Outline and critically evaluate the classical conditioning explanation of phobias.

How have such explanations influenced the treatment of these conditions?

A phobia is, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, an exaggerated and often disabling fear usually inexplicable to the subject. Phobias are quite common - recent surveys suggest that 60% of the population experience them. Understanding how phobias are acquired is essential to treat them. There are many different explanations regarding this matter. Among these is Classical Conditioning, the main focus of this essay. Classical Conditioning is a process of behavior modification. In natural conditions, the Unconditioned Response (UR) is the instinctive response of the organism to the Unconditioned Stimulus (US). In Classical Conditioning there is the introduction of a Conditioned Stimulus (CS), which is associated with the US. After a training period, the CS will trigger a Conditioned Response (CR) without being associated with the US. This response is typically the same as the UR. Watson and Rayner (1920) reported an experiment on an 11-month old child named Albert, in which they conditioned him into fearing a rat. In this case, the CS is the rat and the desired CR is fear of the rat. The expected CR is the same as the UR, meaning that the child showed signs of anxiety towards the US. The appropriate US (loud noise) was then paired with the CS several times. After this training period, Little Albert showed fear when shown the CS alone, suggesting that he had been successfully conditioned. It also suggested there is a possibility for transfer, as Albert showed the same responses when faced with a rabbit, a dog, cotton wool and a fur coat without direct conditioning to do so. This experiment therefore implies that Classical Conditioning can explain phobias. This is thought to be an adaptive way to anticipate harmful situations for survival purposes. In this case, Little Albert had learnt that when he saw the rat, the loud noise was very likely to occur simultaneously. An instinctive reaction is to avoid the CS in hopes of avoiding the US. This avoidance perpetuates the fear, as the individual does not learn to disassociate the US and the CS. Classical Conditioning became known as an explanation of phobias mainly due to this experiment as it was successful. However, it did not have objective values that can validate its authenticity. There was no measurement, for instance, of the frequency of the loud noise or Alberts crying. The signs of anxiety described as the phobic responses are subjective as their intensity may vary between people. Also, since Albert was a baby at the time, we do not know what he was thinking. It is possible that he was afraid of Watson rather than the rat, assuming Watson would be holding the rat during the entire training period, for example. However, this experiment was the starting point for studies regarding the subject. Also, advancements in the conditioning theory made it currently one of the most accepted explanation of phobias. Classical Conditioning implies that there will only be a CR when there have been previous experiences with pairing of a CS and an US. However, there are many cases in which individuals obtain their phobias in different ways, not necessarily involving previous personal experience. Menzies & Clark (1993, cited in Anxiety Disorders, 2010) carried out a study on children who suffered from water phobias and reported that only 2% of the children had memory of previous traumatic events that might have caused it. As such, different explanations were developed.

