The Behaviourist Approach

HeyThereIAmKyle
Mind Map by , created over 6 years ago

A Level PY1 Psychology Mind Map on The Behaviourist Approach, created by HeyThereIAmKyle on 05/17/2013.

157
2
0
Tags
HeyThereIAmKyle
Created by HeyThereIAmKyle over 6 years ago
OCR Biology AS level (f211) flashcards/revision notes
Dariush Zarrabi
FCE Practice Quiz - B2
miminoma
Main Themes in Romeo and Juliet
Carlowl
History- Religion and medicine
gemma.bell
1.11 Core Textiles
T Andrews
The Psychodynamic Approach
HeyThereIAmKyle
The Cognitive Approach
HeyThereIAmKyle
The Biological Approach
HeyThereIAmKyle
The Psychodynamic Approach
Aliza B
The Psychodynamic Approach
Storm Marsden
The Behaviourist Approach
1 Strengths and Weaknesses
1.1 Weaknesses
1.1.1 Emphasis on nurture
1.1.1.1 Focussed on how the environment shapes behaviour
1.1.1.1.1 Completely ignores nature
1.1.1.1.1.1 Our behaviour isn't just influenced by learning, innate abilities such as emotion influence
1.1.2 Determinist Approach
1.1.2.1 People are controlled by external factors
1.1.2.1.1 rewards/punishments provided by our environment
1.1.2.1.1.1 Doesn't consider thought processes, which suggest we have no free will
1.1.2.1.1.1.1 Weakness as it suggests we can't be held responsible for our behaviour
1.2 Strengths
1.2.1 Scientific Approach
1.2.1.1 Pavlov's work is scientific
1.2.1.1.1 Objective and replicable
1.2.1.1.1.1 Operationalised variables mean we can analyse and compare behaviour
1.2.1.1.1.1.1 Scientific approach is advantageous as we can distinguish facts from beliefs
1.2.2 Successful Applications
1.2.2.1 Classical conditioning is used in Aversion Therapy and SD
1.2.2.1.1 Operant conditioning is used in education to shape behaviour in the classroom
1.2.2.1.1.1 Teaching machine; letting students work at their own pace
2 Systematic Desensitisation
2.1 1: Patient is taught how to relax
2.1.1 2: Therapist and P create a heirarchy of fears
2.1.1.1 3: P works way through HoF
2.1.1.1.1 4: When P is relaxed, they can progress to next step
2.1.1.1.1.1 5: Patient overcomes the fear
2.2 Wolpe 1950's
2.2.1 Masserman (1943) -cats had electric shocks when they were put in a box, so then developed a fear of boxes
2.2.1.1 Wolpe (1958) - put food closer and closer to the box, until the cat went in the box to get the food (conditioning)
2.2.2 Suggested fears are not so fearful, but we only think they are because we are too anxious to re-experience it
2.3 Desensitisation Heirarchy
2.4 Different forms of SD
2.4.1 In vivo desensitisation
2.4.1.1 P's would have to face the fear until they're relaxed
2.4.1.1.1 More successful
2.4.2 In vitro desensitisation
2.4.2.1 Therapist asks P's to imagine the fear
2.4.3 Menzies and Clarke (1993) - in vivo is more successful
2.4.4 Comer (2002) - P's watch someone else overcome a fear
2.4.5 Humphrey (1973) - an alternative is self-administered SD is effective
2.4.6 Flooding
2.4.6.1 Direct experience with the fear until reciprocal enhibition takes place
2.5 Counterconditioning: Aim is to acquire a new stimulus-response link
2.5.1 Reciprocal Inhibition: we cannot experience fear and relaxation at the same time
2.5.1.1
2.6 Effectiveness of SD
2.6.1 McGrath (1990) found that 75% of P's respond to SD
2.6.2 Is counterconditioning necessary?
2.6.2.1 Success of SD may be down to exposure than relaxation, and the fact that the P's expect an improvement
2.6.2.2 Klein et al (1983) compared SD with psychotherapy and found no difference which could show that they only overcome the phobias as they expect to
2.6.3 Capafons et al (1998) treated 41 aerophobics. 21 were in a control and were compared to the 20 that underwent SD. Those who recieved SD reported lower levels of fear which shows SD is successful
2.6.3.1 However, 2 in the SD group showed no improvement, so SD is not 100% effective
3 Methodology
3.1 Use of animals in research
3.1.1 Behaviourists believe there's only quantitative differences between humans and animals. e.g. brain size.
3.1.2 Strengths
3.1.2.1 Animal learning has successful applications, they were used to develop ideas for SD.
