Theoretical Comparison Two: Ecological Systems Theory and Social Exchange Theory

Understanding the disparities of individuals effected in today’s society has a high priority focus in social work education. However, without understanding how society reacts or adjust to their environment and relationships, a clinician cannot provide the appropriate assistance to clients.

In the Ecological Systems Theory, an assessment of the individual will include a review of the individual specifically and internally, awareness of the groups the individual interacts with, and review of the environment. Individual assessment in social work involves a bio psycho-social-spiritual approach to identity and behavior.  Bronfenbrenner’s The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design (1979) summarized decades of theory and research about the fundamentals processes that guide life-span development. Unlike most other recent statements of theory Bronfenbrenner’s book did not focus on a specific domain such as social relations or cognition or biological development. Instead, Bronfenbrenner focused on a scientific approach emphasizing the interrelationship of different processes and their contextual variation. Although Bronfenbrenner used this text to develop 50 specific hypotheses concerning developmental processes from infancy through adulthood, these hypotheses have only rarely been tested. Rather, the importance of Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) The Ecology of Human Development and his importance in the field of developmental science are usually summarized in one of two related ways. First, Bronfenbrenner is often credited with bringing attention to contextual variation in human development and helping to move developmental psychology from “the science of the strange behavior of children in strange situations with strange adults for the briefest possible periods of time” (1977, p. 513) to more “ecologically valid” studies of developing individuals in their natural environment. Second, just as Piaget’s rich work is often represented in introductory textbooks by a brief table summarizing his stage theory, Bronfenbrenner’s work is often summarized with a diagram of “ecological theory.”

Social exchange theory is an evolving conceptual framework that can be utilized to explain individual development within the family context. Exchange theory is based on the principle that we enter into relationships in which we can maximize the benefits to us and minimize our costs. Equity theory, a variation of exchange theory, holds that exchanges between people have to be fair and balanced so that they mutually give and receive what is needed. Utilitarian economists made certain assumptions which were applied to exchange theory. They believed:  humans are rational and will seek to maximize their gain. They viewed humans as having access to all the information they needed to make these rational decisions. If a profit cannot be made they will forego that area of investment. Last, a long-term reciprocity is necessary for both participants to make a profit, otherwise one will exploit the other. Behavioral psychology contributed to the following assumptions: an individual will elicit behaviors that will produce the greatest reward and the least punishment. An individual will repeat behaviors that were rewarding in the past, and will keep repeating the behavior as long as it is rewarding. However, the reward will lose its value the more the individual receives the reward.

Cultural anthropology made significant contributions to exchange theory. Sir James Frazer in 1919 made certain assumptions about exchange processes: Exchange processes derive from individuals trying to satisfy basic needs. As these processes consistently produce payoffs, patterns of social interactions are developed. These patterns contribute to the development of social structures and lead to power differentiation in social groups. As clinicians, we must be knowledgeable on how society effects the environment as well as how environment effects society.

http://www.csun.edu/~whw2380/542/Social%20Exchange%20Theory.htm

Source book of Family Theories and Methods. 1993, pp 385-417

Ashford, J. B. (2013). Human Behavior in the Social Environment A Multidimensional Perspective. Belmont: Cengage Learning.

   

Theoretical blog #2. Jean Piaget Structural Approach Theory and Bandura Social Learning Theory

                                                                      Peter Kowal

Theoretical Blog #2

Jean Piaget Structural approach Theories and Banduras Social learning theories

According to Jean Piaget structural approaches to cognition, and Social learning theories, both of them had some similarities and different viewpoints in some ways.  Piaget structural approach, cognition children progress through series of four keys stages of cognitive development marked shifts in how they understand the world around them. Piaget believed that children are like little scientist and that they actively try to explore and make sense of the world around them and want to learned.

 Piaget learned this by observed his own children a stage theory of intellectual development that include four stages which are the sensorimotor, stage from birth to the age of 2 years, the preoperational stage from 2 to 7 years, the concrete stage from 7 to 11 years age and the formal operational stages from adolescence, this is a final stage in Piaget theory involved an increase in logic and ability to use deductive reasoning and understanding of abstract ideas. Piaget key concept for his theory are Schema which described both the mental and physical action involved in understanding and knowing. Some of Piaget theories are Assimilation, accommodation and Equilibrium. Piaget belief that children try to strike balance between assimilation and accommodation which is achieved through a mechanism, he called equilibration.

