Compare and contrast two approaches Essay

psychological science is a huge science commonwealth with m either variations on hail. Over many years Psychologists such as Freud, Skinner, Rogers and Watson, just to name a few, gift contributed, providing us with invaluable tools to mensurate and treat mental illness, understand and treat phobias and thus provide us with a window into the unconscious(p) mind.In particular, two areas of study have intrigued me, so I believe it would be useful to compare and ph unitary line these two very different approaches. Not scarcely will I compare the methods of research used but in addition will denounce any similarities or differences they may have and indeed the strengths and weaknesses of each approach. My chosen approaches to evaluate are Behaviourist V Psychoanalytic.In 1913 John Watson publish Psychology as the conductist military position it, in it he sketch his new ideas. These ideas were considered new because Watson disagreed with Freuds view of humane behaviour he dismissed it as philosophical to the point of mysticism (Watson 1913, citied by Christopher D. Green, York University). Watson in like manner dismissed heredity as an important factor in human behaviour shaping. Watson stated that The traditional methods of animal psychology are indeed the true method of scientific psychology. (Watson 1913, citied by Christopher D. Green, York University). In this denomination Watson said The time seems to have come when psychology must throw all reference to consciousness when it need no longer cozen itself into thinking that it is making mental states the object of observation (Psychology as the behaviourist views it John Watson, Psychological review, 1913. By saying this Watson meant that Freud and otherwise Psychoanalysts could not prove their theories and therefore were not scientific. Also they studied abnormal patients (mental patients) so therefore they could not have a true picture.This publication did in fact establish a new school of psychology, the School of behavioristic psychology. The essential theories, which stand Watson turn out from the rest, are that he believed psychologists should look to the descent amid the milieu and the behaviour, rather than the presumed contents of the consciousness. The principles that govern behaviour in animals and in domain are virtually identical.Watsons aim was to forecast and control behaviour. He was able to provide evidence to his theories unlike other unreliable and unverifiable conscious experience studies.A behaviourist believes that the environment motivates behaviour and that a stimulus will create a response, therefore, humans are merely passive respondents. This approach rejects the unconscious mind and believes that only behaviour that can be observed should be studied. There are three main areas of study Classical teach (Pavlov), Operant conditioning (Skinner) and Observational scholarship (Bandura). Classical conditioning uses a stimulus response, P avlov when experimenting with the give chase and salivation, conditioned the frank to know when a treat was inevitable by victimization a bell as the stimulus.He proved that the dog would salivate at the mere thought of food and therefore his learning was by association. In the Skinner experiment he used peremptory and negative reinforcement as forms of rewards or punishments, this was called Operant conditioning. Finally when using Observational learning (Bandura 1960) its proven to be far to a greater extent scientific using laboratory for studies and experiments. This seems to be a far more object glass approach.The behaviourist approach has a more scientific and objective view and provides a counter argument to the nature supposition. By using a few basic principles, behaviorism can excuse many characteristics in twain human and animal behaviours and has many pragmatic applications. However, on a more negative note it can be said that behaviourism rejects the conscious mental experiences and assumes that individuals are not amenable for their own actions. In addition it over simplifies the explanations for behaviour and experiences.The psychoanalytical approach was started and mainly authentic by Sigmund Freud. He became interested in hysteria and was convinced that unconscious mental causes were responsible for all disorders and even normal personalities. Freuds approach and theory were greatly influenced by thetechnology of the time (locomotives) along with the mesh of hypnotist Charcot. Whilst talking to Charcot, Freud realized how talking about traumatic experiences alleviated the symptoms of hysteria. He also made a connection amidst the aim of sex and hysterical behaviour. Freud saw sex as a potential cause of emotional stress. Another great influence was Breuer who pioneered cathartic therapy. This therapy was cognise as the Talking cure.Freuds major technique was go off association, were a patient would be encouraged to relax and e xpress a free flow of thoughts entering their mind. Another popular therapy of Freuds was conceive of analysis where he would attempt to decode the symbols of a dream. His approach had a huge impact on psychology and psychiatry. Freuds theory was real further by Jung, Adler and Anna Freud (his daughter)The Psychoanalyst believed that behaviour was influenced mainly by a part of the mind which we have no awareness of this was called the Unconscious process. They also believed in Psychic determinism, which dictates whatever we say or do has a cause. Hydraulic drives were believed to create psychic energy which if not released would create tenseness and anxiety. The two basic drives, which this refers to, are the Sex drive and the aggressive drive. seemingly according to Freud, different parts of the unconscious mind were in eonian struggle with each other called the Psychodynamic conflict.. He along with others believed that the personality was shape as we entered different stag es of development.It has become apparent that the only similarity between these two approaches is that both Watson and Freud believed their theory could justify all concepts of human behaviour. They allowed no room for any other explanation. This in its self has causes doubt for both sides of the argument. It is obvious to the reader that there a very few similarities between these approaches, however it seems that both the pioneers solely thought their way was the only way. both these men used their own theories to explain the same topics, such as moral development, Aggression and Abnormalities.There are strengths and weakness to all arguments and this one is no exception. Freuds ideas made a large impact on psychology however, his theories had little experimental support except on repression and fixation. The psychoanalytic approach has huge explanatory of power on a multifariousness of subjects. His methods were regarded as unscientific and incapable of being proved wrong. Many experiments carried out using this theory have failed to support Freud. Psychoanalyst therapy has been widely criticised. behaviouristic psychology was scientific and experimental and left a lasting effect on its subjects. It also provides a strong counter argument on the nature rather than nurture argument. Using simple principles, behaviourism can explain a great variety of phenomena and has many practical implications.So what, if any gain has been made by society by these theories?Far more has been gained from the Behaviour theories than that of the psychoanalyst. This is mainly due to the practical implications applied in todays terms. The behaviourist approach has produced many practical implications such as education (programmed learning) also the treatment of those with behavioural disturbances such as phobias and behaviour shaping in autism. The Operant conditioning principles are used to target animals to do tasks. This approach has also been used in advertising and in c hild rearing. The only gain I can acknowledge from Freud and his theories is that of a therapy to help treat mental disorders. I hear little evidence, however, that this theory actually works or indeed if the principles explain everything, I let out it difficult to find any outcome in this theory. I find the Freudian theory (Psychoanalytic) to be inadequate and non scientific.The behaviourist view seems to be a far more objective approach. It has a more scientific and objective view and provides a counter argument to the nature theory. By using a few basic principles, behaviourism can explain many characteristics in both human and animal behaviours and has many practical applications. However, on a more negative note it can be said that behaviourism rejects the conscious mental experiences and assumes that individuals are not responsible for their own actions. In addition it oversimplifies the explanations for behaviour and experiences.BibliographyWatson, J.B, (1913) Psychology as the behaviour views it. Psychological Review, 20, 158-177Thomas, R.K. (1997) American journal of psychology, 110, 115-125Watson J.B (1914). Behaviour An introduction to comparative degree Psychology. New York Holt.Tony Malim & Ann Birch Introduction to Psychology (1998)Graham Hill Psychology through Diagrams (1998)www.psychclassics.yorku.ca/Watson/intro.htmwww.sntp.net/behaviourism/behaviourism-main.htmwww.psych.utah.edu/gordon/Classes/Psy4905Docs.htm