Specification: The behavioural approach to explaining phobias: the two-process model, including classical and operant conditioning.

The two processes in the two-process model, proposed by Mowrer (1947) are classical conditioning (CC) and operant conditioning (OC). Both have been used to explain how phobias form. Behaviourists explain all phobias as learned through association or an experience (CC) and maintained through reinforcement (OC). You need to know how each plays a part in initiating and maintaining a phobia.

According to the behavioural approach, abnormal behaviour can be caused by: 1) classical conditioning, 2) operant conditioning and 3) social learning theory.

Mowrer (1947) proposed a two‐process model, to explain how phobias are learned through classical conditioning and maintained through operant conditioning.

Classical conditioning (CC)

Classical conditioning is a process of learning by associating two stimuli together to condition (learn) a response. According to the theory of classical conditioning, phobias can be acquired through associative learning. The process of classical conditioning can explain how we learn to associate something we do not fear (neutral stimulus), for example a lift, with something which triggers a fear response (unconditioned stimulus), for example being trapped. After an association has formed, the lift (now a conditioned stimulus) causes a response of fear (conditioned response) and consequently, we develop a phobia of lift, following a single incident of being trapped in a lift. 

Operant conditioning (OC)

Although classical conditioning can explain why we develop a phobia, it struggles to explain why our phobias do not decay over time. For example, it is unlikely that a person will get trapped in every lift they use and therefore it would be reasonable to assume that a person’s phobia of lifts should weaken every time they travel in a lift and don’t get trapped. However, most phobias are long‐term and according to Mowrer, our phobias are maintained through operant conditioning.

According to the theory of operant conditioning, phobias can be negatively reinforced. This is where a behaviour is strengthened because an unpleasant consequence is removed. For example, if a person with a phobia of lifts always takes the stairs, then they are constantly avoiding their phobia. This avoidance reduces the person’s feelings of anxiety and so negatively reinforces their behaviour, making the person more likely to repeat this behaviour (avoidance) in the future. As a result, a person will continue to avoid lifts and maintain their phobia.

Therefore, according to the two‐process model, phobias are initiated through classical conditioning (learning through association) and maintained through operant conditioning (negative reinforcement).

Evaluation

Research evidence supports the behavioural explanation of phobias. Watson & Rayner (1920) demonstrated the process of classical conditioning in the formation of a phobia in Little Albert, who was conditioned to fear white rats. This supports the idea that classical conditioning is involved in acquiring phobias in humans and that generalisation can occur to other phobic stimuli. However, since this was a case study, it is difficult to generalise the findings to other children or even adults due to the unique nature of the investigation.

Another strength of the behavioural explanation is its application to therapy. The behaviourist ideas have been used to develop treatments, including systematic desensitisation and flooding. Systematic desensitisation helps people to unlearn their fears, using the principles of classical conditioning, while flooding prevents people from avoiding their phobias and stops the negative reinforcement from taking place. Consequently, these therapies have been successfully used to treat people with phobias, providing further support for the effectiveness of the behaviourist explanation.

The behavioural explanation for the development of phobias ignores the role of cognition (thinking): phobias may develop as a result of irrational thinking, not just learning. For example, sufferers of claustrophobia (a fear of confined spaces) may think: ‘I am going to be trapped in this lift and suffocate’, which is an irrational thought that is not taken into consideration in the behaviourist explanation. Furthermore, the cognitive approach has also led to the development of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), a treatment which is said to be more successful than the behaviourist treatments.

There is a claim that the behavioural approach may not provide a complete explanation of phobias. For example, Bounton (2007) highlights the fact that evolutionary factors could play a role in phobias, especially if the avoidance of a particular stimulus (e.g. snakes) could have caused pain or even death to our ancestors. Consequently, evolutionary psychologists suggest that some phobias (e.g. snakes and heights) are not learned but are in fact innate, as such phobias acted as a survival mechanism for our ancestors. This innate predisposition to certain phobias is called biological preparedness (Seligman, 1971) and casts doubt on the two‐process model since it suggests that there is more to phobias than learning. 

Issues and debates

The behavioural explanation for the development of phobias has been criticised for being reductionist and overly simplistic in its reduction of human behaviour to a simple stimulus‐response association. It ignores the role of cognition (thinking) in the formation of phobias, and cognitive psychologists suggest that phobias may develop as a result of irrational thinking, not just learning. Therefore, it is also subject to environmental determinism in ignoring the role of individual free will in the formation of phobias. Not every person bitten by a dog develops a phobia of dogs, for example, so other processes must be at play.

The behavioural approach is a nomothetic approach that has created universal laws regarding the formation and maintenance of phobias. Yet, if we accept individual cognition plays a part, a more idiographic approach may be effective.

Possible exam questions

1. Adam is in his mid‐thirties and has had a phobia of clowns since one jumped up on him at a friends’ birthday party when he was a little boy. Red noses and face painting still cause Adam extreme anxiety today. He therefore avoids situations such as birthday parties, fancy dress events and theme parks if there might be clowns present. Explain how the behavioural approach might be used to explain Adam’s phobia of clowns. (4 marks)

2. Briefly describe the behavioural approach to explaining phobias and discuss one limitation of this. (6 marks)

3. Psychologists who subscribe to the behavioural approach of explaining human behaviour believe that all behaviour – normal and abnormal – is learned. Outline and evaluate how the behavioural approach explains phobias. (16 marks)