 

Bandura Social Learning Theories, is similar to Piaget Theory in some point but little bit different. Bandura Social leaning theory, has become the most influential theory of learning and development, his concepts of learning theories are important. Bandura theory added social element that people learn a new information and behavior by watching other people. And important an aspect of Bandura social learning theory is the notion of self-efficacy (Bandura 1997). Self-efficacy which refer to a person belief about his or her ability to perform behavior that lead to expected outcome. He said that people learned through observing other, without direct involvement in their experience. (pg.101)  Bandura demonstrated that children learned and imitate behaviors they have observed in other people. One of his example was that Bandura children studies observed and adult acting in a violent ways, when children who watch the act of a violent were brought into the room with children who did not watch that violent act, they children who watch the act imitate violently while the children who did not see the violent act did not act violently. Bandura had identified his three basic model of observational learning: A live model which involved an actual individual and a verbal instructional model which involved description and explanation. The last one was a symbolic model which involved real or fictional characters which displaying behaviors in the books.

Peter Kowal

 

Theoretical Comparison #2 Freud's Psychosexual Theory vs. Erikson's Psychosocial Stages

Freud’s Psychosexual Theory vs. Erikson’s Psychosocial Stages

In Psychology, there are many theories regarding Psychosocial Development; however, two theories are prominent:  Sigmund Freud’s Stages of Psychosexual Development and Erik Erikson’s Psychosocial Developmental Stages.   “Erik Erikson's theory of psychosocial development is one of the best-known theories of personality in psychology. Much like Sigmund Freud, Erikson believed that personality develops in a series of stages. Unlike Freud's theory of psychosexual stages, Erikson's theory describes the impact of social experience across the whole lifespan” (Cherry, About.com Psychology). 

Sigmund Freud’s Stages of Psychosexual Development are well known, however, controversial.   Freud’s Psychoanalysis theory states that personality is set by the time children reach five years of age; previous experiences have a part in shaping personality.  If these stages are not completed thoroughly fixation happens.  Fixation is a constant focus on a specific psychosexual stage.  This issue needs to be resolved in order to move on to a different stage.  The different psychosexual stages are:  Erogenous Zone:  Mouth (Birth to 1 Year), Erogenous Zone:  Bowel and Bladder Control (1 to 3 years), Erogenous Zone: Genitals (3 to 6 years old), Erogenous Zone:  Sexual Feelings are Inactive (6 to Puberty), and Erogenous Zone:  Maturing Sexual Interests (Puberty to Death). 

On the other hand, Erik Erikson’s Psychosocial Theory is considered one of the renown theories on personality.  Erikson concluded that personality evolved in stages of development occurring from birth until death.  Erikson’s theory is defined by social experiences one has during their life span.  They also include biological factors as well as cultural notions.  There are eight psychosocial stages:  Trust vs. Mistrust (Infancy), Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt (Early childhood), Initiative vs. Guilt (Play age), Industry vs. Inferiority (School age), Identify vs. Identity Confusion (Adolescence), Intimacy vs. Isolation (Young Adulthood), Generativity vs. Self-absorption (Maturity), and Integrity vs. Despair, Disgust (Old Age).  Erikson viewed these eight stages of development as a psychosocial conflict or crisis.  ‘Whether the conflict of a particular stage is successfully resolved or not, the individual is pushed by both biological maturation and social demands into the next stage” (Sigelman & Shaffer, 1995, p. 269).  

Even though, “Freud’s Psychosexual Stages of Developmental describes how personality develops during childhood.  Freud believed that personality developed through a series of childhood stages in which the pleasure-seeking energies of the id become focused on certain erogenous areas; while, Erikson’s theory describes the impact of social experiences across the whole lifespan” (Cherry, About.com Psychology).  They both believed that these theories were based on developmental stages in an individual’s life.  The learner believes that these two theories have a lot of positive attributes; such as Freud's psychosexual theory describes the sexual fixation most people have which can be viewed in commercials and all around our American culture.  While Erikson's psychosocial stages describes in detail the stages we go through in live.   The learner has observed these stages in my own children's lives.  Like in the first stage of Trust vs. Mistrust, I've seem my own children learn to trust as babies.  Even though my son went through abuse, I believe that due to the trust he had in his parents he was able to overcome his fears and now he is a wonderfully confident young man.




Ashford, J. & LeCroy,  C. (2010).  Human Behavior in the Social Environment A Multidimensional Perspective. Belmont:  Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning.

Cherry, K. Erikson's Theory of Psychosocial Development. About.com Psychology.  http://psychology.about.com/od/psychosocialtheories/a/psychosocial.htm.

Cherry, K. Freud's Stages of Psychosexual Development. About.com Psychology.  http://psychology.about.com/od/psychosocialtheories/a/psychosocial.htm
 

Ecological Systems Theory and Modern Functionalism

            Two social systems theories that influence modern ways of thinking for social workers are ecological systems theory and modern functionalism.  Both theories use holism as a central theme.