3.1.2.1.1 Less emotional involvement with animals, less demand characteristics and experimenter bias
3.1.3 Weaknesses
3.1.3.1 Generalisability factors as how can we say animals learn the same way as humans. Human behaviour far more complexed than animal behaviour
3.1.3.1.1 Ethical issues; is it ethical to experiment on animals or put them in harmful conditions
3.2 Lab Experiments
3.2.1 Strengths
3.2.1.1 Best way to find C&E as extraneous varibles are controlled.
3.2.1.1.1 Objective, standardised procedures increases replicability and validity
3.2.1.1.1.1 Quanitative date; easily analysed and comparitable
3.2.2 Weaknesses
3.2.2.1 Lacks ecological validity as it's in an artifical environment.
3.2.2.1.1 P's might try and guess the purpose of the study (Demand Characteristics)
3.2.2.1.1.1 SDB
3.2.2.1.1.1.1 Experimenter could display behaviour that influences P's to act differently (Experimenter Bias)
3.2.3 Only observable behaviour is worth of study
3.2.4 If Psy was a Science then scientific methods should be used to study behaviour
3.2.4.1 Objective, replicable, quanitifiable
3.2.5 Behaviourists believe our behaviour is shaped by the environment so manipulating the environment means we can establish causes of behaviours
3.2.5.1 Establish cause and effect
3.2.5.2 Does the IV affect the DV
4 Social Learning Theory
4.1 Behaviourists believe aggression by imitating behaviour
4.1.1 Observable behaviour; need to be directly experienced to it
4.2 Bandura doesn't ignore biological factors, as he says we all have to potential to be aggressive
4.3 The Bobo Doll Study
4.3.1 1961
4.3.1.1 3-5 y/o B&G
4.3.2 The Motivation for Aggression
4.3.2.1 Bandura's experiment doesn't tell us why children imitate aggressive behaviours
4.3.2.2 Film ending influenced the child's behaviour
4.3.2.2.1 Those who saw the model being PUNISHED were significantly LESS likely to imitate behaviour
4.3.2.2.1.1
4.3.2.2.2 Those who saw the model being REWARDED were significantly MORE likely to imitate behaviour
4.3.2.2.2.1 VICARIOUS LEARNING
4.3.2.2.3 Those who were in the CONTROL were somewhere in between
4.3.2.2.3.1
4.3.2.3 Bandura and Walters (1963) - children divided into 3 groups and each saw a different ending to the film of an aggressive modeel
4.3.2.3.1 1. Rewarded 2. Punished 3. Nothing
4.3.3 Taken into a room with toys and an adult. Half of the children were exposed to the model beating the doll, half weren't
4.3.3.1 Children were then taken into a room with a Bobo doll. Those who were experienced to aggression imitated it, and those who weren't didn't.
4.4 Observation
4.4.1 Observe role models and imitate their behaviour
4.4.1.1 Observational Learning
4.4.1.1.1 Vicarious Reinforcement; children observe people getting rewarded or punished for behaviour
4.4.1.1.1.1 Learn behaviours (OL) and then choose whether to imitate them (VR)
4.5 Mental Representation
4.5.1 Bandura (1986) in order for social learning to take place, children must imagine these behaviours in their environment
4.5.1.1 Represent possible rewards/punishments (expectancies of future outcomes)
4.5.1.1.1 When opportunities arise, behaviour is provided when the expectation of the reward > the punishment
4.6 Maintenence through direct experience
4.6.1 If a child is rewarded for aggressive behaviour, they are more likely to repeat it
4.6.1.1 Aggression will then have a higher value
5 Assumptions
5.1 Behaviour can be explained in terms of Classical Conditioning
5.1.1 Behaviours are learnt through association
5.1.2 A behaviour is a stimulus-response unit
5.1.2.1 Pavlov's dogs (1904)
5.1.3 US --> UR
5.1.3.1 NS --> Nothing
5.1.3.1.1 US + NS --> UR
5.1.3.1.1.1 CS --> CR
5.1.3.1.1.1.1 After
5.1.3.1.1.2 During
5.1.3.1.2
5.1.3.2 Before
5.2 Behaviour can be explained in terms of Operant Conditioning
5.2.1 Behaviours are learnt through reinforcement
5.2.2 Behaviours either result in positive/negative consequences
5.2.3 Skinner's Rats (1938) -Reinforcers
5.2.4 Reinforcers can also be positive/negative
5.2.5 Shaping - reinforcing successively closer approximations to a desired performance

Media attachments