Last part of Abnormal Behaviour in Historical Context.

blogger ate up my previous post apparently. thank goodness i saved my post..
-----

As seen from the previous post, the psychoanalytic theory is indeed very broad. Whatever that was mentioned was probably only 10% of his entire theory. Go read Freud’s book if you are interested to know the other 90%. :X

Now we veer from the vague and unimaginable to something more logical and acceptable. The humanistic theory was the one of the main basis for Jung and Adler, the ex-followers of Freud. As personality theorists, they believed in the positive and optimistic side of human nature and that human being is innately geared towards self-actualization – the process in which people strive to achieve the highest potential against difficult life experiences. One of the underlying assumptions in this belief is that all of us have the freedom and free will to grow. Such an assumption, nevertheless, remains highly controversial and debatable (HEY Socrates, Plato and Aristotle!! Do we really have free will?!). Hence, to the humanists, psychological disorders are a result of road blocks and obstacles that impede our desire and behaviour to self-actualise.

Abraham Maslow postulated a hierarchy of needs, in describing the structure of personality. It follows a rough order of basic needs (at the bottom) for food and sex, social needs (friendship etc.), and then self actualization, love and self-esteem (at the top). He hypothesized that we cannot move up the hierarchy without satisfying the needs of the lower.

The most common humanistic therapy used today is the person-centered therapy, in which the client, rather than the therapist, primarily directs the course of discussion, seeking self-discovery and self-responsibility. The therapist gives unconditional positive regard for the client in which he/she completely accepts most of the client’s feelings and actions and empathises greatly with the client, understanding the individual’s particular view of the world. To the humanists, these are essential features to work effectively towards growth.

This therapy hinges on the importance of therapeutic relationships between therapist and client in facilitating human growth. Nonetheless, Maslow noted that such therapy is only more applicable among individuals without psychological disorders.

Lastly, we look into the behavioural model, which by far, is the most fascinating to me. Tonnes of experiments performed with respect to this model, which resulted in various ethical issues as well regarding the morality of the experiments (Then again, this is one of the biggest issues facing psychologists. Indeed, experiments to test and discover the human nature may seem immoral and unethical in many ways. However, if not for these unethical experiments, we wouldn’t have been enlightened with the various discoveries and theories associated with the mental process and behaviour and the field of psychology wouldn’t have developed thus far. Psychologist’s dilemma?).

The behavioural model gained a foothold with Ivan Pavlov’s classical conditioning. It involves the repeated pairing of a neutral stimulus (NS) with a unconditioned response (UCR). Afterwhich, the neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS), which can elicit the same response, which is now the conditioned response (CR). Playing piano to a cow? Let’s go into Pavlov’s actual experiment.

1) Food was presented to a dog. Dog salivated.
Food – Normal stimulus
Salivation – Unconditioned response (UCR)

2) Food was presented to the dog, this time, accompanied by a bell ring. Dog salivated again.
Bell – Neutral Stimulus (NR)
Salivation – Unconditioned response (UCR)

3) (2) was done repeatedly. After some time, no food was presented to the dog, only the ringing of the bell. Dog SALIVATED!
Bell – Conditioned stimulus (CS)
Salivation – Conditioned Response (CR)

When the ringing of bell was repeated WITHOUT presenting the food (pairing removed), after some time, the dog learned that the bell means nothing and hence, eliminates its conditioned response. This process is called extinction.

In conditioning, a phenomenon known as stimulus generalization can arise. For instance, you fall head over heels for kueh lapis (like me). But on a fateful day, you suffered from diarrhea after eating a few slices of it. You vomited and felt totally sick. From then on, the sight of kueh lapis makes you sick and nauseas. Whenever you see food that comes in layers (like tiramisu), you feel sick, because it resembles the kueh lapis. Even anything that looks yellow or brown can start making you sick. You begin to attribute kueh lapis and anything that looks, tastes, smells like it to the response of puking and feeling sick. Hence, stimulus generalization.

There are many other famous (and evil) experiments on classical conditioning, like John B. Watson and little Albert, and Mary Cover Jones and 2-year-old Peter, all of which contributed to the school of behaviourism. No time to type them out. If you’re really interested, try googling them or ask call, email, sms me. :X

Such an approach to the study of psychology is known as introspection, which involves systematic attempts to report thoughts and feelings that specific stimuli evoked.

One of the most successful and prevalent behaviour therapies is that of systematic desensitization. It aims at diminishing fear and hopefully eliminate phobias by gradual exposure to the feared stimulus paired with a positive coping experience, usually relaxation. A possible therapy I could try on my mum. People who know me would know what a cleanliness freak my mum is. So I could try to expose my mum to dirt and dust first, and ultimately, an outrageously dirty environment, preferably within home. And while she stares in horror and trauma, at every stage, I would then teach her relaxation exercises. By right, after some time, she should feel relaxed upon seeing dust and dirt (But seriously, do you really think it will work on my mum?? Benefit of doubt maybe).

Following classical conditioning was B. F. Skinner’s operant conditioning, which is a type of learning where behaviour changes as a function of what follows the behaviour (layman: giving incentives or not). Skinner’s theory was influenced by Thorndike’s law of effect, which states that behaviour is either strengthened or weakened depending on the consequences of that behaviour. He believed that the most effective way of developing a new behaviour is to positively reinforce desired behaviour, usually by means of a reward. For instance, my tutee is motivated to work hard for her psle this year because her mum promised her a handphone if she does well. Thus, her mum is practicing positive reinforcement here. On the contrary, punishment, in Skinner’s opinion, is ineffective in the long term.

Ever wondered how the parrots in the bird park could do mathematics and perform tricks? Credit goes to the process of shaping, which operates on the principle of operant conditioning. It is a process of reinforcing successive approximations to a final behaviour or set of behaviours. For example, if you want to make a parrot kick a ball, you guide it towards the ball by rewarding it with food whenever it takes a step closer towards the ball, till you get the desired act finally.

The behavioural model, though fascinating, is in itself, incomplete. It fails to account for biological, developmental (changes through life-span) and the subconscious factors that may cause a psychological disorder.

I think the last point of the summary in the textbook summarises it all nicely:

With the increasing sophistication of our scientific tools. And new knowledge from cognitive science, behavioural science and neuroscience, we now realize that no contribution of psychological disorders ever occurs in isolation. Our behaviour, both normal and abnormal, is a product of a continual interaction of psychological, biological and social influences.