             The ecological systems theory states that human beings “can be understood only in the context of the systems in which they live” (Ashford & Lecroy, 2010, p. 143).  This theory uses the principal tenants that social work is focused on the person and situation, as well as the system and its environment, and that each influences the other.  In addition, the theory proposes that all systems work best when all actions that affect the individual positively affect the environment as well.  Two contributors to this theory, Brim and Bronfenbrenner, proposed levels of functioning called microsystems, mesosystems, exosystems, and macrosystems (Ashford & Lecroy, 2010, pp. 143-144).  Ecological systems theory is important because “it enhanced our ability to look at the environment in a way that allowed for its modification.  This perspective redirected attention to the transactions between people and environment rather than focusing on either the person or the environment” (Ashford & Lecroy, 2010, p. 145).

            In contrast, modern functionalism views relationships in a different way.  Talcott Parsons proposed that all social life revolves around agency, “the idea that goal-oriented people act in intentional ways” and that all actions have “alternative courses” called “pattern variables.”  These pattern variables showed there were only a limited number of social choices available to individuals in any situation based on their social environment.  Parsons also refined his theory, which became known as structural functionalism.  In this refinement, he identified four functions in any social system that are necessary for its continued survival:  adaptation, goal attainment, integration, and pattern maintenance.  In addition, he proposed five institutions that play a necessary role in the survival of any social system:  family, religion, education, economy, and government.  The main idea of functionalism is that it helps “us study our social institutions, and social institutions represent the final step in the process in which cultural values are translated into customary behavior” (Ashford & Lecroy, 2010, p. 146).

            Although ecological systems theory as well as Brim and Bronfenbrenners’ levels are well-accepted social systems theories, Parson’s structural functionalism has come under intense criticism at various levels throughout the years.  Two writers propose that Parson’s theory has the “effect of biologizing or mechanizing human society” and that this is actually a departure from generalized systems of functioning to the scientific approach of reductionism as opposed to the social systems theory approach of holism (Soo & Munch, 1979, p. 30).  In addition, because both ecological systems theory and modern functionalism depend on the stability of systems to understand behavior, a third theory, conflict theory, was developed (Ashford & Lecroy, 2010, p. 147).

            Each of these two theories approaches social systems from different viewpoints.  Ecological systems theory makes social workers aware that what affects one piece of a system, affects the rest of the system also, just like in a biological way where adding snakehead fish previously unknown to a stable river ecology will have catastrophic effects.  However, modern functionalism breaks down smaller systems into the functions that affect them and work to create an awareness to social workers, not only of effects of changes on clients and their environments, but also on the choices that clients face in all parts of the systems in which they participate.

            Ashford, J.B & Lecroy, C.W. (2010). Human behavior in the social environment: A 

                multidimensional perspective. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning.

Chong Soo, L., & Munch, P. A. (1979). Fractured Weber: A Critique of Parsons' 

     Interp[r]etation. Qualitative Sociology, 2(2), 26-41.

Theoretical Comparison # 2 Eric Lindermann, Gerald Caplan and Barbara Dohrenwend

Crisis Theory and Model of Stress

        All kinds of different life events can cause stress and lead to a crisis. These life events can be going on for a long time or just suddenly happen. Eric Lindermann and Gerald Caplan both did research on crisis theory. Barabra Dohrenwend was the developer of the model of stress. Crisis and stress are different but when combined can cause greater pain and aggravation for people.
       Crisis is derived from a Greek root word that means "to decide." According to Ashford and LeCroy (2010), The reference to crisis in this context is "any rapid change or encounter that provides an individual with a 'no exit' challenge, no choice but to alter his or her conduct in some manner." In everyday terms this is a critical point in which one knows that a good or bad decision is ahead.
       Stress plays an important role in understanding the adaptation of people. Ashford and LeCroy (2010), have stated that stress represents "any event in which environmental demands, internal demands, or both tax or exceed the adaptive resources of an individual, social system, or tissue system."
        Lindermann who developed the crisis theory and Caplan, a colleague of Lindermann's from the Harvard School of Public Health both did research on the subject of crisis. Lindermann is most well known for his work with the relatives of the victims who died in the unfortunate nightclub fire at the Coconut Grove Dance Hall in Boston in 1941. Lindermann discovered through interviewing the victims loved ones that the way they coped with the stress of losing their loved ones  was by detaching and forming new bonds with other people. Caplan supported Lindermann's theory of crisis but also added his own twist by saying there are other events , not just the loss of something or someone that can cause stress and in turn cause people to develop mental disorders. Caplan determined that any substantial  life change can cause a person to create psychological problems. This in turn becomes a crisis because this is beyond a person's ability to cope with internal adjustments or external adaptations.
          Dohrenwend's model of stress makes the connection between both environment and people. Dohrenwend makes the assumption that human response to stress is determined by such moderating factors as personal characteristics and social resources. According to Ashford and LeCroy (2010). "a moderating factor is considered to be operative when, if in its presence, the relationship of stress to illness (mental or physical) is weaker than its absence." While Lindermann's, crisis theory and Dohrenwend's model of stress are comparable, there are some differences.  The crisis theory states that "the outcome from stressors are a function of the environmental supports and psychological mediators available to a person (Ashford and LeCroy, 2010). Dohrenwend's model of stress shows how different psychosocial and situations play a part in the process.
           The crisis theory and model of stress are very important tools to study to figure out how people cope with stress. When people can not deal with loss, other people or their environment this stress can quickly turn into a crisis.

