The classical conditioning explanation of phobias, and the

treatment of such conditions.

S. Baldwin
This essay will outline and critically evaluate the classical conditioning
explanation of how phobias are acquired. It will then discuss the influence
the theory of classical conditioning has had on the treatments for phobic
conditions.
Phobias are usually defined as a fearful response to stimuli which is out of
proportion to the actual threat or danger that the stimulus presents. The
existence of phobias and the mechanisms that give rise to them have
been of great interest to the field of psychology from its beginning. One
interpretation of how an individual will develop a phobic response is the
classical conditioning theory. The classical conditioning theory states that
through a process of learned association, the conditioned stimulus will be
paired with the unconditioned stimulus, and a conditioned behavioural
response will then occur when the paired unconditioned stimuli is
presented alone.
One of the first studies to test the possibility of applying classical
conditioning to the development of phobias was Watson and Rayner.
(1920) The paper titled conditioned emotional reaction, attempts to
show the process of conditioning an emotional response in a child, fear in
this case. By showing a white rat, the conditioned stimulus, and pairing it
with a loud sound, striking an iron bar, the unconditioned stimulus, and
repeating this process several times, he is declared to be conditioned
when he shows distressed behaviours such as, crying, turning away and
crawling away, when the white rat alone was put in front of him. The
paper concludes with the suggestion that many phobias have been gained
in some similar way.
There are some methodical problems with Watsons findings, but if one
ignores those for the moment there is one major is issue that is not
addressed and that is, why the conditioned response will last a life time as
a phobia? If as he states that several times it was necessary to freshen
the reaction, this seems to indicate that even when a conditioned
emotional reaction was achieved; after some time had passed the
conditioned response will be greatly lessened or even disappeared without
any intervention at all. The fact that phobias tend to be so persistent, is
not readily explained by classical conditioning particularly when the
pairing of conditioned stimulus and unconditioned stimulus may occur
very infrequently and over a long period of time. Furthermore phobias
tend to cluster around certain stimuli, spiders for example, but the theory

we would lead one to expect a fairly random distribution, given the range
of chance encounters that many occur. These inconsistencies suggest that
the classical conditioning model may not be as explanatory as it may have
initially appeared.
Perhaps the great strength of the classical conditioning theory of phobia
acquisition is its simplicity and compatibility with the scientific method. No
other theory is more straight forward, but as suggested above it seems to
be inadequate to explain why a conditioned response persists as a phobia
without refreshing and why phobias tend to be much more prevalent for
some objects but not others.
One of its major theoretic rivals, certainly in early years of development, is
Freudian psychodynamics. The Freudian theory relates all phobic
responses back to psychosexual development. A phobia, the theory states
is the result of a defence mechanism to help cope with repression. An
individual will displace repressed emotions onto a similar more acceptable
object. The case study of Little Hans, Freud, S, (1909) is an example of
this. Freuds interpretation of the phobic response to a white horse was
that the child was showing a displacement strategy to cope with the
conflict Hans felts towards his father. While Freudian analysis is still
popular in places, its lack of compatibility with the scientific method
makes it a theory that psychologists may be wary of trusting.
There are other explanations for certain phobias that do not involve
classical conditioning, animal phobias, for example that include a disgust
emotion (Davey, 2007) could be interpreted through an evolutionary
biological theory as being pre-wired into the individual for reason of
survival. The evolutionary explanation of biological preparedness and nonassociative fear acquisition, are particularly useful interpretations when
the classical conditioning theory has difficulty understanding the cause of
the phobia, or why some phobias are much more common than others.
Such as when a phobia only concerns a limited number of events and
objects, when phobias are acquired through normal development without
any apparent pairing of the two stimuli. It may have some explanatory
power concerning the difficulty of classically conditioned fear to an event
or object that has no evolutionary fear significance, for example, curtains,
compared to one that does, a spider. Still it remains the case that some
people do acquire phobias of the most innocuous objects such as buttons
and dolls. So evolutionary theory can only be suitable for certain types of
phobia. Evolutionary theory also suffers from the same problems of
verifiability as the Freudian theory does, which is likely to lower
confidence in its predictive and explanatory power.

