The behavioural approach to explaining phobias

Classical conditioning and operant conditioning

• Mowrer argued that phobias are learned by classical conditioning and maintained by operant conditioning.
• Classical conditioning - learning to asssociate something we didn't have a fear with at first (NS) with something (UCS) that already triggers fear response (UCR).
• NS becomes CS (conditioned stimulus) producing fear (CR- conditioned response). This could explain how being bitten by a dog (UCS) which causes pain/fear (UCR) could lead to a fear of dogs. The dog is a neutral stimulus which becomes a CS causing a CR of fear following the bite.

Watson and Raynor showed how a fear of rats could be conditioned in a boy called 'Little Albert'.

• Before conditioning: Whenever Albert played with a white rat, a loud frightening noise was made close to his ear. The noise caused a fear response (UCS). The rat (NS) did not create fear until the bang and the rat had been paired together several times.
• After conditioning: Albert showed a fear response (CR) every time he came into contact with the rat (CS). 
• The fear is generalised to other stimuli, e.g. Little Albert was fearful of other white furry objects including a fur coat and a Santa Claus mask.

Maintenance by operant conditioning in terms of negative reinforcement

• Operant conditioning takes place when our behaviour is reinforced or punished. Both positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement increase the frequency of behaviour.

In the case of negative reinforcement an individual produces behaviour that avoids something unpleasant.

• When a phobic avoids the phobic stimulus they successfully escape the fear and anxiety that would have been experienced.
• This reduction in fear negatively reinforces the avoidance behaviour and the phobia is maintained.

An example of how negative reinforcement maintains a phobia:

• If someone has a morbid fear of clowns (coulrophobia) they will avoid circuses and other situations where they may encounter clowns. The relief felt from avoiding clowns negatively reinforces the phobia and ensures it is maintained rather than confronted.

One strength of the two- process model is that it has good explanatory power

The two- process model was a definite step forward when it was proposed as it went beyond Watson and Rayner's concept of simple classical conditioning explanation of phobias.

• It explains how phobias are maintained over time and this has important implications for therapy. Once a patient is prevented from practising their avoidance behaviour, the phobic behaviour declines.
• The application to therapy is a strength of the two-process model.

There are alternative explanations for avoidance behaviour

In more complex behaviours like agoraphobia, there is evidence that at least some avoidance behaviour is motivated more by positive feelings of safety.

• This explains why some agoraphobics are able to leave their house with a trusted friend with relatively little anxiety, but not alone (Buck 2010).
• This is a problem for the two-process model, which suggests that avoidance is motivated by anxiety reduction.

The model is an incomplete explanation of phobias

Even if we accept that classical and operant conditioning are involved in the development and maintenance of phobias, there are aspects of phobia behaviour that require further explaining.

• E.g. We easily acquire phobias of things that were a source of danger in our evolutionary past, e.g. a fear of snakes or the dark. This is the theory of biological preparedness - we are innately prepared to fear some things more than others.
• Biological preparedness is a serious probelm for the two-process model as it shows there is more to acquiring phobias than simple conditioning.

One limitation is that some phobias don't follow trauma

Sometimes phobias appear following a bad experience and it is easy to see how they could be the result of conditioning

• However, sometimes people develop a phobia and are not aware of having a related bad experience, for example, very few snake phobics have ever had a traumatic experience with a venomous snake!
• Phobias in the absence of trauma may be better explained by biological preparedness than the two-process model.