explaining phobias

• The behavioural approach emphasises observable behaviour over cognitive and emotional aspects, focusing on panic, avoidance, and endurance in phobic individuals. Mowrer's two-process model, highlights classical and operant conditioning.
• Classical conditioning, illustrated by Watson and Rayner's ‘Little Albert’ experiment, involves associating neutral stimuli (white rat) with an unconditioned stimulus (loud noise) which normally produces an unconditioned response (fear). Repeatedly pairing the neutral and the unconditioned stimulus together eventually makes the white rat a conditioned stimulus which produces a conditioned response (fear). Responses generalised to similar objects, such as fur coats and a Santa Claus beard, demonstrating the persistence of conditioned fear responses.
• Operant conditioning explains how avoidance behaviours are reinforced by the alleviation of fear and anxiety, sustaining phobias over time. Negative reinforcement, wherein individuals avoid unpleasant situations to escape fear, reinforces avoidance behaviours, and thus maintaining the phobia.
• Point: One strength of the two-process model is its real-world application in exposure therapies.

  Evidence: The model highlights the role of avoidance behaviour in maintaining phobias, explaining why exposure therapies, such as systematic desensitisation, are effective in treating phobias.

  Explain: By preventing avoidance behaviour, exposure therapies disrupt the reinforcement of anxiety reduction, leading to a decline in phobic responses.

  Link: Therefore, this suggests that the two-process model provides valuable insights into the treatment of phobias through exposure-based interventions.
• Point: One limitation of the two-process model is its neglect of the cognitive aspects of phobias.

  Evidence: The model focuses on explaining phobias by focusing on the behavioural aspects through classical and operant conditioning.

  Explain: However, phobias involve both behavioural avoidance and cognitive components, such as irrational beliefs about the phobic stimulus.

  Link: Thus, the model does not offer a comprehensive explanation for all aspects of phobic symptoms, limiting its explanatory power.
• Point: A further strength of the two-process model is evidence for a link between bad experiences and phobias.

  Evidence: Ad De Jongh (2006) found 73% of people with fear of dental treatment experienced a traumatic dentistry experience compared to 21% of people with low dental anxiety.

  Explain: This demonstrates that traumatic experiences involving a stimulus can lead to the development of phobias associated with that stimulus.

  Link: Therefore, this suggests that the model accurately accounts for the role of negative experiences in the acquisition of phobias.
• Point: However, not all phobias emerge from negative experiences, indicating a limitation of the two-process model.

  Evidence: Some common phobias, like snake phobias, occur in populations with minimal exposure to the phobic stimulus or traumatic events. 

  Explain: Additionally, not all frightening experiences result in the development of phobias..

  Link: Thus, the model's focus on negative experiences may overlook other factors contributing to phobia development, making it incomplete in explaining phobic phenomena.