Ashford, J.B. & LeCroy, C.W. (2010). Huamn behavior in the social environment: A multidimensional perspective (4th ed.). Australia:  Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning.

Freud VS Erikson

Freud stages of psychosocial development deals with how a personality develop, and that we move through various stages, and how well we master those stages froms the basis of our personality. (HBSE. PG87). These personality depends on how each of these stages is handled. for instance the an infant's behavior is motivated by these unconsciour, pleasure seeking urges. (87).
The stage of infancy are dominated by an oral focus, early childhood moves through an anal aqnd phallic focus, the nuddke cgukdgiid us reoresebted by a katebct oeruid, and the psychosexual stages end at puberty. Freud should have took these stage a littler further to adulthood. Freud was an id psychologist, on the other hand Erikson was an ego psychologest. (simply psychology.org).
  Like Erikson' he took these theory further with the eight psychosocial stages which includes several key departures from Freud thinking(90). Erikson's eight starts at infaancy through old age he says in the infacy is where trust vs mistrust, early childhood is autonomy vs shame, doubt, play age is initiative vs guilt, school age industry vs inferiority, adolescene is identity vs idenity confusion as well as old age is integrity vs despair, disgust.(90).
 I love these stages that Erikson talks about i seen this with my own children from the oldest to the youngest child with the trust to the mistrust  on to the maturity of generativity of how they act in there lives.
    

  Ashford. Jose., & LeCroy, C.W. (2009). Human behavior in the Social Environment.

Mclead, S.A.(2008). Erik Erikson/Psychosocial Stages- Simply Psychology. Retrieved
http:// www. simplypsychology.org/Erik-Erikson.html.  

Theoretical Compassion #2 :Skinner vs. Bandura

Most will associate Skinner and Watson’s work, in regards to the learning theory, in fact, Skinner expanded on Watson’s original theory. Both theories have the same concept; however, with Skinners, “Two critical concepts in operant conditioning are reinforcement and punishment”, (Ashford J. B. & LeCroy, C.W., 2013). Ones’ behavior can be encourage or discourage by reward or punishment. Skinner believes in playing an active role in the conditioning of an individual’s behavior. Skinner used rats and pigeons to do most of his research. Primarily the experimentation of how rats react with positive and negative reinforcement in regards to them pushing a lever. The observation revealed that in order for the rat to get what it wanted it would push the lever, when this reward was taken away the rat continued to press the lever over and over and then became irritated when the reward was not given.

Bandura believes in the observation of others will lead to one’s behavior. His theory is known as the Social learning Theory. In order to frame one behavior they must observe others known and unknown to the individual in a social environment. “Bandura’s foremost theoretical contribution has been his description of observational learning”, (Dunn, D...et. al, 2009). Every individual will encounter situations where someone educates them that their behavior is predicated from someone else’s, and this will happen throughout one’s life. But the observation and implementation of others actions can be negative or positive and this is learned from birth, how to mimic the actions of others. While Both Bandura and Skinner both believe that behaviors are learned and replicated they just arrive at this analysis in a different manor.

Ashford, J.B. & LeCroy, C.W. (2013). Human behavior in the social environment: A multidimensional perspective (5th ed). Australia: Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning.

