Using Cognitive-Behavioural Interventions - Essay Example

Behaviorism and Cognitive Perspectives Can Psychology be ified as a science and if so, what are the norms that must condition its use? This hasin essence been the crux of the behaviorist-cognitive debate, since the behaviorist insists that it is only external phenomena which can be observed and experimentally measured that can be deemed valid, while the cognitive perspective takes into account the internal consciousness and mental perspective of individuals also as a part of the scientific basis for psychology. While behaviorism emerged during an era where mankind was turning to science to provide answers to natural phenomena, it has faced criticism for its premise of rejecting phenomena ascribed to the consciousness. According to Broad, “…behaviorism in particular….are instances of the numerous class of theories which are so preposterously silly that only very learned men could have thought of them.” (Broad, 1923, p 17) Behaviorism emerged when psychology was beginning to be acknowledged as a science. The scientific validity of experiments to provide a hypothesis was evolving during this time and this experimental-verification approach was also applied to phenomena that involved human aspects. Behaviorism as a definite theory originated with a paper published in 1913 by John B. Watson titled “Psychology as the behaviorist views It” (Watson, 1913) and this document has been dubbed the behaviorist manifesto because it sets out the underlying principles that fashion this theory. The behaviorist theory aims to study and predict human behavior, and thereby devise means to control behavior. However the behaviorist theory aims to derive this theory on the basis of externally observed responses and does not make any provisions for internal interpretation, rather man’s behavior is only one aspect of the behaviorist’s study of the total scheme of things,. (Watson, 1913, p 158.). Behaviorism states that psychology in order to be eligible to be considered a science, can concern itself only with externally observable phenomena which can also be experimentally proven to be scientifically valid, therefore internal consciousness cannot form a part of behaviorism because it cannot be externally observed. Behaviorism therefore focused on the study of external behavior and Watson stated that it must develop methods for publicly observing behavior. Watson’s theory met with resistance from psychologists of the time, because it raised a basic conflict of whether psychology could be considered a science. Watson’s theory rejected then prevailing practices of psychologists which also took into account mental and individual aspects. Tichener pointed out the weakness in the behaviorist theory of insistence on externally observable phenomena as follows: “psychology deals with such things as perceptions, feelings, thoughts or we may say that psychology dealing “in some sort with the whole experience” is to be distinguished as “individualistic” from other sciences that are universalistic.” (Tichener, 1914, p 1). Tichener therefore pointed out that Watson’s theory was restrictive in requiring only one frame of reference – the observational method in science, which precluded many scientific phenomena which could be viewed from a different point of view – the reference frame of human consciousness. Behaviorism therefore totally excluded factors such as perceptions, feelings or thoughts which are vital in the study of the individual. Psychology by definition includes many aspects linked to human consciousness and an individual perspective, which cannot be eschewed if behavior is to be examined. The behaviorism debate did not prevent the evolution of cognitive theories where theories about behavior were set out without much regard for the principles of behaviorism that insisted on the phenomenon in question being scientifically valid only if it is was externally observable and verifiable. However, the debate was revived again in the 1930s by Skinner who proposed that certain words such as mind and consciousness be entirely eliminated from the language because they could not be strictly classified as scientifically observable phenomena.(Skinner 1953). According to Skinner’s portrayal of behaviorism, certain words needed to be eliminated, however when the need arose to deal with phenomena that could be attributed to the mind or to consciousness, they could be labeled separately by lumping them together into one common category named “behavior”. It ignored such phenomena on the grounds that they were not scientific. Skinner however, made a valuable contribution to behaviorism through the development of the operant response and the reinforcement theories (Skinner, 1969). The Cognitive perspective evolved in direct opposition to the shunning of the mental perspective in behaviorism. There was more value attributed to the conditioning forces in the environment as being factors shaping human behavior while the contribution of insight or internal consciousness was largely classified as non observable phenomena. Staddon and Simmelhag (2001) pointed out the inability of Skinner’s theory to explain certain recurring behavioral patterns that cannot be explained by the stimulus-response effect of adaptation of behavior. When Skinner’s reinforcement experiments were carried out by taking time intervals into consideration, inconsistencies developed in the response patterns that appeared to indicate that there was something greater than a pure adaptive response that was governing and conditioning behavior. This lends credence to the cognitive perspective which contends that