WJEC advanced information

• Therapy: Explain main components and evaluate effectiveness and ethical considerations.

• Classical evidence: Explain methodology, procedures, findings, conclusions and evaluate these, and additional ethical considerations.

• Approach: Evaluate the approaches strengths and weaknesses, and compare to the four other approaches.

Cognitive approach assumptions

These are assumptions made about human behaviour. As human thought is unable to be measured, it is investigated using introspection, where a person describes tasks they are performing and how it makes them feel.

Internal mental processes

These are cognitive processes that make sense of the world around us. External stimuli is taken in through our five sense, and internal stimuli is sensations such as hunger and thirst. These are an automatic processes, that after a performing them throughout life become muscle memory. People can also adjust to certain extreme stimuli, such as strong smells losing their strength over time. We each have our own personal interpretations of these stimuli, known as our perception. Examples of these processes are:

• Language processes - understanding sounds and communication

• Attention - honing in on certain important stimuli

• Memory - recalling relevant information

Computer analogy

This shows how our brains process information. Input (external or internal stimuli) - process (perception) = output (behaviour). An example of this is the multistore model of memory, by Atkinson and Shiffrin. This shows how we store memory based on the computer analogy. Environmental stimuli is stored as sensory memory lasts a few seconds, and is only stored if a person pays attention to it, normally if this is abnormal sensory information. It then moves into short term memory, which lasts longer but will fade without rehearsal/revision. This moves it to long term memory, and it becomes short term memory when retrieval is required.

Schemas

Schemas are organised packets of information, that are built up over time through experience and information, and stored in our long term memory. This includes facts and opinions. These do not always represent reality, as they are mainly built off personal experiences. This makes them susceptible to bias, e.g a nurse schema usually involves a woman.

Relationship formation

The cognitive approach tells us how people’s thoughts cause them to form relationships.

• The halo effect (Dion et al) tells us that if a person is perceived as physically attractive we are likely to assume they have other positive qualities, causing us to be more likely to form a relationship with them.

  • An example of this a study performed by Dion et al where participants were asked to rank three people based on their photographs in many categories, such as happiness and career success. It found that those more attractive were ranked highly across all categories.

• Self-schemas are how we perceive ourselves, which leads us to believe we can only be with people on our level. People with a low self esteem may settle for worse relationships, as they believe that is all they deserve or able to get.

• Relationship schemas are also important. If we only have negative relationship experience, we may not want to get in another relationship. Alternatively, those who have been in abusive relationships may be likely to enter another as this is how they believe relationships to be.

• The matching hypothesis (Walster et al) tells us that people wish to date those who they match with in many conditions, such as attractiveness, personality, intelligence and money. This is most noticeable with attractiveness, as it is the first thing people notice about others.

  • An example is a study performed by Walster et al, known as the computer match dance. Students were ranked on attractiveness, and then told to fill in a questionnaire to be paired with someone similar to them. However, partners were randomly selected, and then asked to rate their partner during an intermission. Those with a high attractiveness rating were more critical with their partners, and those paired with highly attractive people were likely to be happier with their date. This shows that people were able to recognise people on their level of attractiveness, and expect a partner on this same level.

Therapy: Rational Emotive Behavioural Therapy

Application of cognitive assumptions

• The cognitive approach shows on how thoughts influence feelings, which is what the creator of this therapy, Albert Ellis, focuses on. Thoughts and their causes are what the therapist will focus on discussing, as well as changing these thoughts to encourage positive thinking.

• Another focus overwriting schemas relating to the self or the world around the room. They challenge these schemas.

Main principles of REBT

The ABC model

• This model is a way of identifying irrational thoughts in order to help deal with them.

• Activating event - an event which causes feelings of anxiety and distress. These are real events and cause genuine emotions. For example, a friend doesn’t respond to a text.

• Beliefs - irrational beliefs that come as a consequence of these thoughts. For example, that person doesn’t like you and no one else does.

• Consequences - altered future behaviour due to this interaction. For example, avoiding starting social interactions.

DE extension

• Disputing beliefs - this is the process of acting to replace negative thoughts. There are many types of this:

  • Logical disputing - self-defeating beliefs do not follow logically from available information

  • Empirical disputing - self-defeating beliefs are not consistent with reality

  • Pragmatic disputing - self-defeating beliefs are useless

• Effects of disputing - this is when a person moves from irrational to rational thinking, therefore having healthier interpretations and not easily catastrophizing. This will improve a client’s mental health, and their self-schemas.

Musturbatory thinking

• This is believed to be the source of irrational thoughts, the belief that certain assumptions of reality must become true for an individual to be happy. Three key ones were identified:

  • I must be approved by those I find important.

  • I must do well, or I am worthless.

  • The world must give me happiness, or I will die.

• Additional ones include:

  • People must treat me fairly and meet my needs, or they are horrid

  • People must live up to my expectations.

• These thoughts cause major disappointment and distress in those that hold them. People do not feel upset after failing a test due to this simple act, but due to the assumptions they have over their success. The only way to attain mental health is to challenge and disrupt these beliefs.

