OCR Psychology A Level Book 2 sample

Essay question Compare the behaviourist explanation of mental illness with one other alternative explanation from cognitive, humanistic, psychodynamic or cognitive neuroscience. [10] One similarity between the behaviourist and psychodynamic explanations is that they both focus on childhood as a key period for later developing mental illness. For example, behaviourism uses operant conditioning to explain how a child learns certain abnormal behaviours through reinforcement such as attention. In contrast, psychodynamic explanations focus on the effects that unconscious conflicts particularly during early childhood can have on the individual’s mental health as an adult. This shows that both explanations assume experiences during childhood are important in the aetiology of mental illness as an adult. One difference between the behaviourist and psychodynamic explanations of mental illness is the scientific rigour used in studies to support the explanations. Scientific rigour involves objective measures being taken and empirically testing the effect of the manipulated variable on the measured variable. For example, behaviourist studies of the development of mental illness tend to use well-controlled environments so that they can see the effect of some behavioural intervention on the development of abnormal behaviours. For example, Askew and Field (2007) conducted an empirical test of the effects of vicarious learning by showing children animals paired with grown-ups with scared or happy faces. Later the children showed a fear response to the animals paired with scared faces, demonstrating how phobias might be acquired through observing and imitating the reactions of adults to previously neutral objects. In contrast, psychodynamic explanations of mental illness can be criticised for lacking scientific rigour. There is a high risk of researcher bias because psychoanalysts are required to suggest interpretations for their client’s dreams during dream analysis. These interpretations may be biased towards prior assumptions made by the therapist and are therefore subjective. One further difference between behaviourist and psychodynamic explanations of mental illness is their stance on the nature–nurture debate. Behaviourists would argue that mental illness is due to nurture—we learn to develop mental illness much like we learn to develop any other behaviours, through interactions with our environment. This can be seen by Watson and Rayner’s research with Little Albert who was trained through the process of classical conditioning to acquire a phobia of rats. Behaviourist explanations do not support the role of nature. Conversely psychodynamic explanations acknowledge both nature and nurture, and so are more interactionist than behaviourist explanations. Psychodynamic explanations assume that all adults experience the three elements of personality (id, ego and superego) thereby supporting nativist explanations, but also that a successful balance of the three elements of personality depends on experience, such as being made to feel guilty for urges they have, therefore supporting nurture too. (About 425 words) Make it clear which other explanation you are going to be referring to at the start, as the student has done here. Each point in this essay follows a similar structure: (1) the similarity/ difference is stated, (2) the similarity/difference is applied to behaviourism and then (3) applied to a psychodynamic example. In paragraphs 2 and 3 note the use of connective words between the two explanations (‘in contrast’ and ‘conversely’). This is important so that it doesn’t just appear as a list of information about two different explanations. Try to use evidence to support your point wherever you can. The use of Watson and Rayner here adds to the point being made and clarifies it. What the mark scheme says… AO1 (5 marks) Reference is likely to be made to operant or classical conditioning, but any behaviourist explanation is creditworthy. The candidate may refer to disorders to elaborate on the explanation or they may use empirical evidence as elaboration of the explanation – both would be creditworthy. AO3 (5 marks) The injunction to ‘compare’ invites candidates to explore similarities and/or differences between the explanations. Points of comparison could be based around debates (e.g. usefulness, social sensitivity, reductionism/holism) or methodological issues such as the type of research supporting the explanation. However, other points of comparison can be expected (e.g. in relation to the area of psychology both explanations come from, or the sorts of treatment that they may lead to). To achieve top level (9–10 marks) … (See page 278 for full mark scheme.) • A good understanding of the key assumptions of both the behaviourist and either cognitive, humanistic, psychodynamic or cognitive neuroscience explanations of mental illness. Points of comparison (similarities and/or differences) are clearly identified and referenced appropriately to both explanations. There is a well-developed line of reasoning which is clear and logically structured. The information presented is relevant and substantiated. This answer is comfortably in the top band, fulfilling all of the criteria, and therefore would achieve 10 out of 10. Overall, this answer demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the explanations through reference to the key features of each explanation. Each point was clearly identified, and linked to both explanations. Empirical evidence was used appropriately to support the similarity or difference being discussed. The question does not ask for simple evaluation of the explanation or research and the answer avoids this common mistake. 53 Exam preparation: Questions, answers and comments