AQA A Unit 5 Approaches

I always use the behavioural approach, I find you can fit it into almost any situation! xxxx

Reply 4

evil groove

Clarence

With the approaches....just learn 3 off by heart and away you go waheyyy!!!

I would just like to ask you how you are so sure that learning three will be enough?

Reply 5

Because they always only ask for two explanations so if you learn three you have a choice of which ones to use :smile:

I don't know how many I'm going to learn. I've done a lot of approaches practice questions already and I've mastered the jist of doing them but I need to revise the approaches. I think I'll do Biological, Behavioural, Psychodynamic and Evolutionary. Your'll all be surprised as to how much you know without having to revise. Many of the approaches youve learnt already throughout AS and A2.. especially if you are doing question 15 on PYA4 on evolutionary explanations of human mental disorders

Em xxxx

Reply 6

evil groove

Em444

Because they always only ask for two explanations so if you learn three you have a choice of which ones to use :smile:

I don't know how many I'm going to learn. I've done a lot of approaches practice questions already and I've mastered the jist of doing them but I need to revise the approaches. I think I'll do Biological, Behavioural, Psychodynamic and Evolutionary. Your'll all be surprised as to how much you know without having to revise. Many of the approaches youve learnt already throughout AS and A2.. especially if you are doing question 15 on PYA4 on evolutionary explanations of human mental disorders

Em xxxx

Sounds sensible enough. I think I'll learn the same 4 as you. Psychodynamic is memorable enough; biological is great alone because you can mention things like the galvanic skin response; evolutionary can be a nice in depth approach, good for the second half of the question; and behavioural is quite easy, but necessary, I believe.

Reply 7

scorpy66

Mushu

Do you think it's possible to explain any stimulus material they gave you with the behavourial approach? Just wondering :rolleyes:

Yes, definitely! For operant conditioning, don't forget negative reinforcement (what is being avoided by the behaviour shown) as well as positive reinforcement (broadly, what is being gained) and punishment. Remember also that classical conditioning really only applies to reflex, not voluntary, behaviours (e.g. Pavlov, Little Albert).

If you expand your definition of behaviourism to include Social Learning Theory (perfectly acceptable to the examiners) you can include all of the above PLUS the principles of observational learning (specific imitation, disihnibition, vicarious reinforcement & identification) as well as a load of cognitive factors, such as attention, retention, and Bandura's later two additions - reciprocal determinism and self efficacy.

Don't worry if you haven't covered all of the above, you couldn't possibly fit every single one of these concepts in, in any case, but I just wanted to point out what a deep well this approach is to draw from to help with this question.

Psychodynamic is my other favourite, if you have done the Social & Personality Development in Unit 4, covering the psychosexual stages and associated, fixated adult personality traits - it is nearly always the case that one of these characteristics features in the stimulus material.

Reply 8

scorpy66

Remember also that classical conditioning really only applies to reflex, not voluntary, behaviours (e.g. Pavlov, Little Albert).

Sorry to sound so stupid but if your given a scenario like someone who has an obsession with computer games/cuddly toys or something along those lines, could you say that the person has learnt an association between the computer games/cuddly toy (CS) and happiness/comfort (UCR)? or am i just confused? :eek:

Reply 9

monty mike

fairygirl21

Sorry to sound so stupid but if your given a scenario like someone who has an obsession with computer games/cuddly toys or something along those lines, could you say that the person has learnt an association between the computer games/cuddly toy (CS) and happiness/comfort (UCR)? or am i just confused? :eek:

An obsession? Well, the key would be in finding out how they developed the obsession (could be a number of ways). But yes, you seem to understand the principles :wink:

Reply 10

monty mike

An obsession? Well, the key would be in finding out how they developed the obsession (could be a number of ways). But yes, you seem to understand the principles :wink:

oh sorry, obsession might have been the wrong word. er more like playing computer games continuously throughout the day. :smile:

Reply 11

scorpy66

From http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~psyc101/pomerantz/Psyc101Week06.pdf

Differences between Classical and Operant conditioning:
• Classical starts with a reflex, Operant does not.
• The response in classical conditioning is a reflex that is elicited, whereas
the response in operant conditioning is voluntary and is emitted
• Classical involves learning a pairing between two events, CS and US,
whereas Operant involves learning a pairing between an action and a
consequence.
• Loosely speaking, Classical involves learning what stimulus follows
another stimulus (food follows bell) whereas Operation involves learning
what stimulus follows a response (food follows lever press)

Another really good site (Powerpoint) is http://www.dc-marion.ohio-state.edu/~dchristie/Learning.ppt

So with classical conditioning you have to start with a reflex response (UCR) which is naturally elicited by a stimulus (UCS). A neutral stimulus (CS) when paired with the UCS can then, through association, come to elicit the same reflex response (CS). Little Albert and Pavlov's dogs are classic examples - loud noise > fear, rat + loud noice > fear, rat > fear. In both cases the response (fear, salivation) is reflex - the dogs can't help drooling, for example!

