Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Compare and contrast cognitive and behavioral theories of psychology
Compare and contrast biological theory to psychological theory
Operant conditioning and phobias
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The main theories of aversive control consist of two-factor theory, operant theory, cognitive theory, and biological theory.
Of these four theories, it is generally agreed that two-factor theory is the dominant theory within the group. This is largely due to the fact that the theory sees avoidance and punishment aspects of aversive conditioning as belonging to both Pavlovian and operant influences, thus the nomenclature two-factor theory.
In the instance of a bright light presented prior to a shock, the shock is then escaped, creating a reinforcer—the shock is disrupted. As each shock is escaped, a Pavlovian conditioning begins to form through the association of the light with the shock until finally a pairing is formed. At this stage the light has come to represent fear to the subject, who will now seek to escape the fear-associated CS. However, escape from the CS basically equates to avoidance of the US. As such, the two-factor theory of avoidance appears to show that in reality avoidance is not actually avoidance, but rather escape from a CS paired with the initial shock. In other words, because escape is vital for successful avoidance behavior, the theory holds that Pavlovian, as well as operant elements, manage and support avoidance.
In fact, two-factor theory will even account for a Pavlovian CS when no stimulus is presented. In this case time comes to represent the CS. If the US occurs at regular intervals, the simple passage of time will come to serve as a CS.
Regarding punishment in the two-factor theory, this Pavlovian conditioning must bring about fear within the subject. When the punished response is made the subject will experience fear, however, should the subject experience any response other than the punishment res...
... middle of paper ...
...theory resembles the previous theories in many ways. Emphasis is the distinguishing factor of this theory, and that emphasis is on a set of defensive responses that Bolles maintains every species has. He called these species-specific defense reactions, or SSDFs. While SSDFs may occur randomly, it is thought that they most likely follow a hierarchical scale.
In biological theory a response resembling an SSDF would result in fast learning, whereas a response that does not would result in the opposite.
When looking closer at the relationship between biological theory and cognitive theory we can see that though similar in some respects, biological theory most definitely stands apart. In short, where cognitive theory will lead one to what happens after a response is occurring, the focus of biological theory lay in what determines the early occurrences of those responses.
Watson, John B.; R Rayner, (March 2000) Conditioned emotional reactions, American Psychologist, Vol 55(3), 313-317.
Fear of flying is created by the unconscious mind as a protective mechanism. When using the neutral stimulus explanation, Lauren may not have had a relevant response of interest. Lauren may have learned something or heard someone from her past that caused the continuous fear. Due to the facts in this case, there’s little information to provide us regarding Lauren. First we know she’s afraid to fly, but we have no further information regarding the condition that caused the fear or the circumstances to what led to this fear. The first step in Pavlov’s theory is trying to discover how Lauren’s fear came about, but without more information one can only speculate or guess how Lauren’s condition developed. Pavlov’s theory states several actions and read actions that could have caused Lauren’s Condition.
Witte, K. (1994). Fear control and danger control: A test of the extended parallel process model (EPPM). Communication Monographs. doi:10.1080/03637759409376328
Kurayama, Matsuzawa, Komiya, Nakazawa, Yoshida, Shimizu, (2012) confirmed that these neutral stimuluses deed indeed has an effect and played a role in fear conditioning in people. The case showed that Treena had indeed learned to be scared of the incident and it proceeded to become a cue for to get anxious and get panic attacks. It has been claimed that patients with panic disorder exhibited fear potentiated startle responses to safety cues and therefore reduced discrimination between safety and danger signals during acquisition, indicating that the safety signal was processed as the aversive event in contrast to the danger signal (Nees, Heinrich, Flor, 2015). It also showed that the her failing to answer the question had affected her in other classes when she would not participate in other classes hence, this showed that the neutral stimulus has developed and grew into a conditioned stimulus which evoked feelings of fear and anxiety in her, in other words it had become a cue for her to be scared and
Watson, J. B. (1920). Conditioned emotional reactions. The American Psychologist, 55(3), 313-317. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/
...tized to it. Aversive conditioning involves replacing an old, positive response to a stimulus with a new, negative one. An example of this is instead of feeling relaxed after smoking a cigarette, a therapist might make a patient feel another negative emotion like embarrassment or fear. The last method of behavioral therapy is operand conditioning, which has been used for years and is simply rewarding someone for good behavior and withdrawing the reward for bad.
