLT theorists. Hence, both approaches emphasise the importance of reinforcement in determining behaviour.
• evaluation (AO3) behaviourist vs SLT: scientific methodology

  Both the behaviourist and biological approaches are praised for their scientific methodologies. The behaviourist approach and the SLT approach used controlled lab experiments and objective measurements such as Skinner's box to observe behavioural responses to reinforcement. Furthermore, Bandura's experiment measured observable behaviours and gained objective, empirical data about social learning which explained cultural differences in behaviour.
• evaluation (AO3) behaviourist vs SLT: observational/reinforcement

  SLT explains learning in terms of observation and imitation through the mediational processes. When individuals observe another person (more often a same-sex role model) being rewarded they are more likely to copy that behaviour (vicarious reinforcement). Whereas, the Behaviourist approach states that individuals learn from direct reinforcement(operant and classical conditioning) In OC a behaviour is more likely to be repeated through positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement. It is less likely to be repeated if followed by punishment.
• evaluation (AO3) behaviourist vs SLT: determinist

  Both theories are environmentally deterministic but SLT takes a soft determinist approach. This means that it allows for a greater role of free will in which behaviours we learn as well as emotions.
• compare the behaviourist and cognitive approach.

  similarities:

  scientific methodology

  views of nature vs nurture

  differences:

  treatment

  external vs internal
• evaluation (AO3) behaviourist vs cognitive: scientific methodology

  The cognitive and behaviourist approaches both use  scientific, experimental methodology. For example, Miller's investigation on the capacity of the short term memory being 7+-2 items (cognitive), and Pavlov and Skinner's (behaviourist) research into classical and operant conditioning are examples of an experimental methods that have standardised procedures and yields objective, empirical, quantitative data. However, lab-based studies can have low real-world application as the environment the data was produced in is artificial.
• evaluation (AO3) behaviourist vs cognitive: treatment

  Both the behaviourist and cognitive approaches have resulted in treatments. Treatment based upon the behaviourist approach such as flooding and systematic desensitisation view the client as needing to be reconditioned and do not involve reflection or cognitive processes. In contrast, the Cognitive approach led to the development of CBT and this involves the client reflecting on their behaviours in order to improve. With the exception of phobias, CBT is the far more widely used and successful treatment for psychological disorders such as anxiety and depression.
• evaluation (AO3) behaviourist vs cognitive: external/internal behaviour

  Behaviourism only focuses on external observable behaviour, such as repeating a behaviour. For example, Little Albert became distressed when he was repeatedly presented with a white rat, after it had been paired with the striking of a metal bar. Whereas, the cognitive approach focuses on internal mental processes such as the processes involved in forgetting eg, is forgetting due to displacement or interference. Therefore, the behaviourist approach could be viewed as more concrete as it measures external, observable behaviour and the effect of environmental stiimuli whilst the cognitive approach measures unobservable mental processes.
• evaluation (AO3) behaviourist vs cognitive: nature/nurture

  Both approaches agree regarding their beliefs of nature vs nurture. The behaviourist approach focuses on nurture and argues that we learn from our environment and are born Tabula Rasa. For example, they would explain depression as being learnt through past negative events rather than neurochemistry. Similarly, cognitive psychologists argue that cognition and perception is due to past experience. For example, they would explain depression as a result of a negative schema that has been constructed throughout life.
• compare the SLT and cognitive approach.

  similarities:

  mediational processes

  scientific methodology

  differences:

  observable vs unobservable behaviour
• evaluation (AO3) SLT vs cognitive: mediational processes

  The SLT and the cognitive approach both have a focus on mediational processes: Attention, retention, reproduction and motivation. The SLT’s focus on mediational processes theorises that we learn this way through observational learning and vicarious reinforcement. The cognitive approach theorises that we use these mediational processes to encode, store and retrieve information. Mediational processes are involved in eg,memory, forgetting, EWT and cognitive interview.
• evaluation (AO3) SLT vs cognitive: scientific methodology

