Behaviourist Principles and Maladaptive Behaviour - Essay Example

?Behaviourists explain maladaptive behaviour in terms of learning principles that sustain and maintain it. DISCUSS this ment and show how a behaviourist's approach to therapy is in stark contrast to a psychoanalytic one. Introduction The problem of maladaptive behaviour has been one of the central areas of research in Abnormal Psychology, and a maladaptive behaviour refers to a trait in human being which does not help to be adaptive. Significantly, maladaptive behaviour is an indication of the level of abnormality or mental dysfunction in a human being. There are several factors influencing an individual’s abnormal or maladaptive behaviour and the psychological theories differ considerably in the way each of them explain maladaptive behaviour. In the wider perspective, maladaptive behaviour has been discussed from different viewpoints such as biological, psychological, and socio-cultural perspectives, and these viewpoints stress the significance of causal factors of this behaviour. Significantly, the Freudian psychoanalytic theory is the oldest psychological point of view about maladaptive behaviour and it was, for a long time, preoccupied with principles regarding libidinal energies and their suppression. Later on, the behaviourist theorists also came with their viewpoints about maladaptive behaviour and they formulated several principles to explain this characteristic in human beings. “The behavioural perspective focuses on the role of learning in human behaviour and attributes maladaptive behaviour either to failure to learn appropriate behaviour or to the learning of maladaptive behaviours. Adherents of the behavioural viewpoint attempt to alter maladaptive behaviour by extinguishing it and/or providing training in new, more adaptive behaviours.” (Carson, Butcher, Mineka, and Hooley, 2000, P. 105). Therefore, it is fundamental to comprehend that maladaptive behaviour is explained by different psychological schools in different ways. For example, Behaviourists explain maladaptive behaviour in terms of learning principles that sustain and maintain it. This paper makes a reflective exploration of the behaviourist principles concerning maladaptive behaviour in order to maintain that the behaviourist’s approach therapy is in stark contrast to a psychoanalytic (Freudian) approach. PART ONE: Behaviourist Principles and Maladaptive Behaviour The behaviourist approach to abnormality deals with maladaptive behaviour and its basic causes. According to this approach, the maladaptive forms of behaviour that have been learnt by an individual are the basic causes of mental disorders. In other words, the behaviourist viewpoint of abnormality maintains that the learning process in human behaviour plays a significant role in the acquisition of maladaptive behaviour. The Behaviourists argue that mental disorders are due to “a complex of learned, inappropriate behaviours, or the absence of appropriate behaviour sequences. In the first instance, behaviour is termed ‘maladaptive’… Further, the rules of acquisition of maladaptive behaviour are no different than the rules of acquisition of adaptive sequences.” (Medcof, Emslie, Roth, 1979, P. 264). In their provocative explanation of abnormal behaviour, the behaviourists emphasizes on how a particular maladaptive sequence is learned, because they believe that the maladaptive behaviour can be removed only by comprehending the specific conditions underlying the behaviour. Thus, the behaviourist approach makes use of the learning theory which incorporates the theories of classical conditioning and operant conditioning. In a reflective exploration of the behavioural model of abnormality, it becomes lucid that this psychological theory emphasizes the role of learning in the acquisition of maladaptive behaviour. In other words, the behaviourists maintain that the human actions are determined mainly by the life experiences of the individuals, and the role of the unconscious forces or the underlying forces is largely limited. According to the behavioural model, abnormality is caused by the development of behaviour patterns that are “established through classical and operant conditioning, or through social learning, that are considered maladaptive for the individual. Most learned behaviours are adaptive, helping people to lead happy and productive lives, but maladaptive (and therefore undesirable) behaviours can be acquired in the same way.” (Cardwell and Flanagan, 2005, P. 138). Therefore, it is fundamental to realize that behaviourists believe that the acquisition of maladaptive behaviours follow the same principles as that of the adaptive behaviours. The behaviourist model about abnormality