Unconditional positive regard

• Another key component of REBT is convincing a client of their intrinsic value as a human being, no matter their successes and failings.

  • This is because feelings of worthlessness make a client less committed to self-improvement, as they see no point.

  • This is achieved by a therapist unconditionally providing respect and appreciation to the client, no matter what they say or do. This will help the client feel important and valuable.

Effectiveness evaluation

Research evidence

• In a meta analysis by Engels et al, REBT was found to be an effective treatment for many different types of disorders, including social phobia.

• Ellis claimed a 90% success rate based on 27 sessions.

• Silverman et al reviewed 89 studies in to REBT effectiveness, finding it ot be more effective or equal to other therapies for a wide range of disorders:

  • 40 studies finding no difference between REBT and other treatments.

  • 49 studies finding REBT more effective than other treatments.

Appropriateness

• REBT is useful for both clinical and non-clinical patients - for those with diagnosable disorders and those with specific issues such as exam stress.

Not always suitable

• Ellis himself pointed out many of REBT's issues.

  • People may lie about whether they follow the principles, causing the therapy to be ineffective.

  • People do not want to involve themselves in the cognitive effort required for recovery, preferring to simply share their issues.

Irrational environments

• Irrational environments are environments that cause irrational thoughts, e.g an abusive partner or mean boss.

  • As these reinforce irrational thoughts, it is difficult for the client to change their own mindset, limiting the effectiveness of REBT.

Ethical evaluation

Client distress

• REBT can be quite forceful, as therapist may have to use confrontational methods to challenge the client’s thinking. This can cause unnecessary anxiety for the client.

Rational vs irrational

• Another issue is the problem of who decides whether a thought is irrational. While a client may be convinced a thought is irrational, such as believing they aren’t well-liked, it may be a true thought.

  • Alloy and Abramson investigated depressive realism, a phenomenon where depressed people are more likely to accurately interpret reality, whereas normal people distort things in a positive way. They found depressed people were more likely to correctly estimate the likelihood of disaster than non-depressed people.

  • This is also known as the sadder but wiser effect.

• Issues can also arise with religious client’s, as the therapist may see their Godly beliefs as irrational while the client disagrees.

Classical evidence

Introduction

• Loftus and Palmer were investigating the accuracy of eyewitness testimony.

• They focused on one of the main causes of inaccurate testimony - leading questions, either by lawyers or police that can alter someone’s information on an event

• They decided to investigate how leading questions affect people’s estimates of speed, mainly due to how poorly people already estimate speed, believing it would show the effects of leading questions better.

Methodology

• There was two experiments, conducted in a laboratory setting with an independent groups design. The experiment involved completely different groups:

  • Experiment one had 45 student participating. They were split into five groups of nine.

  • Experiment two had 150 students participating. For this, they were split into three groups of fifty.

Overview

Experiment one

• Participants were shown seven film clips of different traffic accidents, clips ranging from 5-30 seconds. The clips originated from a driver safety film.

• After these clips, participants were given a questionnaire on the accident they had just seen, with the most important question.

• This question was ‘about how fast were the cars going when they _____ each other‘, with five different words used in the gap, with the answers given in mph. These words were:

  • hit

  • smashed

  • collided

  • bumped

  • contacted

• They found smashed (40.8) estimated a higher speed than contacted (31.8)

• An acronym to remember this is SCBHC.

Experiment two

• Participants were shown a film of a multiple car collision, which lasted less than 4 seconds.

• They were given a questionnaire which included the leading question, this time with only three different options:

  • ‘How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?’

  • ‘How fast were the cars going when they smashed hit into each other?’

  • The control group, who weren’t asked this question.

• Two weeks later, the participants returned and were asked further questions about the accident. The critical question that all participants received was ‘did you see any broken glass‘. The correct answer was no.

• Participants followed the trends of the first experiment, with higher speed estimates given to those in the smashed group than those in the hit and control.

Conclusions

• These findings show the influence of leading questions, with Loftus and Palmer proposing two explanations:

  • Response-bias factor - different speed estimates are caused due to the critical changed word which biases their answers.

  • Altered memory representation - the critical word alters a person’s memory of an incident entirely, altering the perception of the accident to be more serious.

• The second theory is more likely, as the participants associate ‘smashed’ with a more serious crash, therefore change their memory to include broken glass. Serious accidents generate expectations about damage and speed, which participants mirrored. This shows verbal labels cause a shift in the way information is presented in memory, becoming more in line with the verbal label.

Experimental evaluation

Controlled experiment

• The experiment was highly controlled due to its laboratory setting, making manipulation of the independent variable easier. It also proves a causal effect on the dependent variable, therefore allowing for a causal conclusion. This control eliminated any confounding variables, ruling out other factors influencing the results.

Ecological validity

• This study lacks ecological validity, as it is not the same as witnessing a real accident. People may be unbothered watching a video, where as emotional arousal is peaked when witnessing a real accident due to emotions such as fear.

• Proof of this is Foster et al, which showed that if participants believed they were watching a real life robbery, their identification of the robber would be more accurate.

