Evaluation of a Learning Theory
Psychology: AQA A Level, topic 17.1.4
Evaluation of Learning Theory: Strengths
The learning theory states that nicotine addiction is a learned behaviour by observing and modelling nicotine-related behaviour. Nicotine addiction is then reinforced through operant or classical conditioning.
Moolchan et al. (2000)
- There have been a number of studies that support the theory. - One such study was done by Moolchan et al. (2000).
- They discovered that 75% of teenage smokers had at least one parent that smoked.
- In other words, they were likely to learn smoking behaviour from their parents, which supports social learning theory.
Moolchan et al. (2000) cont.
- Additionally, the teens surveyed said that they liked to smoke to fit in with their peers.
- So the idea of operant conditioning is supported - the teens continued to smoke because the habit was positively reinforced.
Cue reactivity
- A second study conducted by Engelmann et al. (2012) provided support for cue reactivity.
- Cue reactivity is a form of classical conditioning whereby people see stimuli associated with smoking (such as alcohol, cigarette lighters, people who smoke) and begin to crave nicotine as a result.
Engelmann et al.
- Engelmann et al. completed a meta-analysis of fMRI examinations.
- They found, in smokers, that there were larger neural responses to smoking-related cues compared to non-smoking (neutral) cues.
Generalisability
- A third strength is the fact that many of the studies were conducted with humans, rather than with animals.
- So the conclusions drawn from these studies can be generalised to the population.
- The brain neurochemistry approach did many animal studies, so the findings from these studies could not be generalised to humans.
Psychological and physical dependence
- Finally, some substances, such as cannabis, do not cause physical withdrawal symptoms.
- So addictions to these substances cannot be explained through the brain neurochemistry approach.
- But the learning theory explains the psychological dependence formed for these substances.
- This is a strength of the learning theory because it explains both psychological dependence and physical dependence.
Evaluation of Learning Theory: Weaknesses
The learning theory states that nicotine addiction is a learned behaviour through observing and modelling others. Nicotine use is then reinforced through operant or classical conditioning.
Nomothetic
- Nomothetic approaches are those that focus on explaining behaviour through general laws that apply to whole populations.
- The learning theory of explaining nicotine addiction is nomothetic, so it does not take into account individual differences.
Reductionist
- The theory also ignores other factors that lead to addiction, such as genetics and the brain neurochemistry approach.
- This makes it reductionist.
Free will
- Free will is the concept that people choose how to behave.
- This is the opposite of determinism, where behaviour is a result of cause-and-effect relationships.
- There is a certain degree of free will whereby people can make a decision to use nicotine.
Free will cont.
- They can make this decision based on what they know about cigarettes (i.e. the dangers).
- But the learning theory does not take into account free will, so is a weakness.
Combination
- Overall, addiction to nicotine is likely to be a combination of brain neurochemistry (biochemical), genetics and social learning.
- Biochemical and genetic factors fall on the nature side of the debate, while social learning falls on the nurture side of the debate.
Nature and nurture
- People may have genetics (nature) that make them more likely to be predisposed to addiction. But they may also have role models (environment/nurture) from which to imitate behaviour.
- The majority of psychologists believe that most human behaviour, including addiction, is likely caused by the interaction of nature and nurture.
Test yourself on Evaluation of a Learning Theory
What is NOT a weakness of the learning theory explanation of addiction?
Why is the learning theory nomothetic?