maintains that abnormal behaviour can be changed by altering maladaptive thinking in human beings and by improving their capabilities to solve issues and to plan behavioural change. The most significant assumptions of the behavioural model concerning the causes of abnormality are: abnormal behaviours are learned through conditioning, only behaviour is important, the principles of maladaptive behaviours apply to human as well as non-human animal behaviour. First of all, it holds that every type of human behaviour is learned through experience, and conditioning plays a crucial role in the acquisition of abnormal behaviours. “Abnormal behaviour is no different from normal behaviour. We can use the principles of classical and operant conditioning to explain all behaviour. This includes the concepts of association and reinforcement.” (Cardwell and Flanagan, 2005, P. 138). Secondly, behavioural model about the causes of abnormality assumes that the mind is a pointless concept and only behaviour is important in realizing maladaptive behaviour and abnormality. In other words, the behaviourists argue that explaining behaviour in terms of observable factors is fundamental, and there is no point in thinking about mental illness because the concept of mind is unnecessary. Thirdly, the behavioural model holds that the principles of maladaptive behaviours apply to human and non-human animal behaviour. Based on the principles of evolution, the behaviourists purport that all animals are formed from the same basic units and the same laws concerning the acquisition of behaviour apply to both human and non-human beings. “‘Higher’ animals just have more of them and this leads to more complex combinations – but the same basic laws apply. This means that it is reasonable to conduct research on non-human animals, like rats and pigeons, and make generalisations to human behaviour.” (Cardwell and Flanagan, 2005, P. 138). One of the major focuses of the behavioural model in relation to abnormality has been the treatment of maladaptive behaviours and it has been relatively successful in this attempt. Understanding the causes of maladaptive behaviours central in its treatment, and the main focus of behaviourist principles, as aforementioned, has been in comprehending them. According to the behaviourists, abnormal behaviour should be realized mainly as socially maladaptive or deficient behaviour, and involvement of mind is not a factor. In a profound analysis of the behaviourist principles concerning the treatment of maladaptive behaviours, it becomes palpable that they emphasise the diagnosis of the environmental circumstances that maintain and reinforce maladaptive behaviours, although they may acknowledge diagnosis of an individual. “Once an understanding of the environmental circumstances surrounding maladaptive behaviours are discovered, a program of extinction can be developed. Behavioural modification therapists have treated sexual inadequacy, hysterical blindness, phobias, stuttering, hyperactivity, alcoholism, mutism, self-mutilation, hypochondria, and anorexia nervosa (psychological loss of appetite).” (Medcof, Emslie, Roth, 1979, P. 265). Therefore, it is essential to realize that the behavioural therapy for the treatment of maladaptive behaviour has made significant results and progress, and it makes use of different approaches to alleviate maladaptive behaviour. In the first approach, the behaviourists apply the principles of positive and negative social reinforcement as well as the applied reinforcement principles. This theoretical approach maintains that a clinician employs behaviour therapy, regardless of what he thinks about it. In the second approach, the development and use of specific behaviour modification, and, so, it is a more pragmatic and applied model. Significantly, the resulting techniques incorporates “behaviour elimination methods (desensitization and aversive learning), and behaviour formation methods (selective positive reinforcement and token economy). All these treatment techniques have certain elements in common. The therapist must be aware of the maladaptive behaviours in very specific terms.” (Medcof, Emslie, Roth, 1979, P. 265-6). Therefore, identifying maladaptive behaviours is central to the behaviourist model for treatment of these behaviours. In a profound investigation of the main behaviourist principles related to maladaptive behaviour, certain criticisms levelled against this approach cannot be ignored. In the first place, it is essential to realize that this approach in psychology has been widely accepted as scientific and testable. Due to the simplicity of behaviourist model, it is easy to conduct research to test how association and rewards influence behaviour