Dunn, D., Hammer, E. Y., Lloyd, M.A., Weiten, W. (2009). Psychology Applied to Modern Life: Adjustment in the 21^st century (9^th ed.). Belmont, CA. Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Theoretical Comparison #2 BANDURA's (Social Learning) VS. PIAGET's (Cognitive Development)

Albert Bandura is said to be one of the new cognitive behaviorist. Cognitive behaviorists are also referred to as social learning theorist. According to Ashford and LeCroy (2010), “Bandura attempts to understand people as conscious, thinking beings who can have an influence on their environment.” Bandura places emphasis on we learn by what we observe and we do this by having role models and we learn new behaviors as a result of these role models. This type learning is considered cognitive because we learn through our memories. According to social-learning theory, models are critical in the development of personality because of the principle of observational learning (Ashford and LeCroy, 2010). According to learning-theories.com, “Most human behavior is learned observationally through modeling: from observing others, one forms an idea of how new behaviors are performed, and on later occasions this coded information serves as a guide for action.” (Bandura). Social learning theory explains human behavior in terms of continuous reciprocal interaction between cognitive, behavioral, and environmental influences.”

Jean Piaget built his career on studying the relationship between how we develop and how we learn (Ashford and LeCroy, 2010).  The concepts of adaptation an organization are critical components of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development. We are said to use schemata as structures for cognitive learning. According to Piaget, what we perceive in the external world does not always fit in our internal schemata, or what we know. So we can assimilate new information into our existing schemata or thought structures and thereby change what we perceive (assimilation). Or we can accommodate our thought patterns to what we perceive-in other words; change what we think (accommodation) (Ashford and LeCroy, 2010).   

Bandura’s social learning theory can be and to my knowledge is applied in the field of social work. Social workers are many things to different people. The principle of professionalism makes social workers great role models. If a client is not sure of a certain behavior we can show them what it looks like by modeling it. Piaget’s theory is also applied in social work. Social workers supply resources and empower clients. Sometimes just simply finding the right resources can fit into the client’s schemata and help to empower that client.

Ashford, J.B. & LeCroy, C.W. (2010). Human behavior in the social environment: a multidimensional perspective (4th ed.). Australia: Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning.

http://www.learning-theories.com/social-learning-theory-bandura.html

Theoretical Comparison 2: Reductionism Vs. Holism

In social work, there are many different theories and approaches to consider utilizing with clients. However, at the very base of it all, decisions between the holistic approach and the reductionist approach may decide how we help our clients.

According to Ashford and LeCroy (2010), “The central principle of reductionism is that ultimate explanations can be found when issues are reduced to their smallest possible components.” As social workers, this approach states that we separate our client’s issues, such as dealing with lack of transportation, then unemployment, etc. Furthermore, reductionism “supports and legitimizes the notions that we can both get it right and, if something goes wrong, reverse it” (Rogers, Luton, Biggs, Biggs, Blignaut, Choles, and Tangwe, 2013). Because each item is considered a separate issue, clients and case managers may build up separate goals. According to reductionism, if the goal for one issue is not met, the situation does not affect the client’s life anywhere else.  An example of reductionism would be if a client does not pursue childcare, it should not affect their employment.

On the opposite end of the spectrum is holism. “Holism strives for a balance and harmony within the person” (Ashcroft, 2011). Holism looks at the entire person, rather than individual issues. Furthermore, “…the holism paradigm attends to a variety of variables impacting on a person, interactional and transactional in nature” (2011). While holism focuses on the client and any internal issues, it also looks at the environment and any issues caused externally. An example of holism in action is assessing a client’s poor mental health causing unemployment, which in turn caused lack of money for food and housing. Holism dictates that each issue feeds into others, and therefore cannot be neglected.

The holistic and reductionist approaches are complete radical opposites, and therefore social workers may need to find a middle ground. Identifying a root cause of a client’s issues may be a solution, rather than fixing everything one by one, or at the same time.

Ashcroft, R. (2011). Health and Wellbeing: Starting with a Critical Pedagogical Model. Social Work Education, 30(6), 610-622. doi:10.1080/02615479.2011.586558

Ashford, J., & LeCroy, C. (2010). Human Behavior in the Social Environment: A Multidimensional Perspective. 4th ed., pp.134. California: WADSWORTH

Rogers, K. H., Luton, R., Biggs, H., Biggs, R., Blignaut, S., Choles, A. G., & ... Tangwe, P. (2013). Fostering Complexity Thinking in Action Research for Change in Social--Ecological Systems. Ecology & Society, 18(2), 68-79. doi:10.5751/ES-05330-180231

Theortical Comparioon between Freud Sigmud and Erik Erikson

Peter Kowal

Theoretical Comparison between Freud Sigmund and Erik Erikson #1

The Psychological Dimension Theories between Freud Sigmund and Erik Erikson had contribution positives in the development of Social science. Sigmund, one of the most influential figures and the founder of psychoanalysis theory of personality, he describe stresses the influence of unconscious mental process. Sigmund, theory mentions the important of sexual and aggressive instinct, the enduring effect of early childhood experience on personality. Sigmund  Psychoanalysis theory base on observation of his patient, in which he mention free association of psychoanalytic technique in which the patient spontaneously report all his/her thoughts, feelings, and mental images as they come to mind. Freud believes that personality is composing of three psychological processes the-id, the ego, and superego that operate at different things. Freud Sigmund mentions that by age of 5 or 6 years old the young child has developed an internal representation of parental voice that is partly conscious -the superego. This is acceptable values and behavior and thoughts. The existent of an individual and the species for example the hunger, thirst, physical comfort and sexuality, Freud use a word libido to refer to sexually energy or motivation.