• Yuille and Cutshall also showed that witnesses to a real armed robbery sustained accurate reports four months after the event, despite two misleading questions from the researcher.

Sample

• All participants in this study were US college students, and other people may be less prone to the effects of leading questions, perhaps due to age difference.

• This is due to source monitoring, where an eyewitness acquires information from two sources, their own observations and subsequent experiments.

  • Schacter et al has shown that elderly people have difficulty remembering the sources of information, even though the information is remembered perfectly. This means they are more prone to misleading information when giving testimony.

Ethical evaluation

Lack of informed consent

• Loftus and Palmer did not inform the participants of the aims of the study, which may have affected their behaviour. Likely, awareness of the leading question would have lead to more careful responses. Therefore, informing them of the aims would have not providing useful insight, as real eyewitness testimony doesn’t have warnings.

• For this reason, the deception is considered acceptable due to the importance of the research, which had a large effect on eyewitness testimony consideration.

• Participants may see the deception as mild, as they were not psychologically or physically harmed as a result and the truth of the study wouldn’t have caused them to refuse to take part.

Psychological harm

• An ethical issue that may have arised is the psychological harm of showing participants a real accident, as this may have caused distress and long-lasting harm. This is unlikely to be removed even with a debrief. Therefore, the study used film clips even though it lost ecological validity.

Alternative evidence

• Another experiment by Loftus involved giving college students who visited Disneyland as a child misleading advertising material that included either Ariel (who was not introduced at the time of their visit), Bugs (not a part of Disney) or a control group.

• They were then asked of their own Disneyland visit, with those given information on Ariel or Bugs more likely to report shaking hands with these characters.

DINOSAUR Evaluation

Determinism < free will

• The cognitive approach falls more into the free will category, as REBT and CBT focus on changing thoughts in order to make change. There is no consideration of biological factors infringing a person’s ability to change their lives.

• A criticism of this is the lack of consideration for the long lasting effects of trauma, which can ingrain these irrational thoughts in a person’s head. It also ignores mental illnesses which inhibit free will, such as eating and mood disorders.

• A positive is the belief that people can overcome their past and move on, a belief that allows for recovery instead of believing people can never move on.

Idiographic < nomothetic

• The cognitive approach is overall nomothetic, as it has general rules for behaviour, such as internal mental processes and the computer analogy. This allows for generalisation.

• However, cognitive therapies do focus on individuals and their personal irrational thoughts, which makes the therapy quite effective.

Nature = nurture

• Cognitive psychology fails to recognise the importance of these factors in human behaviours. For example, genes influence on intelligence and culture’s impact on childhood development have been ignored.

Other approaches

Behaviourist

• Both nomothetic, determinist, nurture.

• Schemas are experience based and influence our responses, which supports behaviourist thinking.

• Cognitive focuses on internal thinking while behaviourist focuses on observable behaviour.

Biological

• Biological is more determinist and nature.

• Both are reductionist, nomothetic, scientific and have successful therapies.

• Both focus on internal processes, and the brain.

Psychodynamic

• Both nomothetic, equally nature vs nurture and have successful therapies.

• Cognitive is more scientific and reductionist.

Positive

• Both focus on free will to change thinking via therapies.

• Positive is less scientific.

• Cognitive is more reductionist and nomothetic.

Scientific > non-scientific

• This approach has many objective and controlled research that supports it, including recent brain scanning techniques to investigate how the brain records long and short term memory.

• Cognitive neuroscience is a component of the cognitive approach, a field dedicated to pinpointing the biological mechanisms responsible for different cognitive processes. This allows researchers to discover what different parts of the body are responsible for.

• This has allowed to causal relationships between emotions, cognitions and behaviours to be effectively predicted.

Applications

• CBT and REBT are effective therapies that have helped many people.

• It has been influential in developmental psychology, for example Piaget theorised children cannot think in the abstract and therefore require concrete showings. This has effected the primary school curriculum, leading teachers to use items such as sticks to represent counting to children.

• Memory research has been expanded, such as Loftus’ investigation into eyewitness testimony. This led to the abolishment of leading questions during police interviews.

Unique to the approach

• The focus on the processes between stimulus and response is a major advantage. These mediational processes, such as perception and memory, affect our response the world around us.

  • This explains practical elements of human behaviour, and can help improve these processes, such as memory improval from retrieval cues.

• This approach has been critised as mechanistic, as human behaviour is viewed as computer like. It ignores many factors, such as social and emotional factors that influence actions and decisions.

  • Emotions are major factors in decision making, unlike computers, making a mechanical mindset ignorant of this factor.

  • While cognitive therapies focus on changing thoughts, they ignore the causes of these issues, such as social or environmental situations. For example, a person may have depression due to bullying which does not stop due to changes in thinking.

Reductionism > holism

• This approach is more reductionist, as behaviour is narrowed down to computer-like and doesn’t consider individual circumstances.

• However, the therapies are holistic as they look at a person’s thoughts and how they personally can improve their mindsets.