cognitive and positive approach

simmilarity - successfully appliedto real world

POINT

• Both Positive Psychology and the Cognitive approach have strong real‑world applications, improving well‑being, mental health, and societal outcomes.

EVIDENCE

Positive Psychology

• Used across work, education, and health.

• Mindfulness delivered via apps (Headspace) and formal therapy (MBCT).

• Mental Health Foundation (2010): mindfulness improves depression + well‑being.

• Schools/workplaces use PP interventions, especially post‑COVID.

Cognitive Approach

• Eyewitness Testimony:

  • Loftus & Palmer → memory is reconstructive → explains false IDs.

  • Innocence Project: 69–75% of 375+ DNA‑overturned cases involved mistaken eyewitness ID.

• Therapies (CBT/REBT):

• Widely used in the NHS.

• Effective for depression, schizophrenia.

• Works by challenging irrational thoughts → improves emotions + behaviour.

STRENGTH / WEAKNESS

• Strength (shared):

• Strong real‑world success → high practical value + societal impact.

• Supports the validity of both approaches.

similairty - interactionalist

POINT

• Both Positive Psychology and the Cognitive approach take an interactionist view, recognising that behaviour is shaped by both nature and nurture.

EVIDENCE

Positive Psychology

• Happiness influenced by genetics + environment + intentional actions.

• Lyubomirsky et al. (2005):

  • 50% genetics

  • 10% circumstances

  • 40% intentional activities

• Seligman (PERMA) + Myers & Diener → relationships and social context matter.

Cognitive Approach

• Mental processes shaped by innate abilities (e.g., language acquisition).

• But also shaped by environmental input → schemas develop through experience.

• Interaction between biological predispositions and learning.

STRENGTH / WEAKNESS

• Strength (shared):

  • Interactionist → more balanced and realistic than single‑factor explanations.

• Weakness (shared):

• Can still underestimate wider social/cultural influences.

If you want, I can now condense this into a single paragraph for a 16‑marker or move to the next similarity/difference.

difference - determinsitc v free will

POINT

• Cognitive = soft determinism (behaviour shaped by internal mental processes like schemas, but some free will through conscious thought).

• Positive Psychology = strong free will (people can intentionally choose behaviours that increase well‑being).

EVIDENCE

Cognitive Approach

• Behaviour influenced by schemas → mental frameworks guiding perception and behaviour.

• Schemas shaped by experience, social interactions, media, but can be consciously changed.

• CBT/REBT: individuals challenge irrational thoughts using thought diaries → shows limited free will within cognitive constraints.

Positive Psychology

• Humans have free will to develop strengths and improve well‑being.

• Mindfulness increases awareness → enables intentional choices in behaviour and emotion regulation.

• PP acknowledges some biological influence but emphasises personal agency.

• Held (2002): free‑will focus risks self‑blame; ignores structural factors like poverty or trauma.

STRENGTH / WEAKNESS

Cognitive

• Strength: Led to effective therapies (CBT/REBT).

• Weakness: Schema‑based determinism may reduce personal responsibility.

Positive Psychology

• Strength: Empowering — encourages self‑directed change.

• Weakness: Can be individualistic; may blame people for circumstances beyond their control.

reductionist v hollistic

• Positive Psychology = holistic, explaining well‑being through multiple interacting factors.

• Cognitive Approach = reductionist, explaining behaviour mainly through internal mental processes.

EVIDENCE

Positive Psychology (Holistic)

• Well‑being shaped by biological + social + intentional factors.

• Concepts like flow involve many interacting elements (skills, challenge, motivation).

• Holism gives a fuller, realistic understanding of complex experiences like happiness.

Cognitive Approach (Reductionist)

• Behaviour explained by schemas, memory, biases.

• Example: gambling → cognitive biases (ignores social/financial factors).

• Scientific strength: cognitive processes can be isolated and measured (e.g., Loftus & Palmer).

• But ignores biological and social influences (e.g., MAOA‑L gene, SLT).

STRENGTH / WEAKNESS

Positive Psychology

• Strength: Holistic → more complete explanation of well‑being.

• Weakness: Harder to isolate causes → research and interventions less precise.

Cognitive Approach

• Strength: Reductionism allows scientific control and testability.

• Weakness: Oversimplifies behaviour → ignores complexity