Phobias can also be about particular situations, Davey (2007) suggests

that situational phobias may be produced by other mechanisms, since
many of this type do not seem to have been traumatically induced like a
classical conditioning model would suggest, but are more related to panic
and panic disorder. This theory considers these phobias to be the
misattribution of bodily sensations directly to a particular situation. An
example of the situational phobia is the interpretation of a bodily
sensation such as vertigo, as threatening and attributing this ambiguous
sensation to the situation.
The classical conditioning theory has been around since Pavlovs first
paper more than a hundred years ago, and as progress in the field of
psychology has moved and developed further so have the theories that
operate with-in it. Field and Nightingale (2009), consider classical
conditioning to form a useful basis for understanding phobias, but point
out modern conditioning theory has developed to include interactions with
cognition and is the basis for many other panic and anxiety disorders.
Davey (2007) outlines a new variant called the two-process model,
which acknowledges second order characteristics of phobias such as
avoidance behaviour, where the individual suffering from a phobia has
learnt to avoid the stimulus, sometimes preventing the extinction of the
phobia when in treatment.
Nevertheless conditioning theory has shaped many of the treatments that
are given to individuals suffering from phobias. Exposure treatments were
some of the first to be developed, and they are still used today. According
to Grs, and Antony, (2006) they are the treatment of choice for specific
phobias. This is because the recorded success rate of these treatments is
very good. As the conditioning theory suggests the therapies purpose is
to either condition a neutral or positive association with the paired
stimulus or repeat exposure until extinction of the fear response has been
achieved. A variety of treatments have been developed to this end.
Flooding is an exposure treatment which can be performed by imagining
the phobic stimulus or being artificially exposed to it. Artificial Reality
simulators have more recently introduced to provide a powerful stimulus
but in a safe and comfortable environment (Grs, and Antony,2006).
Counterconditioning is a different variant, and as the name suggests it is
designed to replace the fear response with a more positive one, the theory
which underlies this therapy and the process by which it is performed are
entirely attributable to the classical conditioning theory.
Systematic desensitisation is also another variant based in conditioning
theory. By involving a ranked list in a fear hierarchy, the individual is

exposed to increasing levels of the stimulus. Beginning at the first level of

phobic stimulus they are exposed until they gain a relaxed state
whereupon they are exposed to the next level and so on until they have
achieved an extinction of the phobic response.
There are also one-session rapid treatment therapies, which have been
developed in recent years for the modern no time to stop, twenty-four
seven society. The classical conditioning principle remains the same,
gradual exposure to the phobic stimulus through a combination of the
afore mentioned strategies until extinction has been achieved.
In conclusion classical conditioning explanation of phobias is useful, but its
explanatory power is limited. While it has several rivals, its simplicity
along with its scientific orientation are the key strengths of the theory.
Although unable to explain all phobias, even where its explanation is not
adequate, the treatments that have developed from the classical
conditioning theory can often help those suffering from them. Conditioning
based therapies remain the most widely used and effective for many
different phobias, this is perhaps the most worthwhile and surprising
legacy of the classical conditioning approach.

References.
Davey, G. Psychopathology and treatment of specific phobias. (2007)
Psychiatry, 6,6, p 247-253
Field A, P, and Nightingale Z, C, (2009) What if Little Albert had Escaped?
Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry. Vol 14(2): 311319.
Freud, S. (1909) Analysis of a phobia of a five year old boy. In The Pelican
Freud Library (1977), Vol 8, Case Histories 1, pages 169-306
Grs, D, F, and Antony, M. The Assessment and Treatment of Specific
Phobias: A Review (2006) Current Psychiatry Reports, 8. p 298303
Watson. J. B, and Rayner. R. (1920) Conditioned Emotional Reactions.
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 3(1), 1-14.

Student number: 11075292

Word count:1439