My informal learning experience is connected with the death of close relatives form cancer. Given the rise of cancer and the deteriorating environment, the use of carcinogens in the food industry, fear of cancer cannot be considered unreasonable. In my case it went beyond common sense and became a phobia. My cancerophobia is very closely linked with the fear of death. Everyone knows that according to the statistics, cancer takes the third place among the causes of death (after injuries and cardiovascular diseases). So my informal learning experience is a manifestation of psychogenic reaction to the death of loved ones from cancer.
Let’s describe three types of conditioning: classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and cognitive-social learning through the example of my informal learning experience.
Classical conditioning is closely connected with the name of Pavlov, who has made fundamental contributions to the theory of classical conditioned reflexes. The basic scheme of the conditioned reflex is S-R, where S is a stimulus, R is a response. In classical conditioning scheme a reaction only occurs in response to any stimulus, unconditioned or conditioned ones. Unconditioned responses are mostly innate, they occur in response to a stimulus without any pre-conditions (hence - unconditioned). Conditioned responses are gained; they are produced under certain conditions (hence - conditioned) (Henton, W.W., & Iversen, I.H., 1978). In my case of canserophobia death of a relative is a conditioned stimulus that precedes the unconditioned one: the fear of death. The combination of stimuli repeated several times caused a conditioned response: the development of cancerophobia.
The other type of conditioning is an operant conditioning. According to the principle of operant conditioning, behavior is controlled by its results and consequences. Behavior modification is carried out by the impact of its results and consequences (Henton, W.W., & Iversen, I.H., 1978). Stimulus goes after the behavioral response the system of direct reinforcement and punishment is used. In other words, classical conditioning stimulus precedes behavioral response, and in the operant - follows it. In my example death would be considered a punishment that stimulates my fear of cancer.
The most distinctive feature of the cognitive-social theory of Bandura is the belief that human behavior is mainly formed through observation or on the basis of examples. My informal learning experience could have occurred through cognitive-social learning in a form of other people’s deaths being an example of fatal consequences of cancer.
Bandura also stresses the importance of independent influences as a causal factor in all aspects of human functioning - motivation, emotions and actions (Delanty, G., 2006). This is most evident in his concept of self-efficacy: the position that a person can learn to control events that affect his life. My phobia could have been such an independent factor, if it hadn’t been based on relatives’ diseases and had been simply caused by my own ideas of death.
Arranging the surroundings, providing the support for the cognitive and awareness of the consequences of their actions, people are able to exert some influence on their behavior (Delanty, G., 2006). Of course, self-regulation functions are not uncommonly supported by the influence of the society. Thus, my cancerophobia could have had an external origin, but I should not underestimate the fact that the internal influence partly governs the actions I perform.
Through verbal and figurative representations people make and keep their experience in a way that it serves as a benchmark for future performance. In my case, the ability to generate images of the desired future outcomes transforms into behavioral strategies to ensure the achievement of distant targets, which are the avoidance of cancer. With the ability to operate the symbols, I can solve problems without resorting to a real, open conduct of trial and error, can thus foresee the likely consequences of various actions and change my behavior accordingly.
Each of us had experience in dealing with some problems and found that it becomes ridiculously easy, if someone had already solved it. The Surveillance factor is the key to the problem. According to Bandura, people who are aware of their self-efficacy, have made great efforts to carry out complex cases than people who have serious doubts about their capabilities (Delanty, G., 2006). In turn, high self-efficacy related to the success of expectations, usually leads to a good result, and thus contributes to self-esteem. On the contrary, low self-efficacy related to the failure of expectations, usually leads to failure and thus reduces self-esteem. From this perspective, my example of the fear of cancer and inability to deal with a phobia affects my judgement is clue factor to underline the low self-efficacy, which, in my case, is a direct cause of low future expectations.
These three personality theories have different approaches. The theory of classical conditioning describes reactive learning, in most cases, requires virtually simultaneous exposure to the conditioned and unconditioned stimuli (the impact of conditioned stimulus must be a little ahead of unconditioned). Operant learning theory argues that behavior is influenced not only by stimuli that affect the body before making any actions, but also by the behavior results themselves: such as reinforcement and punishment. By cognitive-social learning theory Bandura showed that learning can occur not only when exposed to certain stimuli on the body, but also with the person’s awareness and cognitive assessment of external events. Cognitive-social learning theory focuses on modelling and self-regulation mechanisms, and adds to the two presented in classical and operant conditioning elements (behavior and environmental influences), the third element - the cognitive process.
References
Delanty, G. (2006). Handbook of Contemporary European Social Theory. New York: Tayler & Francis Group.
Henton, W.W., & Iversen, I.H. (1978). Classical Conditioning and Operant Conditioning: A Response Pattern Analysis. New York: Springer Science & Business.
(Delanty, G., 2006).