in human beings. Various experimental studies in this connection to maladaptive behaviour have proved how abnormal or maladaptive behaviour can be learned. However, the major criticism against this model is that it cannot account for all human behaviours. The studies in this area maintain that learning theory can give an explanation for some aspects of normal and maladaptive behaviours, such as phobia of dogs after being bitten (classical conditioning). “However, much of human behaviour is more complex than this… The way we think about things affects our experiences. Behaviourism disregards thoughts and emotions, and is not a complete explanation of human behaviour.” (Cardwell and Flanagan, 2005, P. 138). Another major criticism of the behaviourist model is that the symptoms are not the real cause of maladaptive behaviour and the actual cause of the disorder may be disregarded. Thus, behaviourist model fails to deal with some pertinent aspects of maladaptive behaviour. PART TWO: Maladaptive Behaviour: Comparison of the Behavioural Approach with the Freudian Psychoanalytic Approach The various psychosocial perspectives on human behaviour, such as psychodynamic, behavioural, and cognitive-behavioural, make pertinent contribution to the understanding of maladaptive behaviour. Each of these psychosocial perspectives varies from others in its central principles concerning how maladaptive behaviour happens in human life and the treatment for dealing with such behavioural issues. However, it is fundamental to realize that none of these psychosocial perspectives alone can give a reason for the complex variety of human maladaptive behaviours. “Because different causal perspectives influence which components of maladaptive behaviour the observer focuses on, each perspective depends on generalizations from limited observations and research.” (Carson, Butcher, Mineka, and Hooley, 2000, P. 87). For example, there is marked difference among the psychosocial perspectives on the fundamental reasons for a complex disorder in human beings such as the consumption of alcohol or drugs. Thus, the behavioural perspective of the disorder emphasises the defective learning of habits to diminish stress and the environmental conditions as the cause of the disorder. On the other hand, the more traditional psychodynamic point of view highlights the intra-psychic conflict and anxiety in the individual as the reason for the disorder, whereas “the more recent interpersonal variant on the psychodynamic perspective focuses on difficulties on a person’s past and present relationships that contribute to drinking.” (Carson, Butcher, Mineka, and Hooley, 2000, P. 87). Therefore, it is evident that the different psychosocial perspectives differ drastically from each other on the subject of how human beings acquire maladaptive behaviour, and the perspective selected for the treatment of a particular disorder has immense consequences on the result of the treatment. In other words, the choice of a particular psychosocial perspective influences the perception of maladaptive behaviour. In a profound investigation of the various psychodynamic therapies for maladaptive behaviour, it becomes lucid that, among the various psychotherapeutic approaches, the psychodynamic treatments are the earliest method of dealing with such behavioural patterns. Significantly, the historical roots of psychodynamic treatments can be traced in the psychoanalytic theory by Sigmund Freud, although his followers later modified this theory as well as the techniques. In other words, Freudian psychoanalytic theory has been the oldest psychosocial viewpoint on maladaptive behaviour, and this approach originally focused on the explanation of such behaviours based on the principles of libidinal energies and their repression. It is fundamental to realise that “the psychodynamic principles underlying Freud’s approach continue to exert a major influence today. Psychodynamic approaches have in common a focus on internal conflicts and unconscious factors that underlie maladaptive behaviour.” (Passer and Smith, 2006, P. 575). Sigmund Freud developed an important theory of personality as well as a specific approach to treatment, and both of the theory and the approach are suggested by the term psychoanalysis. Freudian psychoanalysis can be realized as a system of therapy which is based on the theories of personality developed by Freud and the main “goal of psychoanalysis is to help clients achieve insight, the conscious awareness of the psychodynamics that underlie the problems. Such awareness permits clients to adjust their behaviour to their current life situations, rather than repeating the maladaptive routines learned in childhood.” (Passer and Smith, 