  The cognitive and SLT approaches both use scientific, experimental methodology. For example, Miller's investigation on the capacity of the short term memory being 7+-2 items (cognitive), and Bandura's (SLT) research into social learning through the imitation of behaviours exhibited by a role model are examples of an experimental methods that have standardised procedures and yields objective, empirical, quantitative data. However, lab-based studies can have low real-world application as the environment the data was produced in is artificial.
• evaluation (AO3) SLT vs cognitive: external/internal behaviour

  SLT only focuses on external observable behaviour, such as imitating a behaviour. For example, children in Group 1 of Bandura's experiment imitated the violent behaviours of the aggressive role model with the bobo doll. Whereas, the cognitive approach focuses on internal mental processes such as the processes involved in forgetting eg, is forgetting due to displacement or interference. Therefore, the SLT approach could be viewed as more concrete as it measures external, observable behaviour and the effect of social learning whilst the cognitive approach measures unobservable mental processes.
• compare the SLT and biological approach

  similarities:

  scientific methodology

  differences:

  determinist

  nature/nurture
• evaluation (AO3) SLT vs biological: scientific methodology

  Both approaches are praised for their scientific methodology. The SLT and the biological approach both use nomothetic scientific/experimental methodology to study behaviour. Bandura studied 72 children using an experimental method for the Bobo doll study when investigating modelling and aggression. Peterson used MRI scanning to assess and discover that the Broca’s area was active during a reading task and the Wernicke’s area was active during a listening task. McGuffin et al found 46% concordance rates between MZ twins and 20% concordance between DZ twins for depression, which shows empirical evidence that there is a genetic element to depression. Consequently, both approaches lack ecological validity as the results are produced in an artificial environment with tight control over extraneous variables.
• evaluation (AO3) SLT vs biological: determinist.

  Social learning theory focuses on the idea that our behaviour is externally changeable through observable learning i.e.vicarious reinforcement, particularly learning from the same sex role model, as demonstrated by Bandura’s Bobo doll study. The biological approach however, is biologically deterministic and see behaviour as being a product of internal factors such as, brain structure, neurotransmitters, hormones and genes. This is demonstrated through the biological explanation for OCD, which theorises that the COMT gene and the SERT genes are the candidate genes for OCD.
• evaluation (AO3) SLT vs biological: nature/nurture

  One difference between the approaches is how they sit on the nature vs nurture debate. The SLT approach favours nurture, as it believes that behaviour is learnt through experiences such as vicarious reinforcement and imitation. Whereas, the biological approach sits on the nature side, focusing on hormones, neurotransmitters, and genes. The biological approach argues that genotypes, which are then expressed through the phenotype, are what influence behaviour.
• compare the biological and cognitive approach


  similarities:

  treatment

  nature vs nurture

  difference:

  determinist
• evaluation (AO3) biological vs cognitive: nature/nurture

  The biological approach sits on the nature side, focusing on hormones, neurotransmitters, and genes. The biological approach argues that genotypes, which are then expressed through the phenotype, are what influence behaviour. Similarly, cognitive psychologists argue that cognition and perception is due to past experience. For example, they would explain depression as a result of a negative schema that has been constructed throughout life.
• evaluation (AO3) biological vs cognitive: treatment

  The cognitive approach led to the development of CBT and this involves the client reflecting on their behaviours in order to improve. It is a widely used treatment for anxiety and depression. The biological approach, on the other hand, has led to the development of drug treatments such as SSRIs for depression or antipsychotics for schizophrenia. While biological treatments act quickly and are life-saving, they often treat symptoms and most causes and can have long-term effects. In contrast, cognitive treatments will often be expensive and take place over an extended time period.
• evaluation (AO3) biological vs cognitive: determinist.

  Biological psychologists would argue that the cause of behaviour is ultimately determined physically either through genes, neurotransmitters or neural structures. This approach almost entirely disregards freewill. Cognitive psychologists would argue that behaviour is caused through our thinking patterns and though these may be correlated to physical structures also involve freewill and emotion.