Playing computer games is a voluntary behaviour much more easily explained by operant conditioning, e.g. play game > excitement/adrenaline/reward of winning > game playing behaviour is stengthened. Or excessive game playing could be a result of negative reinforcement for other behaviours, i.e. avoidance behaviour.

I think it's harder to explain via classical conditioning... what is the starting UCS & UCR, that game playing can then become associated with as the neutral CS?

Reply 12

scorpy66

I think it's harder to explain via classical conditioning... what is the starting UCS & UCR, that game playing can then become associated with as the neutral CS?

thats where i get confused.
so the UCS is the computer game..and then the UCR could be happiness
but then i don't really know what the CS could be..perhaps the computer screen? or is that taking it out of proportion?
and then the CS (computer screen) leads to the UCR (happiness)?
i think that might be a bit far fetched though..

Reply 13

i still think that you could write a sentance in your paragraph and say how the person could associate, through classical conditioning, playing the computer games with whatever the scenario is. i dont think it will do any harm. you obviously wont get your 6 marks for just that but if your writing about operant conditioning and the whole reward/adrenaline/reinforcement thing then a sentance saying about classical conditioning wont do any harm.

ive done quite a few practice q's and have often written about classical conditioning but havent gone into detail about all the CS, UCS, CR, UCR etc. because its only worth 6 marks and if your writing other things about the behavioural, e.g. operant conditioning, modelling etc.. then i dont think its necessary to go into that much depth.

obviously though, if you can write stuff like that then its great.. but dont drive yourself crazy about not knowing which parts of the scenario are the UCS, CS, UCR, CR etc.

like for the billy scenario in june 2005:

The behavioural approach may explain why some people, like Billy, take a humorous approach to life. Through operant conditioning, Billy may feel reinforced by the reactions he gains from making people laugh by telling them jokes. This positive reinforcement reinforces Billy to repeat the behaviour, knowing that he will receive the same positive response from his workmates if he continues telling them jokes and if he continues doing unexpected things to make them laugh. Through classical conditioning, Billy may associate making people laugh and feeling popular within his workplace with telling people jokes and consequently he knows that if he continues such behaviour in life, the behaviour will always make him feel popular and will always make people laugh.

And the Jenny answer in Jan 2004:

a. The behavioural approach might try to explain Jenny’s enjoyment of cooking for others. Through operant conditioning, Jenny receives positive reinforcement from her friends about her good cooking. This is rewarding and makes Jenny feel good and want to repeat the behaviour (operant conditioning). She will associate this rewarding feeling with cooking for her friends (classical conditioning), thus inviting her friends around again to cook for them. Through the two process theory, this cycle of classical and operant conditioning continues. The social learning theory may also account for Jenny’s enjoyment of cooking for others. Jenny may have observed other people cooking and felt vicariously reinforced by the gratification and attention they received from their cooking, therefore resulting in Jenny modelling this behaviour to receive similar responses herself. The media may have influenced this modelling behaviour as there are many television programmes which involve cooking such as programmes by Jamie Oliver and Ready Steady Cook.

Reply 14

scorpy66

Problem is the UCS and UCR starting point has to be an innate, reflex SR pairing. I don't see how computer game > happiness could be an unlearned SR connection, let alone what CS could then be paired. :confused:

I just can't get classical conditioning to work for voluntary behaviour - isn't that why Skinner developed operant conditioning in the first place, because most of our behaviour is complex and voluntary so classical conditioning of simple reflexes only applies to a v. limited range of behaviours?

Personally I'd leave out classical conditioning unless there was clear evidence of some sort of reflex response, such as fear,salivation, sexual arousal, etc., in the stimulus material. It's only worth including if it clearly applies to the question and there are plenty of other behavioural/SLT concepts to reach for in preference.

Sorry if I'm being picky! :redface:

PS Emm444, just read your post and agree that an attempt at a sentence shouldn't do any harm!

Reply 15

Lol. I don't know the answers to your questions because I don't know about the behavioural approach in that much detail, so you are probably right.

I personally don't see the harm in writing a sentance about association and classical conditioning. AQA doesn't use negative marking, so they aren't going to take away marks for it. If you've written about operant conditioning, modelling, etc then you will be fine and you've got nothing to loose.

I've written about it quite a few times and I've been fine. My teachers a marker for AQA so she knows what shes talking about.

But whatever you all decide to do, make sure you engage with the material and put it in the scenario because thats what you get marked on. I went to a conference with the examiners and they kept emphasising the importance of 'engaging' xx

Reply 16