2006, P. 575). Although it is difficult to describe the Freudian psychoanalysis, it is fundamental to identify the four basic techniques of this therapy, i.e. free association, analysis of dreams, analysis of resistance, and analysis of transference. Free association is an important technique in this therapy, wherein the individual narrates everything that comes to his mind. Freudians believe that it is possible to analyse the running account by the individual and to make interpretations of the behavioural patterns, although the account may seem random. By the technique of free association, the Freudian therapist attempts to explore the contents of the preconscious thoroughly. “Analytic interpretation involves a therapist’s tying together a client’s often disconnected ideas, beliefs, and actions into meaningful explanations to help the client gain insight into the relationship between his or her maladaptive behaviour and the repressed (unconscious) events and fantasies that drive it.” (Carson, Butcher, Mineka, and Hooley, 2000, P. 631). In an attempt to compare and contrast the behavioural approach with the psychoanalytic (Freudian) approach concerning abnormality, one realises that these approaches differ drastically in their theoretical principles as well as therapeutic techniques. Traditional Freudian psychoanalysis attempted to deal with maladaptive behaviours on the basis of the analytic interpretations by the technique of free association. Significantly, this theoretical perspective inspired many offshoots in the later period and new therapeutic interventions were introduced lately. Later on, the Behaviour therapists focused on changing maladaptive behaviours by the employment of the principles of classical conditioning, operant conditioning, etc. Thus, the theoretical principles of both the psychosocial perspectives differ considerably. However, there has been a prominent view among the behaviourists that the behavioural theory can go hand in hand with Freudian psychoanalysis. “Psychoanalysis dominated clinical psychology and psychiatry at the same time that behaviourism was at its apex in experimental psychology. In fact, there were attempts by behaviourists, most notably by John Dollard and Neal Miller, to show that behavioural theory is compatible with Freudian psychoanalysis.” (Pear, 2007, P. 115). To point out the connection between psychoanalytic and behavioural approaches to maladaptive behaviour, it may be noted that the “psychoanalytic, behavioural, and cognitive approaches, are in part derived from the thinking of Freud…” (Weiner, 1992, P. 350). Conclusion A comprehensive analysis of the factors influencing maladaptive behaviour in human beings confirms that there are several psychosocial perspectives which deal with this issue and these are based on certain sound theoretical principles. Significantly, the behavioural approach and the Freudian psychoanalytic approach are two essential theoretical perspectives which attempt to analyse the question how human beings acquire maladaptive behaviour. Both these approaches, based on their distinctive psychosocial perspectives, figure out the differing reasons for the maladaptive behaviour of human beings, and ultimately seek to come up with effective therapeutic treatment to deal with this behavioural disorder. Essentially, both the approaches come up with pertinent assumptions about the nature of the maladaptive behaviour. On the one hand, the Freudian psychoanalytic approach focuses on making analytic interpretations, by way of the technique of free association, and helps the clients achieve insight, so that they can “adjust their behaviour to their current life situations, rather than repeating the maladaptive routines learned in childhood.” (Passer and Smith, 2006, P. 575). On the other hand, the Behaviour therapists argue that the maladaptive behaviours are caused by the learned, improper behaviours, and they attempt to alter such behaviours by the employment of the principles of classical conditioning, operant conditioning, etc. Bibliography CARDWELL, Mike and FLANAGAN, Cara. (2005). Psychology AS: The Complete Companion. Nelson Thornes. P. 138. CARSON, Robert C., BUTCHER, James N., MINEKA, Susan., and HOOLEY, Jill M. (2000). Abnormal Psychology and Modern Life, 13/e. New Delhi: Pearson Education India. P. 105. MEDCOF, John., EMSLIE, Gordon R., ROTH, John. (1979). Approaches to Psychology. London: Routledge. P. 264. PASSER, Michael W. and SMITH, Ronald E. (2006). Psychology. New York: Tata McGraw-Hill. P. 575. PEAR, Joseph. (2007). A Historical and Contemporary Look at Psychological Systems. London: Routledge. P. 115. WEINER, Bernard. (1992). Human Motivation: Metaphors, Theories, and Research. SAGE. P. 350. Read More