Evaluation of behavioural approach to phobias

• There is research evidence supporting the behavioural explanation of phobias. Watson and Rayner showed classical conditioning creating a phobia by causing 11 month old Little Albert to develop a fear of white rats due to association with loud noises. However this study was largely unethical as Little Albert was not protected from harm nor could he give consent. Also, as this was a case study, it is difficult to generalise to other children and adults
• A strength of the behavioural explanation is its application to therapy. The ideas have led to the development treatments, including systematic desensitisation and flooding. Systematic desensitisation focuses on helping people unlearn their fears through classical conditioning, and flooding prevents people from avoiding their phobias, preventing negative reinforcement. This shows the effectiveness of the behaviourist explanation, as people have been treated from their phobias
• A limitation for the development of phobias ignores the role of cognition, as phobias may develop as a result of irrational thinking. For example, claustrophobic people who are afraid of confined spaces ay believe they will become trapped in a lift and suffocate, which is an irrational thought and not taken into consideration in the behaviourist explanation. The cognitive approach has lead to the development of CBT, which is said to be more successful than behaviourist treatments.
• The behavioural approach may not provide a complete explanation for phobias. For example, Bounton highlights the fact that evolutionary factors could play a role in phobias, for example if snakes have caused pain or death to our ancestors. Evolutionary psychologists suggest that some phobias are not learned but are innate, as these phobias act at a survival instinct. This is referred to as biological preparedness. It casts doubt on the two process model since it suggests that there is more to phobias than learning.