In observational learning, a child takes note of what his or her mother or father considers to be threatening. On the other hand, children can also be conditioned by their own life experiences through a process called operant conditioning (SOURCE). In some instances, children tend to generalize their fears, subsequently forming a phobia. For example, a young girl who became increasingly cautious of flying insects after an unpleasant encounter with a nest of agitated yellow jackets. After being assaulted by these creatures, she associated all flying bugs with the painful sting of a yellow jacket. Of course, children can also be classically conditioned to display a fearful response; that is, they learn to associate an unconditioned fear-relevant stimulus with a conditioned stimulus, provoking a conditioned, fearful response. One of the most well-known examples of this is an experiment involving a young boy, famously dubbed Little Albert. Little Albert learned to fear small furry animals in a laboratory setting when the presence of these creatures was paired with loud banging noises (SOURCE). From the aforementioned experiments and studies, it is undeniable that external circumstances and experiences assist in the configuration of fear in
Other issues under the cognitive theory are social and learning theories that are founded on the assumptions that humans make decisions based on logical evaluation of ideas. One of the strengths of the theory is in its recognition of humans as logical beings. It rejects behaviorism because the theory does not recognize the importance of logics in human reasoning.
During this stage a stimulus which produces no response (i.e. neutral) is associated with the unconditioned stimulus at which point it now becomes known as the conditioned stimulus (CS). Often during this stage the US must be associated with the CS on a number of occasions, or trials, for learning to take place.
Biological and cognitive are both different theoretical perspectives. They both have unique differences. The biological and cognitive approaches differ in their view on the nature versus nurture debate. The biological approach focuses on nature rather than nurture. It believes that behavior is determined by internal physiological processes such as the structure and functions of the neurons, hormones, DNA and structure of the brain. The cognitive perspective goes into the domain of mental processes to understand human nature. This perspective shows how we learn, make decisions, use language, plan for future, and form judgments.
Newell, A., Shaw, J. C., & Simon, H. (1958). Elements of a theory of problem solving. Psychological Review, 84, 231–259.
Description of the Psychodynamic Theory The thought process that drives the psychodynamic theory is that our histories greatly influence the people we turn out to be. Psychodynamic theory emphasizes the importance that relationships, especially those developed in the early stages of life, have on our development. This theory is also motivated by the assumption that our emotions or states of mind are the driving forces behind our actions (Dean, 2002). This theory focuses on childhood trauma, and how this can influence the way a person acts for the rest of his or her life.
The strength of classical conditioning is that it can help to explain all aspects of human behavior. Any of behavior can broke down into stimulus-response association, so that according to the classical conditioning, conditioned stimulus will lead conditioned response to occur, then the scientist can observe and determine the behavior (McLeod, 2014). In the case of Pavlovian conditioning, he found that when the conditioned stimulus (bell) was paired with an unconditioned stimulus (food) was presented to the dog, it would start to salivate. After a number of repeated this procedures, Pavlov tried to ring his bell by its own...
Hence, behavioral theory main focus is the behavior of the individual. The theory focuses on the positive and negative reinforcement. While, cognitive theory focuses more on the reasoning and consequences, while seeking to change the way one thinks about the actions. Behavioral theory seeks to change the way you act in the situation which will change the situation altogether. The consequences in cognitive therapy are reinforcements in behavioral theory. Meichenbaum (2000) found that cognitions can act as conditioners of behavior, which influences behavior change. Clients can be helped to restructure their cognitions, which can result in behavior
A number of different theories have been proposed to explain how these factors contribute to the development of this disorder. The first theory is experiential: people can learn their fear after an initial unpleasant experience such as a humiliating situation, physical or sexual abuse, or just attending a violent act. Similar experiences that follow add to the anxiety. According to another theory, which refers to cognition or thinking, people believe or predict that the outcome of a particular situation will be degrading or harmful to them. This can happen, for example, if parents are overly protective and constantly alert to potential problems. The third theory focuses on biological basics. Research suggests that the amygdala, a structure deep inside the brain, serves as a communication center that signals the presence of threats, and triggers a response in the form of fear or