Phobias - explanation

• 2 process model


  Phobias can be seen as a learned response to environmental triggers.

  
  

  The theories of classical conditioning and operant conditioning were first combined as a single explanation for phobia by Mowrer in the 2-process model.
• 2 process model - 1st stage

  Classical conditioning - associative learning

  
  

  Phobia is acquired through an association between something we previously didn't fear (neutral stimulus) and something that triggers a fear response (unconditioned stimulus)

  
  

  Eg: a child with no previous fear of dogs (NS) gets bitten by a dog (US), and from this moment, associates the dog (CS) with fear and pain (CR).
• Generalisation


  In the previous example, due to the process of generalisation, the child isn't only afraid of the dog who bit them but shows a fear of all dogs.
• There is empirical support to show how classical conditioning leads to the development of phobias.

  Little Albert (Watson and Rayner)
• Little Albert - procedure

  Prior to the experiment, little Albert showed no fear response to white rat - neutral stimulus.

  
  

  Watson and Rayner paired a white rat (neutral stimulus) with a loud bang (unconditioned stimulus) resulting in the unconditioned response of fear towards the rat, even without the sound.

  - induced this fear response by hitting a metal bar with a hammer behind his head every time he went to reach for the ray. They did this 3 times.
• Little Albert - findings

  This conditioning could be generalised to similar objects. Little Albert also showed fear in response to furry objects including a fur coat and a Santa Claus beard.

  
  

  This demonstrates that the fear response can be induced in humans through classical conditioning.
• Methodological criticism


  research into this approach predominantly uses case studies

  
  

  Albert's case is extremely rare and considered a unique event.

  findings can't be generalised to explain all cases of phobias.

  
  

  reduces the population validity and support.
• 2 process model - 2nd stage

  Operant conditioning

  
  

  Explains how a phobia is maintained, reinforcement can increase the frequency of a behaviour to occur.

  
  

  The CS evokes fear and anxiety, and avoidance of the feared object or situation lessens this feeling, which is rewarding.

  
  

  The reward (negative reinforcement) strengthens the avoidance behaviour, and the phobia is maintained - cyclically reinforcing.
• Limitation - reductionist (evolutionary factors)

  This explanation fails to consider evolutionary factors which play an important role in the development of phobias.

  
  

  Seligman suggests that humans have a 'biological preparedness,' an innate preparedness to acquire certain phobias, because they were adaptive in our evolutionary past.

  
  

  This suggests it's adaptive to acquire fear - can help us survive dangers.
• Limitation - reductionist (L)


  This weakens appropriateness if the behavioural explanation, there is more to the development of phobias than simple conditioning.
• Strength of the 2 process model - application

  The idea that phobias are maintained by avoidance is important in explaining why people with phobias benefit from exposure therapies.

  
  

  Once avoidance behaviour is prevented, the phobias ceases to be reinforced by the reduction of anxiety. Avoidance behaviour therefore declines.

  
  

  This shows the value of the 2 process model, as it identifies a means of treating phobias.
• Inability to explain cognitive aspects of phobias

  Behavioural explanations like the 2 process model seek to explain behaviour, in the this case, avoidance of the phobic stimulus.

  
  

  However, we know that phobias also have a significant cognitive component - for example, irrational thinking appears to be a key feature of phobias.

  
  

  This means that the 2 process model doesn't fully explain the symptoms of phobias.