Models of abnormality are frameworks that assist in explaining the behavioral, cognitive, biological and psychodynamics of individuals (Sue, Sue & Sue). Additionally, the models help to explain why illnesses occur and the treatments associated with these illnesses. Each model presents a different approach to resolving the psychological illness that an individual may be going through. For the purposes of this paper, the behavioral and cognitive models will be discussed, compared and contrasted.
Behavioral Model
The behavioral model in psychology is typically expressed as an alternative to the conventional medical frameworks that are used to explain individual behaviors. The therapies that are governed under this particular model seek to change an individual's behavior and provide them with a significant and extensive amount of control over themselves and their respective environment. Key individuals within the behavioral therapy field include John Watson, who is said to have conducted an experiment in 1920 on a boy named, Albert, in order to demonstrate how phobias within individuals are learned behaviors. Another key individual is Mary Jones, who demonstrated several years later that just as phobias can be learned, they can also be unlearned. Behavioral therapy is characterized by the concepts that were first presented by Ivan Pavlov and subsequently, evolved by B.F. Skinner. Essentially, the idea behind behavioral therapy is the concept of classical conditioning, which is that a stimulus that is neutral tends to come right before another particular stimulus and this, in turn triggers a particular response in an individual (Sue, Sue, & Sue; Ozmete & Hira).
Throughout the years, a significant amount of research is said to have been conducted in addition to the seminal works of Watson and Jones. In particular, the work of Bandura is believed to be extremely important to not only the behavioral model of psychology, but the field of psychology as a whole. Bandura (1974) states that much of the behavior of man is based or rather centered on the consequences that an individual undergoes. This behavior is then reinforced through specific experiences, or motivators and there are both benefits and challenges to this (859-860). In essence, behavior is best explained through an individual’s experiences, the way they handle the experiences and the effects of the experiences on the other areas of their life.
Cognitive Model of Psychology
Extensive work is stated to have been performed in order to understand from a cognitive perspective, the inner workings of man. Most, if not all cognitive models and the psychologists who use the frameworks express that behavior is centered on the thought processes and perspectives of individuals. It is from this, that they create their theories and emphasize the best approaches for an individual’s illness to be fixed and alleviated. To outline behavior and discuss it, psychologists monitor or conduct laboratory experimentation on individuals. This assists them in gaining a better understanding of how humans deal with their surroundings, and why they perform the actions and behaviors that they do (Cognitive Psychology; McLeod).
Comparison & Contrast
The mentioned models are often compared and contrasted, especially as it relates to abnormality. According to Saul McLeod, the similarities between the models lie in understanding the behaviors of individuals, and the responses that individuals provide based on a given stimulus. The behavioral model is grounded primarily in why people execute certain behaviors based on stimuli. The cognitive model is grounded primarily in why people execute certain behaviors based on the stimuli as well, but an emphasis is placed on their cognitive processes that lead to the behavior (1). In other words, psychologists who analyze individuals through the cognitive framework tend to thoroughly examine the individual’s cognitive processes through laboratory experiments with the hope of explaining that behavior is truly based on how the mind works (an internal aspect, essentially).
The behavioral framework, while similar in its underlying construct, is more concerned with the stimuli and the responses. The psychologist does not take into account the cognitive processes, but rather argues that they can be swayed in a certain direction based on the particular stimuli. Additionally, the cognitive approach is more concerned with the scientific nature and applying scientific concepts as a basis for an individual’s illness, ailment or problem. The behavioral framework does not consider the science behind an individual, in observing the stimuli, but makes the claim that an individual’s environment affects them more than they might admit and to a certain extent, has some degree of control of what they do, when they do it and how they do it. Essentially, the ailment is a direct reflection of the environment’s stimuli – whatever that stimulus may be.
For example, an individual prone to violent behavior would be explained by a behavioral psychologist as one who has learned this from their parent(s) or as a survival technique in the particular neighborhood they reside in. The psychologist would consider approaches to correcting the violent tendencies by perhaps placing the individual in an environment where violent behavior was not easily triggered, or where they could potentially find some positive reinforcement for themselves. Conversely, the cognitive psychologist would probe into the individual through discussions to find a scientific basis or foundation, once the stimuli has been identified. They are after the root of the problem and only care about applying science to the conclusion or outcome after said observation.
Recent Years
According to David Cecil, in recent years, psychologists and psychiatrists have found that a blending of the theories is necessary in certain situations. Since the similarities outweigh the differences between the two frameworks, this allows the medical professional to tap into strategies that combine both modalities. Moreover, because both frameworks are concerned with correcting the behavior as best as possible, the field has found it easier to tackle certain illnesses and situations with two-pronged technique (6-9). It is beneficial for there to be a combination of the theories in certain instances, situations and circumstances especially ones where the medial professional observes the reason cognitively behind the issue and then applies the behavioral model to correcting the problem.
It is helpful and useful, then for each psychologist and psychiatrist to thoroughly and extensively understand both frameworks, and why they can be applied to most, if not all circumstances and illnesses. By understanding both frameworks, patient outcomes as far as correcting the abnormalities will undoubtedly be reduced because the medical field it tackling the problem from both a practice and scientific perspective. Perhaps, this is why the term CBT, or cognitive-behavioral therapy is used more so in the field than the two frameworks individually being spoken of by psychologists and psychiatrists who specialize in abnormality.
Works Cited
Bandura, Albert. "Behavior Theory and the Models of Man." American Psychologist (1974): 859-869. Web. 15 June 2016. <https://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Bandura/Bandura1974AP.pdf>.
Cecil, David P. "COGNITIVE AND BEHAVIORAL APPROACHES: TO BLEND OR NOT TO BLEND." Online posting. North American Association of Christians in Social Work (NACSW), Feb. 2008. Web. 14 June 2016. <http://www.nacsw.org/Publications/Proceedings2008/CecilDCognitive.pdf>.
McLeod , Saul. "Cognitive Psychology." Simple Psychology, 2015. Web. 15 June 2016. <http://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive.html>.
Ozmete, Emine, and Tahira Hira. "Conceptual Analysis of Behavioral Theories/Models: Application to Financial Behavior ." European Journal of Social Sciences 18.3 (2011): 386-404. Web. 15 June 2016. <http://tkhira.user.iastate.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/OzmeteHira2011.pdf>.
Sue, David, Derald W. Sue, and Stanley Sue. Understanding Abnormal Behavior. Eighth. Houghton Mifflin, 2006. Web. 15 June 2016. <http://college.cengage.com/psychology/sue/abnormal/8e/instructors/sue_irm.pdf>.
