comparison of approaches

compare operant conditioning and social learning theory

1. both assume that human development is a consequence of nurture; babies are born as ‘blank slates upon which experience writes’; both suggest that behaviour is a result of learned associations and reinforcement/punishment; social learning involves meditational processes (cognition) and operant conditioning does not

2. operant conditioning assumes a hard determinism position, that all behaviour is environmentally determined by external influences that we are unable to control (environmental determinism); social learning assumes a soft determinism position, that as well as being influenced by our environment cognitive factors can mediate learning, we also exert some influence upon it through the behaviours we choose to perform (reciprocal determinism)

3. operant conditioning takes a reductionist approach to the study of behaviour by breaking complex actions into the simplest observable actions of the stimulus and the response; social learning is less reductionist because it allows for cognitive factors to mediate this learning

compare humanistic and psychodynamic approach

1. determinism – the humanistic approach assumes people have free choice over their behaviour, whereas the psychodynamic approach assumes that behaviour is determined by unconscious factors (beyond conscious control)

2. nature/nurture – the humanistic approach assumes behaviour is affected by desire to self-actualise (nature) and our experience can provide barriers to this through conditions of worth and varying experience of conditional positive regard (nurture). Likewise, the psychodynamic approach assumes behaviour is driven by unconscious forces, eg id/ego/superego dynamics (nature) but our coping mechanisms such as defence mechanisms arise from experience (nurture)

3. methodology – both are much less scientific than other approaches (but the psychodynamic approach assumes that some aspects of behaviour can be investigated scientifically)

4. therapy – Rogers believed that counselling (utilising unconditional positive regard) can be used to help clients solve their problems, overcome conditions of worth and enable their potential for self-actualisation, whereas Freud believed that psychoanalysis can lead to improvements in clients through psychotherapy.

compare cognitive and behaviourist approach

Focus – the cognitive approach studies internal mental processes such as memory and thinking, whereas the behaviourist approach focuses only on observable behaviour

Determinism – the cognitive approach assumes soft determinism, as people can choose their responses, whereas the behaviourist approach is environmentally deterministic

Methodology – both use scientific methods, but behaviourists rely heavily on controlled lab experiments, whereas cognitive psychologists often use inference to study mental processes

Application – cognitive psychology has led to cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), whereas behaviourism has led to behaviour modification techniques such as systematic desensitisation

compare biological and cognitive approach

Level of explanation – the biological approach explains behaviour in terms of genes and brain chemistry, whereas the cognitive approach explains behaviour in terms of mental processes

Determinism – the biological approach is biologically deterministic, whereas the cognitive approach assumes soft determinism

Reductionism – the biological approach is highly reductionist, reducing behaviour to biological components, whereas the cognitive approach is less reductionist as it includes mental processes

Methodology – both are scientific and use controlled methods, such as brain scanning in biology and experiments in cognitive psychology

compare biological and behaviourist

Nature vs nurture – the biological approach emphasises nature, whereas the behaviourist approach emphasises nurture

Determinism – the biological approach assumes biological determinism, whereas the behaviourist approach assumes environmental determinism

Methodology – both approaches use scientific methods and controlled experiments

Reductionism – both are reductionist, but biology reduces behaviour to biological processes, whereas behaviourism reduces behaviour to stimulus–response links

compare humanistic and behaviourist

Determinism – the humanistic approach emphasises free will, whereas the behaviourist approach is environmentally deterministic

Holism vs reductionism – the humanistic approach is holistic, whereas the behaviourist approach is reductionist

Methodology – the humanistic approach rejects scientific methods, whereas the behaviourist approach relies on controlled experiments

Application – humanistic psychology led to client-centred therapy, whereas behaviourism led to therapies such as systematic desensitisation

compare psychodynamic and behaviourist

Determinism – both approaches are deterministic, but psychodynamic theory focuses on unconscious determinism, whereas behaviourism focuses on environmental determinism

Nature vs nurture – the psychodynamic approach emphasises innate drives but also early experience, whereas the behaviourist approach focuses entirely on nurture

Methodology – the psychodynamic approach uses case studies, whereas the behaviourist approach uses controlled laboratory experiments

Application – psychodynamic psychology led to psychoanalysis, whereas behaviourism led to behaviour modification therapies

compare humanistic and cognitive approach

Free will vs determinism – the humanistic approach emphasises free will, whereas the cognitive approach assumes soft determinism

Methodology – the humanistic approach rejects scientific methods, whereas the cognitive approach uses controlled experiments

Focus – the humanistic approach focuses on personal growth and self-actualisation, whereas the cognitive approach focuses on mental processes

Application – the humanistic approach led to client-centred therapy, whereas the cognitive approach led to CBT