Erik Erikson Psychosocial Theory, in his theory, Erikson view was interesting because his explanation was that, psychosocial development through death; He assumed that people follow sequence of stages of development. Erikson said the stage from biological force and from young age related to social and cultural expectation. Erikson refer to epigenetic principle it is biological blueprint dictated how the organism growth and reach maturity. According to Erikson Psychosocial theory combines with social change in the expectation of the society to structure the personal adaptations his or her environment. He identify eight psychosocial stages of human development, he said each stage mark different task. He said physical, emotion and cognitive task that individual must master the struggle to adjust to the demand of the social environment.

By Peter Kowal

 

Theoretical Comparison 1: Founders of Learning Theory

Theoretical Comparison 1: Founders of Learning Theory

         Similar in their general concepts, the theories of learning created by B.F. Skinner, A. Bandura and better known as the father of behaviorism, J.B. Watson each differ upon the ideas and processes that take place for human beings to behave in such ways that we do. Behaviorism and classic conditioning were created by J.B. Watson. Both processes exist around the idea that a person's learned emotional response(s) have been engineered or wired internally that way from being conditioned to do so. For classical conditioning to take place a response associated with ones stimulus must come to be connected with other outside stimuli, or neutral stimulus which typically wouldn't cause the response. Skinner's operant conditioning assumes a similar process. However, this theory of learning is attributed to trial and error and conditioned response's are voluntary rather than instinctual or automatic as it is in classical conditioning.

         Skinner believed to effectively control someones environment will create the possibility to produce any behavior and a provided stimulus increases the probability that the behavior will be repeated or omitted by using punishment and reinforcements. These are two tools used to modify an other's behavior by encouraging the frequency of desirable behaviors and reducing instances of undesired behaviors. Bandura's social learning theory provides that behavior is learned by observing the behavior of another in an environment. People observe role models and learn new behaviors as a result of copying those observed performances. It is still considered learning theory though neither punishments nor reinforcements exist for imitating the behavior perceived.

         The basis of all these theories attempt to understand and explain human behaviors on the studying of observable stimuli and the response(s) exerted due to or literally towards such as an observable stimulus. All three theories share the same concept that a person's emotions, process of thought, and the resulting social behaviors of these thoughts and emotions are acquired or learned; rather than already in them from the moment they were born. Watson and Skinner's learning theories relate with the other because they both explain how emotional responses are learned by stimulus substitution thus causing them both to be directed or controlled by some form of outside or neutral stimuli. Bandura's Social Learning theory involves indirect causes and a more subjective form of action as with the other two theories the process is passive or unrecognized by the subject at the time of conditioning.

         The learner acknowledges that each theory is accurate in its own way to explain how behaviors are learned because assertions have been assessed by using the scientific method to test each theory personally and quite frequently throughout their course of life in the past. Nevertheless knowledge of how successful conditioning can be and how influential exerted behaviors in any social situation can become attained are both resources one could only hope are used responsibly for the greater good of humanity.

          Ashford, J. B. & Lecroy, C.W. (2010) Human behavior in the social environment: A multidimensional perspective. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning.

          Feldman, R.S. (2006) Development across the life span. 4th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc., p 20-28.

　

　

Theoretical Blog 1 Watson vs. Freud

John B. Watson brought behaviorism into the forefront of psychology in 1913 when he asserted that psychology must abandon its focus on subjective “mentalistic” concepts and instead focus exclusively on behavior (Ashford and LeCroy, 2010). According to John Watson, psychology as the behaviorist views it is a purely objective experimental branch of natural science. Its theoretical goal is the prediction and control of behavior. Introspection forms no essential part of its methods, nor is the scientific value of its data dependent upon the readiness with which they lend themselves to interpretation in terms of consciousness. The behaviorist, in his efforts to get a unitary scheme of animal response, recognizes no dividing line between man and brute. The behavior of man, with all of its refinement and complexity, forms only a part of the behaviorist's total scheme of investigation (University of Utah).

