Model Exam Response - Abnormal Psychology (DP IB Psychology)

A sociocultural explanation of the etiology of abnormal psychology assumes that external factors influence the onset/development of abnormal behaviour. Sociocultural factors which may influence the etiology of disorders include culture, learning and conditioning. Sociocultural factors can, however, only explain the etiology of disorders to a certain extent: the role of genetics and thought processes also provide viable explanations of how disorders develop. Research by Watson & Rayner (1920) and DiNardo (1988) will be considered in terms of the extent to which Behaviourism (both classical and operant conditioning) provide valid explanations of the etiology of phobias.

The wording of the exam question is used which shows Focus on the question. There is an explanation of sociocultural factors which shows Knowledge & Understanding. The command term is referred to explicitly which tells the examiner that the student has understood what is required of them (Focus). Relevant Research is cited so that the examiner knows what to expect in the essay plus the student has identified the sociocultural factor of conditioning/learning as the key area of focus in the essay (Focus; Knowledge & Understanding). The paragraph is clear, coherent and grammatical (Clarity & Organisation) with effective use of terminology.

The core assumptions and mechanisms of Behaviorism are (in summary): only observable behaviour can be measured: human beings are born as ‘blank slates’; behaviour can be conditioned via classical conditioning and operant conditioning; learning and experience are key factors in behaviour. Classical conditioning is learning by association (a neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus/response). Operant conditioning involves the role of learning via consequences (positive reinforcement by rewards; negative reinforcement by avoidance). The behaviourist approach is an ideal vehicle by which to understand the etiology of phobias with its emphasis on structured processes and learned responses so the extent of its usefulness seems promising.

Behaviourism is explained (Focus) in some detail (Knowledge & Understanding). The command term is referred to (indirectly) in the final sentence of the paragraph (Focus). The paragraph is clear, coherent and grammatical (Clarity & Organisation) with effective use of terminology.

Classical conditioning forms the first phase of the Two-Process Model, suggested by Mowrer (1960). The TPM takes, as its basis, the idea that behaviour is learned through experience via environmental stimuli (classical conditioning) and once the behaviour has been established it is reinforced via operant conditioning. This concept would explain the etiology of phobias as there are countless phobias which do not seem to be explicable in terms of the potential threat they pose to people e.g. button phobias. Button phobia (koumpounophobia) must, it seems, be the result of conditioning i.e. the phobic person had an adverse experience involving buttons and has been conditioned to fear them. To some extent this is a valid explanation but what classical conditioning cannot explain is how some fears may be as a result of biological factors such as preparedness. A fear of snakes or fire would seem to be an evolutionary advantage when it comes to survival as both of these stimuli can harm or even kill a person.

Classical conditioning is explained in light of a relevant model (Knowledge & Understanding) and the question is addressed directly i.e. the etiology of phobias is cited. The paragraph then develops this idea and expands on it to introduce Critical Thinking in terms of an alternative explanation for phobias. The command term is explicitly addressed (Focus). The paragraph is clear, coherent and grammatical (Clarity & Organisation) with effective use of terminology.

One study which used classical conditioning to instil a phobia into a young child was Watson & Rayner’s (notorious) 1920 study commonly known as the ‘Little Albert’ study. This study used the mechanisms of classical conditioning to condition fear of rats (which generalised to fear of all fur-covered objects) into an 11-month-old baby. The pairing of the neutral stimulus of the rat with the loud, discordant striking of a metal bar behind the boy’s head produced a conditioned response i.e. the boy developed a rat phobia as a result of being conditioned to do so. In short, the study was successful in its aim but, at a cost i.e. the ethical violations present in the study mean that it cannot ever be replicated to check for reliability. To this extent the study lacks usefulness and applicability and as it was a case study of one child the data cannot be generalised to the conditioning of all phobias and to a wider population.

