Dec 08, · Preparedness theory and Phobias. Suffering from a phobia can be a debilitating and distressing condition. Phobias induce physiological responses and can impact upon daily routines, inhibiting life experiences and opportunities. While more people are likely to have unpleasant experiences with non-biological stimuli there is research to suggest that phobias have a biological specificity i.e. An analysis of phobias using a more contemporary model of fear conditioning is proposed. In this view, phobias are seen as instances of highly "prepared" learning (Seligman, ). Such prepared learning is selective, highly resistant to extinction, probably noncognitive and can be acquired in one blogger.com by: 4 Furthermore, phobias, unlike laboratory fear conditioning, are often acquired in one trial and seem quite resistant to change by “cognitive” means. An analysis of phobias using a more contemporary model of fear conditioning is proposed. In this view, phobias are seen as instances of highly “prepared” learning (Seligman, ). Such prepared learning is selective, highly resistant to extinction, probably Cited by:
Preparedness and phobias
Suffering from a phobia can preparedness and phobias a debilitating and distressing condition. Phobias induce physiological responses and can impact upon daily routines, inhibiting life experiences and opportunities. While more people are likely to have unpleasant experiences with non-biological stimuli there is research to suggest that phobias have a biological specificity i. Science has attempted to understand two things in regards to phobias; which mechanisms activate a phobic response and how they can be treated.
Initial scientific evidence has explained the origin of phobias in terms of Pavlovian classical conditioning, identifying them as conditioned human responses Marks, Seligman, however, questioned differences between fears conditioned in the laboratory and phobias, and instead proposed a contemporary model of fear learning which he called preparedness theory.
According to preparedness theory, phobias are based in the evolutionary programming of humans and they are primed to respond to fear specific stimuli which threaten survival e.
spiders and snakes, preparedness and phobias. This essay will discuss classical conditioning, preparedness theory and the biological basis preparedness and phobias phobias as well as.
In addition this essay will examine contemporary research which outlines the status of preparedness theory today. Classical conditioning suggests that automatic reflexes, like blinking or salivation, can be conditioned to respond to any neutral stimulus Slater, While doing this he noted two things.
Firstly, that the dogs would often begin to salivate prior to the presentation of food and, secondly, preparedness and phobias this was a non-conscious behaviour. He quickly realized preparedness and phobias salivation was no longer due to an automatic, physiological process. Pavlov then investigated how these conditioned responses were learned. Through a series of experiments, he set out to provoke a conditioned response to a previously neutral stimulus.
He selected food as the unconditioned stimulus USa stimulus that naturally and automatically evokes a response. The ticking sound of a metronome was chosen to be the neutral stimulus, preparedness and phobias. First he exposed the dogs to the sound of the metronome, then immediately presented the food. After undertaking several trials, Pavlov recorded that the dogs began to salivate upon hearing the metronome.
Therefore, the previously neutral stimulus, preparedness and phobias, the metronome, had become a conditioned stimulus CS that then provoked the conditioned response CRsalivation Field, Thus, neutral stimuli could be conditioned similarly in both animals and humans McNally, This is called the equipotentiality premise.
Equipotentiality implies that a phobia of anything can develop provided that it is experienced in close association with a trauma Field, However, other studies suggest that phobia and fear is not random Marks, and is related to the survival of the human species and evolutionary association with danger and trauma Seligman, a phobia of chairs or flowers would be as likely to preparedness and phobias as one toward snakes or spiders.
Seligman explained this concept, stating that phobias can induce fear using classical conditioning methods such as the pairing of a tone with shock.
However, the conditioning of a phobia is not unprepared as that explained in classical conditioning; instead humans are prepared or genetically primed to the conditioning of fear related to the survival of humankind.
Similarly, Marks supports this premise identifying that, while fear of snakes is widespread in primates, preparedness and phobias, research shows that animals from the African plains do not react directly to predators, but use more subtle cues such as proximity and behavioural cues to identify danger. Ohman et al. as cited in McNally found that preparedness for fear changed in the life span of primates. They explained these findings by hypothesising that the relative dependency of younger monkeys upon older carers meant that they were more vulnerable to attack from predators thus preparing them for animal fears.
These differences include the ease of acquisition, high resistance to extinction, belongingness and irrationality McNally, In the laboratory, it was found that conditioning of fear usually required between three and six trials and was extinguished readily Seligman, Ease of acquisition contends that phobias can be developed with highly degraded input, in comparison to conditioned fear Marks, Resistance to extinction refers to the persistent nature of a phobia despite a lack of reinforcement or removal of reinforcement, preparedness and phobias.
