Comparison of Approaches Part 1 (AQA A-Level Psychology): Revision Notes
Comparison of Approaches Part 1
Introduction to comparing approaches
Psychologists use several criteria to compare the five main approaches in psychology. This comparison helps highlight the similarities and differences between the biological, learning, cognitive, psychodynamic, and humanistic approaches.
The comparison focuses on six key debates:
- Free will vs determinisn
- Nature vs nurture
- Holism vs reductionism
- Idiographic vs nomothetic approaches
- Whether the approach is scientific
- Whether it extrapolates from animal to human behaviour
Each approach can be positioned along these debate continuums, showing where they stand on each issue. This systematic comparison allows psychologists to evaluate the strengths and limitations of different theoretical perspectives in understanding human behaviour.
Criterion 1: Free will and determinism
Understanding the Free Will vs Determinism Debate
This fundamental debate in psychology concerns whether humans have genuine choice in their actions or whether all behaviour is predetermined by various factors.
What this criterion means
Free will refers to the idea that our actions are voluntary and based on personal choice. We make our own decisions and choose our course of action.
Determinism is the opposite - it suggests that an individual's behaviour, choices and thoughts are determined by internal or external factors beyond their conscious control.
Where each approach stands
Biological approach: Strongly deterministic
- Believes behaviours stem from biological roots and are therefore outside conscious control
- Our actions are determined by genetics, brain chemistry, and physiological processes
Learning approach: Mostly deterministic
- The behaviourist element argues behaviour results from stimulus-response reactions
- Even when we think we have choice (no threat of punishment), we're still driven by past experiences of pleasure
- Social learning theory allows some choice in whether we imitate observed behaviours, but this is still dictated by experience
Cognitive approach: Moderately deterministic with some free will
- How we process environmental information is shaped by past experiences (schemas)
- However, cognitive therapy requires individuals to change their thoughts, suggesting some element of free will exists
Psychodynamic approach: Strongly deterministic
- Core assumption is that behaviour and thoughts are dictated by the unconscious mind
- Since we have no control over our unconscious, the approach is strongly deterministic
Key Point: The humanistic approach is unique among psychological theories for its strong emphasis on human agency and personal responsibility.
Humanistic approach: Strongly supports free will
- The only approach to fully advocate free will
- Believes we choose our own path in life and have complete control over our actions
Criterion 2: Nature-nurture debate
The Nature-Nurture Debate
This debate examines the relative contributions of genetic inheritance (nature) versus environmental factors (nurture) in shaping human behaviour and development.
What this criterion means
The nature-nurture debate examines whether our thoughts, feelings and behaviours result from our genetic makeup (nature) or environmental influences (nurture). Most approaches acknowledge both play a role, but differ in which they emphasise more.
Where each approach stands
Biological approach: Strongly nature-focused
- Core assumption is that behaviour can be passed on through genetic makeup
- Acknowledges environment affects genetic development but maintains genetics are the primary influence
- Illustrated by concepts like phenotype development
Learning approach: Strongly nurture-focused
- Behaviourism believes everyone is born free of predispositions
- Environment shapes all behaviour through learning from role models
- Takes an extreme nurture position with no acknowledgement of innate capacities
Cognitive approach: Balanced view
- Accepts there could be innate thought mechanisms important for development of thought and language
- Also recognises the environment's role in shaping thought processes
- Processing is based on experience, placing it on the nurture side of the debate
Psychodynamic approach: Neither side clearly
- Argues for existence of innate drives (represented by the id)
- However, parenting affects formation of other personality elements
- Therefore nurture plays a role too, making it interactionist
Humanistic approach: Difficult to determine
- Doesn't believe the debate is valid as it tries to make generalisations about large numbers of people
- This conflicts with the individualism it advocates
- However, there seems to be an innate drive to be the best you can be (nature) but environment can aid or hinder this process (nurture)
- Humanist theories appear to be interactionist
Criterion 3: Holism and reductionism
Understanding Holism vs Reductionism
This debate concerns the best way to study and understand human behaviour - whether to break it down into component parts or study it as a complete, integrated whole.
What this criterion means
Reductionism views behaviour as best understood by reducing it down to its constituent parts - breaking it into smaller components to study.
Holism views behaviour as best understood as a whole rather than just the sum of its parts - considering the complete picture and interactions between different factors.
Where each approach stands
Biological approach: Most reductionist
- Most commonly associated with reductionism
- Tries to explain behaviour through genetic, physiological or biochemical causes
- Reduces complex behaviours to simple biological mechanisms
Critical Consideration: While reductionism allows for precise scientific investigation, it may oversimplify complex human behaviours by ignoring the interactions between different factors.
Learning approach: Reductionist
- Behaviourism has experimental reductionism due to its focus on stimulus-response experimental design
- Upholds scientific investigation by isolating behavioural elements
- Seen as reductionist for this reason
Cognitive approach: Supports experimental reductionism
- Experiments are carefully controlled to isolate one variable for testing
- However, there's an issue with 'decoupling' - isolating one cognitive process for testing when in reality many cognitive functions work together
- Some attempts within cognitive psychology to look at context make it less artificial and less reductionist
Psychodynamic approach: More holistic than reductionist
- Believes all elements of an individual's behaviour should be taken into account
- Not seen as reductionist as it doesn't employ scientific methods to investigate behaviour
- However, could be argued it's reductionist due to focus on drives as underpinning behaviour
- These drives could be seen as the explanation behind behaviour, making it reductionist
- Generally considered more holistic than reductionist
Humanistic approach: Holistic
- Does not believe in reducing behaviour to specific elements
- Believes the individual should be regarded as a whole
- Rejects using scientific method to investigate behaviour
- Has no elements of experimental reductionism
Key Points to Remember:
-
Free will vs determinism: Humanistic approach supports free will most strongly, while biological and psychodynamic approaches are most deterministic
-
Nature vs nurture: Biological approach emphasises nature, learning approach emphasises nurture, while cognitive, psychodynamic and humanistic approaches take more balanced positions
-
Holism vs reductionism: Humanistic approach is most holistic, biological and learning approaches are most reductionist, with others falling somewhere in between
-
Each approach can be positioned along continuums for these debates, helping to visualise their similarities and differences
-
Understanding where approaches stand on these criteria helps evaluate their strengths and limitations in explaining human behaviour