Psych MEQs / SAQs · Foundations — behavioural science
Learning theory applied to panic and avoidance (MEQ)
FRANZCP/MRCPsych-style MEQ integrating classical/operant learning, extinction/relapse, inhibitory-learning exposure design, and safety limits.
On this page & tools
Target exams
Model answer
Reveal model answer
(i) Classical and operant / two-factor. Classically, interoceptive and situational cues (crowd, heart racing) have become CSs that elicit fear/panic CRs after pairing with intense panic (US-like event).[9] Operantly, leaving the shop negatively reinforces escape by terminating aversive arousal; partner presence and carrying diazepam act as safety signals. Two-factor theory: classical fear to cues + operant avoidance/escape maintained by anxiety reduction, preventing extinction of the CS.[3][4]
(ii) Extinction (Bouton). Extinction is new inhibitory CS–noUS learning, not erasure of the original CS–US memory; retrieval is context- and time-dependent.[3][4] Relevant relapse phenomena: renewal if she only practices in clinic then returns to the mall alone; spontaneous recovery after a gap in practice; reinstatement after an unexpected panic or stressor US-like event; (bonus) rapid reacquisition if a full panic re-pairs cues quickly.
(iii) Inhibitory-learning exposure plan. Assess risk/medical exclusion; build hierarchy; rate specific expectancies (e.g. probability of collapse/heart attack). Design trials that violate expectancies (stay with heart racing without leaving). Fade safety behaviours: partner distance graded, no talisman benzodiazepine, no pulse-checking. Use variability and multiple contexts (different shops, times, alone). Process learning after trials; add retrieval cues; plan boosters against renewal.[5][6][9]
(iv) Vs habituation-only. Habituation model ends trials when SUDS falls and may keep identical graded steps. Inhibitory learning prioritises expectancy violation and retrieval of safety learning; SUDS drop is neither necessary nor sufficient; variability and context diversity are deliberate.[5][6]
(v) Defer elective exposure. Examples: acute suicide plan/intent needing crisis care; medical instability or uncontrolled arrhythmia concerns requiring medical review; severe intoxication; acute psychosis/mania; inability to consent to the plan. MI-style engagement and stabilisation can proceed, but intense interoceptive/mall exposure waits.[6]
Common errors
Equating extinction with unlearning; treating partner/diazepam as harmless coping; designing only office hierarchy without multi-context work; stopping solely because SUDS remains high despite expectancy violation; ignoring risk gates.[3][6][9]
References
- [3]Bouton ME Context, ambiguity, and unlearning: sources of relapse after behavioral extinction Biol Psychiatry, 2002.PMID 12437938
- [4]Bouton ME Context and behavioral processes in extinction Learn Mem, 2004.PMID 15466298
- [5]Craske MG, Kircanski K, Zelikowsky M, et al. Optimizing inhibitory learning during exposure therapy Behav Res Ther, 2008.PMID 18005936
- [6]Craske MG, Treanor M, Conway CC, et al. Maximizing exposure therapy: an inhibitory learning approach Behav Res Ther, 2014.PMID 24864005
- [9]Clark DM A cognitive approach to panic Behav Res Ther, 1986.PMID 3741311