Using two different psychological approaches explain one aspect of human behaviour

26/02/09 Lisa Thomas Access: Psychology

Using two different psychological approaches

explain one aspect of human behaviour

The six main approaches for human behaviour are Psychodynamic, Behaviourist, Physiological, Humanistic, Cognitive and Social. All of the approaches have their place in explaining different types of human behaviour, but it is improbable that any single approach can be used to determine all characteristics of a type of behaviour. However, when undertaking research and experiments, researchers typically focus on a single approach. One aspect of human behaviour which can be explained using these approaches is mental illness. According to NIMH (2005) mental illness is defined as a health condition that changes a person’s thinking, feelings, or behaviour (or all three) and causes the person distress and difficulty in functioning. Mental health illnesses are currently diagnosed using the DSM-IV-TR diagnostic assessment, which is an international Diagnostic and Statistics Manual of Mental Disorders. However, It is important not to confuse mental illness with mental disorders as they are separate classifications, even though they are diagnosed via the same manual, as the latter is primarily associated with neurological diseases (WHO 2007).

The Physiologists theory is that mental illness occurs as a result of a brain injury, a chemical imbalance or a genetic disorder. Due to the biological nature of this theory they primarily cure mental illness by prescribing drugs such as serotonin, to balance the chemicals within the brain, or in extreme cases brain surgery may be an option. Recent research has proven that there are definite links between depression and low serotonin levels, as well as other physical effects on the body such as low/high blood pressure and imbalances of specific hormone levels (Rice et al 2002, p.156). These effects can be measured using medical equipment and biological tests.

To support their theory that mental illness can be inherited, research was conducted to prove that genetics are a major factor in the predisposition to mental illness. One such study was conducted by McGuffin et al (1996), in which 177 sets of twins completed diagnostic assessments. The sample consisted of 68 monozygotic and 109 dizygotic same-sex co-twins of which one (from each set) had been previously diagnosed with a major depressive disorder. As monozygotic twins are developed from a single ovum, they share 100% of their genetic makeup, whereas dizygotic twins only share 50% of their genetic makeup. Therefore, researchers were able to compare the data to determine whether there was an increased risk of developing mental illness if they shared 100% of their genetic makeup. The results established that there is a considerable higher risk of developing mental illness in the monozygotic twins compared to the dizygotic twins. The experiment also concluded that there was no evidence that the sex or shared environments of the participants were factors (McGuffin et al 1996).

This is a preview of the whole essay

This study was qualitative and had high ecological validity as the data collected was a reflection of the participant’s inner feelings, thought and reaction processes (dependent variable), with regards to their everyday life and could not be influenced by the researcher. There were no ethical issues involved in this study, as all participants were volunteers and identities were kept confidential. One dispute would be that the sample used was not very representative as there was a higher ratio of dizygotic twins to monozygotic twins (independent variable). Additionally, the study may have provided evidence that genetics are responsible for the predisposition to mental illness, but it did not demonstrate evidence into the possible triggers of the illness, as many people with these genes do not necessarily go on to develop a mental illness. This suggests that there are other factors involved, which gives credence to Szasz’s (humanistic) hypothesis as he disputes that mental illnesses are biological diseases, but merely ‘problems in living’ and that disorders which have a biological cause should be identified as ‘neurologically impaired’ (Dwyer 1995, p.300). However, experiments such as this have provided researchers with valuable data and evidence, resulting in great advancements into treatments of mental illnesses.

A negative aspect of this theory is that it is deterministic, since it predetermines a person’s mental health without taking into account other factors. It is also reductionist as it rules out other influences or triggers in the deterioration of mental health. This can result in a patient not receiving the full treatment or therapy they require to completely recover. Conversely, determinism and reductionism can be useful when trying to find an underlying medical cause for a patient’s condition and determining how to treat them with medication or surgery. It also rules out the possibility of any bias surrounding the diagnosis of a patient.

Another explanation is the behaviourist approach which is, that all behaviour is learned via a process called conditioning. There are two types of conditioning, the first is classical conditioning which is learned by associating two stimuli (i.e. hearing a buzzing sound and being stung) and the second is operant conditioning which is negative or positive reinforcement (i.e. being punished for bad behaviour or rewarded for good behaviour). Behaviourists believe that mental illness occurs due to too much negative reinforcement or too little positive reinforcement (Rice et al 2002, p.164).