Psychodynamic theory in contrast to social learning theory: According to Ashford and LeCroy all human behavior, according to Freud, is driven by a special kind of energy referred to as the libido. The libido is in constant search of pleasure. This “libido theory” is considered the cornerstone of contemporary psychoanalysis (St Clair, 2004). “With this theory, all human behavior could be related to the driving force of the sexual instinct and the counterforces that kept it in check”

In contrast and comparison, social learning theory seems to work on a solution to the behavior in the present or in the here and now, whereas psychodynamic theory tends to change an internal behavior learned in the past. Both theories hold validity but one is more time consuming than the other one.

http://www.psych.utah.edu/gordon/Classes/Psy4905Docs/PsychHistory/Cards/Watson.html

 Ashford, Jose B. & LeCroy, Craig Winston (2010). Human Behavior in the Social Environment A Multidimensional Perspective. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning.

Theoretical Comparison One: The Psychological Theories of Psychologists, John Broadus Watson (1878-1958), Albert Bandura (1925-present), and Burrhas Frederic Skinner (1904-1990).

Although the three psychologist studied behaviorism, each developed different methodologies of theories. Watson believed that all behavior is learned from the environment. Watson’s theory is called classical conditioning and believed that certain behavioral responses can be obtained through conditioning.  Classical conditioning theory consist of learning a new behavior through the process of association. There are three stages to classical conditioning. In each stage the motivations and reactions are given special scientific terms: Before conditioning, during conditioning and after conditioning. Classical conditioning can be used to create phobias.

Skinner’s theory is called operant conditioning and he believed behavior that is reinforced tends to be repeated (strengthened); behavior which is not reinforced tends to die out-or be extinguished (weakened). Skinner thought that the best way to understand behavior is to look at the causes of an action and its consequences. He identified three type of responses that can follow certain behaviors: neutral operants, reinforcers and punishers.  

In Bandura’s social learning theory, he believed a child’s behavior is learned from the environment through the process of observational learning. Individuals that are observed are called models. In society children are surrounded by many influential models, such as parents within the family, characters on children’s TV, friends within their peer group and teachers at school.  These models provide examples of masculine and feminine behavior to observe and imitate. They pay attention to some of these people and encode their behavior.  At a later time they may imitate the behavior they have observed.    

The three theories mentioned helps the learner understand how behaviors are formed. All theories described are learned behaviors through conditioning or observation and how we react. As clinicians, negative or undesirable consequences can be changed to positive consequences through aiding clients to achieve better lives.

Skinner, B. F. (1938). The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis. New York: Appleton-Century. Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Watson, J. B. (1924). Behaviorism. New York: People's Institute Publishing Company. Ashford, J. B. (2013). Human Behavior in the Social Environment. A Multidimensional Perspective. Belmont: Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning.

Theoretical Comparison 1: Bowlby & Erikson

Two theories that discuss the importance of how an infant bonds with caregivers include John Bowlby's psychoanalytic attachment theory and Erik Erikson's theory of psychosocial development. Both Bowlby and Erikson believe that trust is very important in the psychological development of an infant. Bowlby believes that the quality of early infant attachments to primary caregivers and the ability to trust is crucial in developing relationships later in life. Erik Erikson believes that infants need to receive care that is consistent, dependable, and reliable  from the primary caregiver in order to have trusting and secure relationships later on in life.
Even though Bowbly and Erikson have the trust component and a connection to Freud, their theories are different. Attachment is described as an emotional relationship that is unique and involves the elements of pleasure, comfort and care. Bowlby states that attachment is a "lasting psychological connectedness between human beings." Bowbly also believes that attachment has a connection to survival. "The propensity to make strong emotional bond to particular individuals [is] a basic component of human nature"(Bowlby, 1988,3). There are three important components to the attachment theory: children that are raised knowing that their primary caregivers are always available have less fear, the confidence that the children develop during infancy, childhood and adolescence is somewhat unchanged for the entirety of a person's life and children expect the primary caregiver to be responsive because they have in the past. Erikson's theory of psychosocial development focuses on the ego and the stages of development from infancy(0 to 1 1/2) to maturity(65+). Erikson developed the eight psychosocial stages of which the first stage trust vs. mistrust is where an infant learns to trust the primary caregiver to meet basic needs and this helps the infant feel secure even in times of uncertainty. If this stage is successful the virtue of hope is established which means the infant will be able to trust that others will help in time of crisis. Erikson states that if the virtue of hope is not established then an infant will have a fear and start to mistrust and this will effect the development of the other seven psychosocial stages which are autonomy vs. shame,doubt (1 1/2 to 3), initiative vs. guilt(3 to 5), industry vs. inferiority(5 to 12), identity vs. identity confusion(12 to 18), intimacy vs. isolation(18 to 40), generativity vs. self-absorption(40 to 65) and integrity vs. despair,disgust(65+).
These two theories are important because it gives the learner two similar and yet different ways of approaching the reasons why infants as well as humans can not bond or attach to other humans. It is essential for this process to start while an infant in order to be healthy children, adolescents and adults.

