Transcript Chapter 6 Behavioral Methods for Changing Respondent Behavior

Chapter 6
Behavioral Methods for
Changing Respondent
Behavior
What We Learn in the
Respondent Conditioning Process
• a contingent association between the CS and
reflex
• to place a negative or positive value on the CS
Strength of the CR
• the CS should make consistent predictions
• the CS should be closely paired in time with the
US
• the more intense the CS, the stronger and faster
the conditioning
• the more intense the US, the stronger and faster
the conditioning
Other Factors Influencing
Respondent Conditioning
• some US - CS relations are more relevant
– taste (but not auditory and visual stimuli) pairs
well with sickness
– taste does not pair well with pain
• more intense CSs tend to overshadow less intense
stimuli
• once established, a CS tends to block other stimuli
from becoming CSs for the same US (blocking)
Other Factors Influencing
Respondent Conditioning
(continued)
• prior experience with a CS in a neutral setting may
make it more difficult for the stimulus to develop
as a CS (latent inhibition)
• discrimination and generalization develops with
respondent CSs
Second Order Conditioning
• in first-order respondent conditioning, a CS
predicts the US
• in second order conditioning, a CS predicts an
established CS
Second Order Conditioning
Conditioned Emotional
Responses
• a conditioned emotional response (CER) is a
learned fear
• CERs can be learned:
– directly through classical conditioning
– indirectly through modeling
– indirectly through cognitive processes
• genetic factors may contribute to the development
of fears
Conditioned Emotional
Responses (continued)
• elements of fearful experiences may be stored in
separate memory systems
– some elements may be stored in implicit or
"nondeclarative" memory
– other information is stored in explicit or
"declarative" memory
Operant and Classical Control of
Substance Abuse
• operant control of substance abuse:
– positive reinforcement (leads to pleasant
feeling)
– negative reinforcement (eliminates withdrawal
symptoms)
• respondent control of substance use:
– stimuli associated with use can become CSs
that will produce drug-like physiological CRs
Operant and Classical Control of
Substance Abuse (continued)
– encountering these CSs can increase temptation
to use
• -protective physiological CRs develop in the
presence of CSs associated with use
• emetic therapy pairs consumption of alcohol (CS)
with drug (US) that causes nausea (UR)
Respondent Conditioning and
Chemotherapy
• chemotherapy used with cancer patients often
causes nausea as a side effect
– anticipatory nausea can cause sickness just
prior to treatment
– food aversion can develop with tastes
associated with treatment
• overshadowing can be used to associate flavors of
less preferred foods with nausea
Assessing Respondent Behaviors
• assess fears:
– directly by observing overt fearful responses
– indirectly through self-reports and
physiological measures
• frequency and duration data can quantify severity
of fears
• magnitude is more commonly used to measure
severity of CERs
Assessing Respondent Behaviors
(continued)
• magnitude is quantified using:
– physiological responses such as heart rate
– rating scales like the subjective units of
discomfort scale (SUDS)
Functional Analyses in
Respondent Behavior
• antecedents are the original or generalized CSs
• measure antecedents using:
– questionnaires like the Fear Inventory
– self-report of how the fear began
• identify environmental stimuli, general life
factors, and thoughts or images that are associated
with the fear
Functional Analyses in
Respondent Behavior (continued)
• identify bodily sensations and activities associated
with the fear response
• identify avoidance responses maintained by the
fear
• identify additional problems that result from
avoidance
• identify the short- and long-term consequences of
fear-generated behaviors
Extinction and
Counterconditioning Methods
• extinction presents the CS without it predicting
the US
• flooding exposes phobic to an intense CS for a
prolonged period
• spontaneous recovery of an extinguished response
can occur
• counterconditioning associates the CS with an
alternative US
Counterconditioning:
Systematic Desensitization
systematic desensitization gradually replaces fear
with relaxation
• desensitization often begins with relaxation
training and development of a hierarchy of fears
– almost any relaxation procedures can be used
– a stimulus hierarchy identifies stimuli that
elicit very weak to very strong CRs
Counterconditioning: Systematic
Desensitization (continued)
– both imaginal and real life (in vivo) stimuli can
be used
• after relaxation training and development of the
hierarchy, begin desensitization proper:
– present the least-feared stimulus
– client relaxes
– subsequent stimuli are presented once prior
stimuli do not elicit fear
Counterconditioning: Systematic
Desensitization (continued)
• adjustments should be made if fear responses are
observed
Hierarchy of Fear of Heights
1. Standing at a closed upper-floor window and
looking out. (SUDS = 5)
2. Standing on a stepladder, 3 feet from the floor, to
change a light bulb. (SUDS = 15 )
3. Standing on a balcony near the railing, several
stories above the ground. (SUDS = 25)
4. Walking on flat ground above a mountain cliff, 20
feet from the edge. (SUDS = 35)
Hierarchy of Fear of Heights
(continued)
5. Walking on flat ground above a mountain cliff, 5
feet from the edge. (SUDS = 45)
6. Hiking on a steep trail. When cliffs are very near,
there are guard rails. (SUDS = 55)
7. Being a passenger in a car traveling at the speed
limit on a narrow and winding mountain road.
When cliffs occur, there are guard rails. (SUDS =
65)
Hierarchy of Fear of Heights
(continued)
8. Being on an extension ladder outside a house,
cleaning a second-story window. (SUDS = 75)
9. Climbing up a 50-foot high water tower, using a
ladder with handrails. (SUDS = 85)
10. Standing on a moderately sloped roof of a house.
(SUDS = 95)
Effectiveness of Desensitization
Procedures
• systematic desensitization is well documented as
an effective treatment
• treatment effects appear to be durable
• treatment using in vivo stimuli may be better than
those using imaginal stimuli
• desensitization can occur without using relaxation
exercises
Effectiveness of Desensitization
Procedures (continued)
• desensitization can occur without using full
stimulus hierarchies
• use of hierarchies and relaxation do not seem to
harm the individual and may help the process
Vicarious Desensitization
through Modeling
• in participant modeling, the client watches others
interact with a feared object and is encouraged to
do the same
• supplement with prompts and instruction
• modeling treatments for fears may be less likely to
generalize
Tips on Using Systematic
Desensitization
• make sure those involved understand the
procedure, its purpose, and its effectiveness
• personalize the hierarchy
• maximize experience with the CS
• use imaginal CSs when necessary but prefer in
vivo stimuli
Tips on Using Systematic
Desensitization (continued)
• have an assistant present if SUDs are high
• keep CS rankings available for reference
• make sure the target individual has mastered the
relaxation exercises
• do not rush through the procedure
Tips on Using Systematic
Desensitization (continued)
• do not make sessions too long
• schedule sessions at least once or twice per week
• withdraw the CS if the person cannot relax in the
presence of it - reassess your strategy