In 1920, Watson and Raynor performed a study to verify the behaviourist’s theory that classical conditioning is responsible for inciting a fear of a previously insignificant object. The case study participant was an infant named ‘Little Albert’, who had been reared in a hospital environment. During tests at 8 months of age, Albert was unresponsive to all stimuli, including rats, except for the banging on a suspended steel bar with a hammer. Watson and Raynor used this negative reinforcement to induce a fear of rats by striking the steel bar whenever Albert reached for the rat. Eventually, the rat was produced to Albert without the banging on the steel bar. However Albert now associated the two stimuli and became fearful of the rat. Watson and Raynor experimented with Albert further by using toy blocks to reduce his anxiety, but introducing the rat along with other stimuli, resulting in transference of his fear onto the other stimuli. Overall, Watson and Raynor did five variations of the experiment to fully test the theory, however they did not get the chance to re-condition little Albert to see if they could remove his fear using the same principles, as Albert was removed from the hospital. Nonetheless, research by Jones (1924) proved that it is possible to remove the fear using a treatment of systematic desensitisation (Bainbridge 2008, p.115-116).

The results proved that it is possible to induce fear to an object by associating the item with something negative. However, this study could be deemed misrepresentative as it was conducted on only one child and the only variable was the stimuli. As the infant was so young, it could be disputed that the evidence does not draw definite conclusions, owing to the fact that some of his behaviour could have been misinterpreted by the researcher, in favour of his desired outcomes. Additionally, due to his age, it is unlikely that demand characteristics had any impact on the results. The ecological validity, of the study, may be considered high, since the child had been brought up in a hospital environment, so it could be argued that it was indeed a natural setting for him. The study would be deemed unethical due to the fact that Albert may have suffered a permanent phobia to the stimuli presented during tests. Despite the limitations, this study was a valuable source of knowledge.

However, the behaviourists approach does not explain why some people develop mental illnesses and others do not, therefore suggesting that other factors may be involved, for example Freud (Psychodynamic) would claim that the mental illness occurred as a result of unresolved conflicts developed in childhood (Dwyer 1995, p.301). This approach is also reductionist and deterministic as it absolves the person from any responsibility, for example they can blame their parents for bad parenting. This approach has been useful in attempting to understand how mental illnesses can occur, thus being an important influence in the development of therapies.

All approaches have a valuable opinion on what causes or explains mental health, however it is evident that there is usually more than one approach at the root of the problem, as most of the approaches overlap or have a ‘knock on effect’. There are still many questions unanswered regarding mental health, because the mental health of humans is too complicated to explain with one approach and it is difficult to measure and test, unless it is a biological cause. For this reason, when effectively treating mental illness it is more beneficial to the patient to take into account different approaches rather than being reductionist, as other possible causes can be ruled out or included. Ultimately, patients usually need various forms of treatment, such as a combination of drugs and/or different methods of therapy to regain their mental health.

Bibliography

Bainbridge, A., Collier, W., Latham, S., Middleton, S., Saunders, B. (2008), OCR A2 psychology: Models of Abnormality (2008), Heinemann, Essex. p.115-116

Dwyer, D., Scampion, J. (1995) A Level Work Out Psychology (1995), Basingstoke, MacMillan Press Ltd. p.299-310

Eysenck, M.W. (1994) Perspectives on Psychology, Reprint (1995), East Sussex, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

., ., ., . (1996) Pubmed: Arch Gen Psychiatry: A hospital-based twin register of the heritability of DSM-IV unipolar depression, United States, American Medical Assn. [Online] 22 February 2009,

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8629888?dopt=Abstract

NIMH (2005) The Science of Mental Illness: NIH Curriculum Supplement Series Grades 6-8, Maryland, National Institute of Mental Health. [Online] 19 February 2009,

http://science-education.nih.gov/supplements/nih5/Mental/other/glossary.htm

Rice, D., Haralambos, M. (2000) Psychology in Focus: AS Level, Reprint (2002), Ormskirk, Causeway Press Ltd. p155-172

Wadeley, A., Birch, A., Malim, T. (1992) Perspectives in Psychology, 2nd Edition (1997), Basingstoke, MacMillan Press Ltd

WHO (2007) Features: Online Q&A: What are neurological diseases? World Health Organisation Publications. [Online] 3 March 2009,

http://www.who.int/features/qa/55/en/index.html

References