human behavior cannot be attributed to be merely an external function but that any study of external behavior must also take into account, the internal consciousness and mental processes of the subject. Therefore the cognitive perspective advocated the incorporation of the “individual” perspective as a valid scientific phenomenon, despite the fact that it was not a universally observable one. The cognitive perspective took all mental phenomena into account in the study of psychology and human behavior, adjudging them to be separate phenomena which could be identified and therefore studied from a scientific perspective. The dilemma with behaviorism was the fact that it could provide no explanation for those incidents which only the individual experiencing them could observe. The need to examine words and to see where they could have derived from and rejecting them if they originated from the realm of the individual mind or consciousness was the greatest limitation identified in behaviorism. The recognition that the underlying cognitive element was an important aspect that was related to behavior assumed importance in the 1970s. Cognitive therapists are of the view that dysfunctional thinking is the root cause of mal adaptive behavior symptoms.(Ellis 1962; Beck 1976). The study of the thinking process and the role of this internal cognitive aspect has become especially important in observing aggressive behavior in school children for example, where such responses cannot be solely attributed to environmental factors associated with the manner in which the child is raised but may involve other internal cognitive aspects. Therefore, an application of the cognitive component has been found to be useful in introducing self regulation in aggressive students and has been more effective than purely behavioral controls. (Smith et al, 2005) The cognitive perspective applies the function of behavior as dependent upon two aspects of the thinking process (a) knowledge and (b) appraisal. The first stage of knowledge comprises the knowledge that a person possesses about how things work while the appraisal phase consists of the person’s own internal evaluation of how well he is able to utilize that knowledge to ensure his well being. The result of such appraisal will in turn determine an individual’s behavior and an appraisal that perceives a negative utilization of knowledge is likely to produce mal adjustment. The appraisal process can be conscious or unconscious, but may trigger emotions which will condition behavior. Freud has taken this further and also suggested that affects or the results of the appraisal process, may sometimes become disassociated from cognition (Freud 1915). Thus he suggests that behavior – especially dysfunctional behavior – cannot be understood merely by observation of external phenomena or merely at the level of the brain and neuroscience, but that the evidence relating to biological aspects of how human mental processes work should be integrated with psychological theories that have been proposed to explain that knowledge, so that the best possible explanation can be derived to explain human behavior.(Sperry 1982) Thus in conclusion, it may be noted that the behaviorist and cognitive theories represent two different phases in the psychological study of human behavior – one which focuses on externally observable and verifiable phenomena while the other ascribes importance to the internal cognitive element that affects the emotions and therefore directly, or indirectly influences behavior. Behaviorism was popular in the 1930s while cognitive elements have begun to surface since the 1970s. But modern trends appear to indicate a need to examine these two opposing perspectives in tandem. While the limitations of behaviorism have been repeatedly stressed, it is becoming obvious, as illustrated in the studies by Smith et al and Freud’s views, that a valid approach cannot ignore this perspective, just as a purely behaviorist approach will be severely limited and “preposterously silly” as Broad has observed. The behaviorist and cognitive aspects cannot exist exclusive of each other, rather it is only through an optimum combination of both methods that human behavior can be effectively studied. Biography: * Beck, A.T., 1976. Cognitive Therapy and the emotional disorders International Universities Press * Broad, C.D., 1923. “The mind and its place in nature” New York: Harcourt Brace. * Ellis, A, 1962. Reason and emotion in psychotherapy Lyle Stewart * Frued, Sigmund, 1957. The Unconscious In Stratchley, J, edn,. The standard edition of the complete works of Sigmund Freud Vol 14, pp 159-215. Hogarth Press * Skinner, B.F., 1953. Science and Human behavior New York: Macmillan Co. * Skinner, B.F., 1969. Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis New York: Appleton-Century Crofts. * Smith, Stephen W, Lochman, John E and Daunic, Ann P, 2005. Managing Aggression: using cognitive behavioral interventions: State of the practice and future directions Behavioral Disorders, May 2005, 30(3), pp 227-241 * Sperry, R., 1982. Bridging Science and Values: A unifying view of mind and brain In Eccles, J. edn Mind and brain: the many faceted problems pp 126-145 Paragon House. * Staddon, J.E.R. and Simmelhag, V, 1971. The superstition experiment: A reexamination of its implications for the principles of adaptive behavior Psychological Review, 78, pp 3-48 * Tichener, E.B., 1914. On “psychology as the behaviorist views it” Proceedings of the American philosophical Society 53, pp 1-17 * Watson, J.B., 1913. ”Psychology as the behaviorist views it” Psychological review 20, pp 158-177 Read More