References

Ashford, J.B. & LeCroy, C.W. (2013).Human behavior in the social environment:  A multidemsional perspective.(pg.99),(5th ed.).Australia:  Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A Secure Base. New York:  Basic Books.

Bowlby,J.(1969/1982). Attachment and Loss, Vol 1:  Attachment. New York:  Basic Books.

McLeod, S.A.(2008). Erik Erikson I Psychosocial Stages - Simply Psychology. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/Erik-Erkison.html

Theoretical Comparison between John Watson and B. F. Skinner

Theoretical Comparison

1)      Behaviorism by John Watson

“Watson is recognized as the father of behaviorism, a learning theory that is based on observable behavior.  Watson was extreme in his position that at birth a person is tabula rasa- a blank slate.  Watson believed that development depends on learning given the proper experiences, learning will proceed.  This theory focuses on studying observable stimuli and observable responses to stimuli.    According to Watson, behavior was a subject matter in its own right, to be studied by the observational methods common to all sciences” (Ashford & LeCroy, 2010). 

“Early forms of psychology assumed that mental life was the appropriate subject matter for psychology, and introspection was an appropriate method to engage that subject matter. In 1913, John B. Watson proposed an alternative: classical S–R behaviorism. According to Watson, behavior was a subject matter in its own right, to be studied by the observational methods common to all sciences. Unfortunately, by around 1930, Watson’s behaviorism had proved inadequate. Many researchers and theorists then adopted a view in which various organismic entities were inferred to mediate the relation between S and R: mediational S–O–R neobehaviorism. This general view has remained influential, although the details of the various versions have differed over the years. The behavior analysis of B. F. Skinner took an entirely different approach. Particularly important was the study of verbal behavior. Although behaviorism is often conventionally defined as an approach that seeks to explain behavior without directly appealing to mental or cognitive processes, this definition needs considerable clarification, especially as it pertains to Skinner’s behavior analysis and his view of

behaviorism as a philosophy of science (Moore, The Psychological Record, 2011, 61,449-464).”

2)      Learning Theory by B. F. Skinner

“B. F. Skinner built on Watson’s learning theory (1953) by advancing the study of operant conditioning, a form of learning that occurs when responses are controlled by their consequences. Skinner observed that behavior is repeated when followed by positive consequences and that it is not repeated when followed by neutral or negative consequences.  When consequences such as rewards and punishments are made contingent on behavior, they can have a powerful influence on behavior” (Ashford & LeCroy, 2010). 

Both behaviorism by John Watson and B. F. Skinner’s theory are learning theories.  Watson used experiments to explain the importance of learning through experience.   As in the experiment he conducted on a child named Albert.  Albert was exposed to a stimulus, the cute white rat and at the same time was exposed to a second stimulus, a loud, frightening sound.  Through repeated exposure to these two stimuli he associated the two sounds together. As a result, when Albert was presented with the white rat he experienced a fearful response.  B. F. Skinner, used the theory of learned behavior and put a different spin by using reinforcement and punishment.  “These concepts are really quite simple, and part of the attraction of operant conditioning is that is a straightforward theory about behavior” (Ashford & LeCroy, 2010).  In the same way, B. F. Skinner observed behavior that was influenced by experience and how fears are not inborn but learned. 

The learner has worked with children for the majority of her life and has observed that children are not tabula rasa.  Most children, without regard for age, seem to have preconceived ideas of what they want and how to get it.  Currently, I work with a two year old that tries to get whatever he wants without regard for any other child.  Even though, his mother (a teacher) and his teachers have told him over and over again to wait his turn and stop hitting his friends. 

The learner has also observed that children respond better to discipline when it involves positive and negative consequences.  The learner has used B. F. Skinners learning theories without being aware of the origin.  When the learner started working with children in a formal setting, she was first encouraged to use this theory.  The learner would use gummy worms to reward the children for making right choices.  The majority of the time positive reinforcement worked as it should, except with the exception of two children.  One of these children was believed to have a learning disability and had a difficult time focusing.  The second did not seem to care about consequences. 

 Ashford, Jose B. & LeCroy, Craig Winston (2010). Human Behavior in the Social Environment A Multidimensional Perspective. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning.

Moore, J. (2011).  The Dominance of Associative Theorizing in Implicit.  The Psychological Record, 61, 449-464.