Behavioural approach to explaining phobias

• Mowrer argued that phobias are learned by classical conditioning and then maintained by operent conditioning.
• Classical conditioning involves association:

  1. UCS triggers a fear response (UCR)
  2. NS is associated with the UCS
  3. NS becomes a CS producing fear (which is now the CR)
• Little Albert, conditioned fear: Watson and Raynor

  1. When Albert played with a white rat (NS), a loud noise (UCS) was made close to his ear, causing a fear response (UCR).
  2. Rat did not create fear until the bang and the rat had been paired together several times.
  3. Albert showed a fear response (CR) every time he came into contact with the rat (now a CS).
• Generalisation of fear to other stimuli


  Little Albert also showed fear in response to other white furry objects including a fur coat and a Santa Claus mask.
• maintenance by operant conditioning

  takes place when our behaviour is reinforced or punished.

  negative reinforcement: an individual produces behaviour that avoids something unpleasant.

  when a phobic avoids a phobic stimulus they escape the anxiety that would have been experienced. the reduction in fear negatively reinforces the avoidance behaviour and the phobia is maintained.
• example of negative reinforcement

  if someone has a phobia of clowns 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 of the two-process model

  good explanatory power. went beyond watson and reynor's simple classical conditioning explanation of phobias. has important implications for therapy, if a patient is prevented from practicing their avoidance behaviour then phobic behaviour declines. the application to therapy is a strength of the two-process model
• limitation of explanations of phobias

  not all bad experiences lead to phobias. sometimes they do appear following a bad experience and its easy to see how they may be the result of conditioning. however, sometimes people have a bad experience (e.g. bitten by a dog) and don't develop a phobia. this suggests conditioning alone cannot explain phobias. they only develop where a vulnerability exists.
• limitation of the two-process model

  doesn't properly consider the cognitive aspects of phobias. behavioural explanations are oriented towards explaining behaviour rather than cognition. this is why the two-process model explains maintenance of phobias in terms of avoidance- but we know that phobias also have a cognitive element. therefore, the two process theory doesn't;t adequately address the cognitive elements of phobias.
• limitation: alternative explanations for avoidance behaviour

  In more complex behaviours like agoraphobia, there is evidence that at least some avoidance behaviour is motivated more by positive feelings of safety. this explains why some agoraphobics are able to leave their house with a trusted friend with relatively little anxiety, but not alone (buck). this is a problem for the two-process model, which suggests that avoidance is motivated by anxiety reduction