The use of Research to expand on and support a sociocultural etiology of phobias. Study detail is used (Knowledge & Understanding). Critical Thinking is used to challenge the extent of the usefulness of the study, linked to ethics and replication. The response demonstrates a good use of ethical issues as it does not simply state that the procedure is unethical, it extends the argument.The command term is explicitly addressed (Focus). The paragraph is clear, coherent and grammatical (Clarity & Organisation) with effective use of terminology.

Operant conditioning forms the second phase of the Two-Process Model, the mechanisms via which the phobia is maintained. One study which investigated whether phobia of dogs was maintained via the mechanisms of operant conditioning is DiNardo (1988). Via the use of structured interviews the researcher sought to determine the extent to which participants with a dog phobia harboured feelings of fear about the possible consequences of encountering a dog. The results support the TPM to some extent as very few of the non-phobic participants believed that any future encounter with a dog would result in fear whereas the dog-phobic participants expressed an exaggerated fear of physical harm linked to possible future encounters with a dog. These findings may explain to some extent how operant conditioning maintains an established phobia but they are based solely on participants self-reporting their experiences with dogs and their anticipated fear, both of which may be subject to misremembering, social desirability bias or researcher bias (i.e. the researcher may have behaved in a way which suggested what the ‘correct’ answers should be).

The use of Research to expand on and support a sociocultural etiology of phobias. Study detail is used (Knowledge & Understanding). Critical Thinking is used to challenge the extent of the validity of the study in terms of different types of bias that could have interfered with the findings. The command term is explicitly addressed (Focus). The paragraph is clear, coherent and grammatical (Clarity & Organisation) with effective use of terminology.

While the sociocultural explanation of the etiology of phobias goes some way towards providing a valid explanation of the topic its very emphasis on external factors only means that it is limited in its scope. One biological theory of phobias which is based on evolutionary survival mechanisms (preparedness) also provides a compelling account of humans as being ‘hard-wired’ to fear dangerous stimuli in order to keep them safe e.g. an innate fear of snakes (Ohman et al., 1975). The cognitive explanation of Generalised Anxiety Disorder is equally convincing as an explanation of phobia etiology with its emphasis on irrational thought processes, cognitive distortions and panic as the foundations of phobia origination.

The student considers other, alternative explanations for the etiology of phobias as part of their Critical Thinking which also includes wider Knowledge & Understanding of the topic and cites another piece of Research. The command term is explicitly addressed (Focus). The paragraph is clear, coherent and grammatical (Clarity & Organisation) with effective use of terminology.

To conclude, a sociocultural explanation of the etiology of a disorder such as a phobia is most suited to a behaviourist approach with its emphasis on phobic responses which are learned and maintained via the mechanisms of conditioning (the TPMl). The sociocultural explanation of the etiology of disorders can, however, only go so far in providing a valid and convincing account of how phobias develop and, once developed, how they continue to exist. What the behaviourist approach fails to account for is the existence of pre-existing phobias as a result of preparedness and to the role of irrational thought processes in phobia development. It also fails to account for adverse experiences linked to specific stimuli which do not develop into phobias. So, in summation, sociocultural influences on the etiology of phobias is to some extent valid but it should be used in conjunction with other explanations in order to provide a fuller picture of abnormal psychology.   976 words

The essay comes to a conclusion, reflecting on what has been covered and returning to the demands of the question (Focus). Critical Thinking explores the limitations of sociocultural influences and points out what this approach does not account for. The command term is explicitly addressed (Focus). The paragraph is clear, coherent and grammatical (Clarity & Organisation) with effective use of terminology.

Why would an examiner give this model answer top marks?

• It is fully focused on the question at all times

• It does not go ‘off on a tangent’ by including off-topic, irrelevant or superfluous detail

• It is concise, there is no ‘waffle’ and it uses key terminology throughout

• Research is used in a way which adds value to the response i.e. it is not a ‘shopping list’ of ‘everything I know about this topic/theory/study’ (what some teachers call a ‘knowledge vomit’, sorry for the gross imagery)

• It picks key critical thinking/evaluation points

• Critical thinking is not simply an evaluation of research, it is an appraisal of the question as a whole

• Each paragraph is composed of a topic sentence which is then expanded on, with examples