Other explanations of phobias are operant conditioning and modeling. This is when fear is acquired through positive and negative reinforcements (for example, a child is rewarded when avoiding a snake and punished or reprimanded when close to a snake, possibly leading to fear of snakes) or through imitation of phobic responses seen in others respectively. Mineka (1984, cited in Anxiety Disorders, 2010) conducted an experiment with adolescent monkeys where their parents were terrified of snakes. The monkeys came to show the exact same phobic reactions to snakes as their parents without having any traumatic event that could justify classical conditioning as an explanation. There is also the cognitive approach, which claims that an individuals thoughts on a very unlikely potential situation give rise to phobic reactions. For example, individuals may believe they will suffocate if the elevator broke, and might transfer that fear into other enclosed spaces causing claustrophobia, as suggested by Beck (1963, cited in Anxiety Disorders, 2010). Studies also suggest that genetic predisposition might play a role in acquirement of phobias. This might explain why people raised in similar environments that go through similar experiences do not develop similar phobias. It also suggests that all living organisms will be more likely to develop phobias when the stimulus is potentially harmful in real-life situations. One particular study of rats, conducted by Garcia and Koelling (1966, cited in Classical Conditioning, n.d.) , shows this. The rats were conditioned into avoiding a sweet-tasting liquid when paired with an injection that made them ill, but not when paired with shocks because the shocks did not indicate that the food was not edible, but the fact that they became ill did. They were, however, conditioned into avoiding the shocks when paired with light, since it replicates natural hazards. The Psychoanalytic Theory, developed by Freud, suggests that phobias are a result of repression of the sexual impulses that force unconscious phobic responses onto objects or situations. However, this can not be experimentally verified. This is also not the parsimonious theory, which would be the simplest assumption. In Watson and Rayners report, they suggest that Freudians would probably analyze one of Alberts dreams (if this was possible) and conclude that his fear was caused by him being violently scolded for trying to play with his mothers pubic hairs. This may have been the case, but it is hard to prove, whereas Classical Conditioning is the simpler explanation, therefore the parsimonious one. These explanations lead to the development of different treatment of phobias. Some, such as hypnosis and medication, are directed towards regulating the phobic responses and reducing the anxiety signals, like regulating heart rate and breathing. Hypnosis can also be used to reach the patients subconscious and identify a traumatic event that may have caused the phobia. This treatment has therefore been influenced by the psychoanalytic theory, which has also developed psychoanalytic therapy, where analysis of dreams and associations are used to determine the origin of and therefore cure phobias. The treatments that show signs of improvement at a faster rate are exposure therapies (flooding, counter-conditioning and systematic desensitization). These are based on the principle that avoiding the phobic stimulus will only perpetuate misguided ideas that they are harmful and exposure to the phobias will solve this. These therapies have been influenced by the cognitive and behavioral approaches. In fact, Watson and Rayner suggested basic ideas of these as possible ways of removing Alberts phobia. In Little Alberts case though, there was a certain degree of extinction, which happens when the pairing of the CS and US becomes less frequent and the CS alone becomes less effective

in producing a CR, eventually reaching a point where there is no CR at all. Merely five days after showing negative responses at once, Alberts response had lost intensity. Flooding is when the phobic individual is confronted directly with the phobic stimulus until they understand that none of the feared consequences would take place. Watson and Rayner called this habituation to fatigue reflexes that set up different reactions. However, some individuals may not be able to cope with this treatment, if phobic response is too intense. Counterconditioning is when the phobic stimulus is paired with a positive stimulus, hoping a positive response overtakes the phobic one. Watson and Rayner called this reconditioning, and the positive stimuli suggested were tactual stimulations of erogenous zones, such as the lips, nipples or sex organs. They also suggested feeding Albert candy. Systematic Desensitization (Wolpe, 1962, cited in Field & Nightingale, 2009) is a type of therapy that involves a fear hierarchy. The patient is trained to relax when facing a stimulus at the bottom of this hierarchy and, when this is complete, the stimulus moves up a level of intensity. This happens until all levels have been successfully dealt with. However, there are some limitations to this as some phobias are hard to recreate or may be difficult to define as levels within a hierarchy. Classical Conditioning is one of the most widely recognized explanations of phobias. However, it does not account for the origins of all phobias. There are other explanations of phobia equally recognized, making it difficult to determine which is the most accepted, as there is still no clear-cut definitive answer and all of the ones mentioned in this essay have either been proven in experiments or are hard to prove or disprove as they have no variables or results that can be measured in a definite and absolute way. As such, Classical Conditioning is a plausible explanation of phobias.

References
Anxiety Disorders (2010). Anxiety Disorders: An Introduction to Phobias & Explanations . Retrieved from http://aqabpsychology.co.uk/2010/07/anxiety-disorders-anintroduction-to-phobias-explanations/ Classical Conditioning (n.d.). Retrieved from http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/classical_conditioning.htm Davey, G. (2007). Psychopathology and treatment of specific phobias. Operant Conditioning (n.d.). Retrieved from http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/operant_conditioning.htm Phobia. (n.d.). In Merriam-Websters online dictionary (11th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/phobia Watson J., & Rayner R. (1920). Conditioned Emotional Reactions. Retrieved from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Watson/emotion.htm Field, A. & Nightingale Z. (2009), Test of Time: What if Little Albert had Escaped?. Retrieved from http://ccp.sagepub.com/content/14/2/311