Specification:  Comparison of approaches.

The different approaches in psychology have been explored: behaviourist, social learning theory,

cognitive, biological, psychodynamic and humanistic. The requirements of the specification for A-Level are to be able to compare these approaches. One way to do this is to consider the similarities and differences in terms of several key debates in psychology including their stance on free will versus determinism, nature versus nurture, reductionism versus holism, whether they adopt an idiographic and/or nomothetic approach to research.

*While this section focuses on the issues and debates as a source of comparison; additional comparisons are evident in other parts of the specification. For example, in the Attachment topic, the learning theory of attachment and Bowlby’s theory of attachment are explored in relation to the nature versus nurture debate; in the Psychopathology topic, OCD is examined in relation to biological determinism; phobias in relation to environmental determinism and depression in relation to soft determinism, etc. This section will demonstrate how to compare each of the Approaches in Psychology to other approaches, using various issues and debates. The purpose of this section is to demonstrate the skill of comparison and how to use the issues and debates to make effective comparisons.

Comparison of The Biological Approach with The Humanistic Approach: Reductionism Versus Holism [Difference]

The biological and humanistic approaches differ in their methodology of examining and explaining human behaviour. The biological approach attempts to break human behaviour down into different structures and processes that occur at a biological level (e.g. the function of genes, hormones, neurotransmitters, etc.) and use these biological properties to explain human behaviour. The humanistic approach argues that

human behaviour should be explained at a holistic level and that the only way to understand human behaviour is to focus on all aspects of human experience. Humanistic psychologists strongly disagree with the idea of reductionism as they believe that reductionism simplifies the complex nature of human behaviour. Therefore, these two approaches radically differ in the extent to which they examine and explain human behaviour, with biological psychologists advocating a reductionist point of view and humanistic psychologists advocating a holistic point of view.

Comparison of The Behaviourist Approach with Social Learning Theory: Nature Versus Nurture [Similarity]

The behaviourist approach and social learning theory (SLT) are similar in their approach to explaining how human behaviour is shaped through reinforcement. A central tenet of operant conditioning (the behaviourist approach) is that of positive and negative reinforcement which serves to ensure that behaviour is repeated. Within SLT the notion of vicarious reinforcement is important for social learning to occur. So, whilst both approaches focus on different types of reinforcement, both recognise the importance of the environment (nurture) on human behaviour.

Comparison of Social Learning Theory with The Psychodynamic Approach: Free Will Versus Determinism [Difference]

SLT and the psychodynamic approach differ in the extent to which they claim that human behaviour is determined. The psychodynamic approach claims that behaviour is determined by unconscious drives and early childhood experiences, which is known as psychic determinism. SLT takes a softer view and claims that while behaviour is influenced by environmental forces (e.g. vicarious reinforcement), humans have personal responsibility and free choice, which is known as soft determinism. Therefore, these two approaches differ in their view about the extent to which humans have control over their own behaviour, with the psychodynamic approach advocating a harder view of determinism in comparison to SLT.

Comparison of The Cognitive Approach with The Psychodynamic Approach: Nomothetic Versus Idiographic Approaches [Similarity]

While the cognitive and psychodynamic approaches are different in many ways, they are similar in their methodology of examining and explaining human behaviour. The cognitive approach takes a nomothetic approach, generating theories (e.g. the multi-store model, the working memory model, etc.) to explain human behaviour. Furthermore, the cognitive approach makes uses of idiographic methods (e.g. case studies of Patient HM, KF, etc.) to provide evidence to support or refute cognitive theories. Likewise, the psychodynamic approach also takes a nomothetic approach, generating theories (e.g. psychosexual stages of development, theories of personality, etc.) to explain human behaviour, while also utilising idiographic methods (e.g. case studies of Little Hans, Rat Man, etc.) to provide evidence to support or refute psychodynamic theories. Therefore, while these approaches remain different in many ways, they both utilise nomothetic and idiographic approaches to explain and examine human behaviour.

Comparison of The Psychodynamic Approach with The Humanistic Approach: Free Will Versus Determinism [Difference]

The psychodynamic approach and humanistic approach are fundamentally different. One difference is the extent to which each approach claims that human behaviour is determined. The psychodynamic approach claims that behaviour is determined by unconscious drives and early childhood experiences, which is known as psychic determinism. The humanistic approach claims that humans have control over their own environment and are capable of change. Incidentally, the humanistic approach is the only approach that advocates complete free will. Therefore, these two approaches could not be more different in their view about the extent to which humans have control over their own behaviour.

Comparison of The Humanistic Approach with Social Learning Theory: Nature Versus Nurture [Similarity]

The humanistic approach and SLT are similar in their approach to explaining how human behaviour is shaped by the environment (nurture). From a humanistic approach, the individual strives within their environment to achieve self-actualisation. Within SLT, the notion of vicarious reinforcement is important for social learning to occur. So, whilst both approaches focus on different key contributors to shaping behaviour, both recognise the importance of nurture whereby the environment can influence the outcome of behaviour.

Possible exam questions

1. Briefly outline one similarity between social learning theory and any other approach in psychology. (2 marks)

2. Explain one way in which the behaviourist approach and the social learning approach in psychology are similar. (3 marks)

3. Briefly explain two similarities that exist between the humanistic approach in psychology and the psychodynamic approach to explaining human behaviour. (4 marks)

4. Briefly outline two differences between the behaviourist approach in psychology and the cognitive approach. (4 marks)

5. Outline two differences between the humanistic approach in psychology and the cognitive approach. (6 marks)

6. Critics of the humanistic approach claim it has little to offer psychology. Discuss the humanistic approach, referring to at least one other approach in your response. (16 marks)

7. Discuss what makes the psychodynamic approach unique in psychology with reference to other approaches in your response. (16 marks)

8. Describe the humanistic approach in psychology and discuss differences between this approach and the psychodynamic approach. (16 marks)

9. Outline the biological approach in psychology. Compare the biological approach to the behaviourist approach to explaining human behaviour. (16 marks)

10. Discuss social learning theory. In your response, draw comparisons with at least one other approach in psychology. (16 marks)

11. Describe the humanistic approach in psychology. Compare the humanistic approach with either the biological approach or the cognitive approach. (16 marks)

12. Describe and compare two approaches of your choice in psychology. (16 marks)