Preparedness and phobias supports this as one of the most empirically robust components of preparedness theory. McNallyhowever, contended that clinical data refutes the idea of resistance to extinction. He cited the work of Foa and Kozak and Williams, Turner, and Peer to demonstrate that enough therapeutic exposure preparedness and phobias both prepared and unprepared phobias McNally, Belongingness contradicts the equipotentiality premise, identifying that some conditioned and unconditioned stimulus combinations are easier to learn preparedness and phobias others McNally, preparedness and phobias Phobias are believed to be non-cognitive and phobic fear is rarely inhibited by rational means, thus, when informing a phobic individual that they are not going to be harmed by the object of their phobia; their behaviour does not change Seligman, Typically a study involves non phobic human participants, preparedness and phobias, preparedness and phobias US mild electric shock and CS which are considered to be fear relevant e.
slides of spiders or snakes and fear irrelevant e. slides of mushrooms or flowers. Conditioning is usually indicated by the degree of difference in electrodermal activity. Through their research, preparedness and phobias, Ohman and Mineka proposed an evolved model of fear learning, preparedness and phobias, identifying four factors: activation occurs in aversive contexts by fear relevant stimuli with an evolutionary basis, automaticity, encapsulation and a neurobiological mechanism.
They suggest that the inability of humans to exert conscious cognitive control over their phobia, despite rational evidence of safety, is explained by encapsulation. Within their cognitive mechanism, Ohman and Mineka propose dual levels of learning in fear conditioning in which the amygdala is responsible for automatic emotional responses and, therefore, fear learning in human conditioning with fear relevant stimuli.
The hippocampus then controls the cognitive level of contingency learning where fear learning with fear-irrelevant stimuli occurs, although this is unemotional. Just as it is believed that some stimuli are more easily conditioned due to the salience of the stimulus, Cook et al. in their research. These findings imply that the tactile nature of the US used in experiments could be a determining factor in resistance to extinction of phobia, preparedness and phobias.
Lovibond, Siddle and Bond proposed that preparedness and phobias sensitisation is the result of encoding to elicit fear and that the potential to elicit fear is apparent only in particular conditions e.
In their research, Lovibond et al. Preparedness theory today continues be explored and refined. Marks suggested the concept of prepotency to preparedness, preparedness and phobias, which specifies that species selectively respond to particular stimuli, a predisposition further demonstrated in preparedness, where organisms also learn certain responses to particular stimuli Marks, For Marks, human survival has been contingent upon an ability to learn from encountered danger, providing associative explanations regarding the need for humans to respond to biological stimuli in order to survive Davey, supports the theory of learned associations underpinning the non-arbitrary distribution of phobias, but argues that this is the result, not of preparedness, but of cognitive biases.
Processing of frightening stimuli is biased in terms of an increased anticipation of aversive results from contact with the object, and this both creates and continues strong associations between the two Davey, preparedness and phobias, Neurological research is now being applied in an attempt to understand how cognitive mechanisms function in fear learning.
There is substantial evidence to support the preparedness view of fear acquisition and a premise in preparedness and phobias most phobias are associated with objects important in nature that have the potential to impinge upon the survival of the species Seligman, Thus, if the acquisition of phobias is species specific and has a basis in evolution, preparedness theory could also account for the high resistance to extinction which has been observed Seligman, December 8, in Events admin Comments are closed Preparedness theory and Phobias.
Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot. Premium Partner. Get help. Recommended Service, preparedness and phobias. Related posts: Pathological Irrational Fear Of Different Situations Psychology Essay Classical and operant conditioning Preparedness and phobias Of CBT For Social Phobias Strengths And Limitations Of CBT For Social Phobia Psychology Essay The Impact Of School Phobia On Education Psychology Essay Concepts and Theories of Classical Conditioning Ivan Pavlov Theory and Biography Social Phobia And Fear Of Public Speaking Psychology Essay Rescorla Wagner Learning Explaining reasons people might develop a specific phobia.
Previous Post The Stigma Associated With Mental Disorders Psychology Essay. Next Post The social sharing of emotion theory.
The Top 7 Most Common Phobias
, time: 9:56Phobias and Preparedness - Republished Article
Furthermore, phobias, unlike laboratory fear conditioning, are often acquired in one trial and seem quite resistant to change by “cognitive” means. An analysis of phobias using a more contemporary model of fear conditioning is proposed. In this view, phobias are seen as instances of highly “prepared” learning (Seligman, ). Such prepared learning is selective, highly resistant to extinction, probably Cited by: Dec 08, · Preparedness theory and Phobias. Suffering from a phobia can be a debilitating and distressing condition. Phobias induce physiological responses and can impact upon daily routines, inhibiting life experiences and opportunities. While more people are likely to have unpleasant experiences with non-biological stimuli there is research to suggest that phobias have a biological specificity i.e. preparedness to evolutionary origins, pointing out that the great majority of phobias are about objects of ecologi-cal importance to the survival of the species (e.g., fear of darkness, fear of dangerous animals such as snakes and spiders). Defining preparedness In his paper, Seligman wrote that a
No comments:
Post a Comment