Psych Vivas · Foundations — behavioural science
Learning theory and behavioural science — structured clinical viva
Learning theory and behavioural science — structured clinical viva
On this page & tools
Target exams
Opening definitions
Classical conditioning: CS predicts US → CR. Operant: behaviour shaped by consequences (positive/negative reinforcement and punishment). Observational: modelling via attention, retention, reproduction, motivation; self-efficacy drives persistence under threat.[1]
Schedules (30-second version)
Continuous: fast learn, fast extinguish. Intermittent — especially variable ratio — high steady rates, extinction-resistant (gambling pearl). Fixed interval scallops; variable interval moderate steady rates. Self-efficacy still determines whether patients initiate contact with harder schedules under threat.[1]
OCD case — mechanism and ERP
Obsessions function as threat cues; washing is negatively reinforced by distress reduction. ERP arranges exposure to contamination cues without the ritual so new inhibitory learning can form that the feared outcome does not require washing. Optimise with expectancy ratings, variability, multiple contexts, and fading of subtle safety (e.g. “mental washing”). Evidence supports exposure-based treatment for OCD.[5][6][15]
Extinction teaching point
Extinction ≠ erasure. Original CS–US memory remains; inhibitory CS–noUS learning is retrieved in context. Name renewal, spontaneous recovery, reinstatement, rapid reacquisition.[3]
Depression case — BA
Low response-contingent positive reinforcement and avoidance maintain depression (Ferster line). BA: monitor activity, schedule values-based tasks, grade difficulty, problem-solve barriers. Dimidjian 2006: BA comparable to antidepressant and outperformed CT in more severe depression acutely; lineage reviewed 2011.[2][7][18]
Inhibitory learning vs habituation
Habituation model: stay until anxiety falls. Inhibitory learning: violate specific expected catastrophes; SUDS drop not required; remove safety signals; vary contexts to fight renewal.[5][6]
Safety and examiner traps
Defer exposure if acute risk/medical instability. Do not invent legal section numbers; capacity and least-restrictive care still apply. Trap answers: “extinction deletes fear forever”; “partner is fine forever as coping”; “variable ratio extinguishes fastest.” These traps reverse Bouton and Craske principles and ignore safety gates.[3][5][6]
References
- [1]Bandura A Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change Psychol Rev, 1977.PMID 847061
- [2]Ferster CB A functional anlysis of depression Am Psychol, 1973.PMID 4753644
- [3]Bouton ME Context, ambiguity, and unlearning: sources of relapse after behavioral extinction Biol Psychiatry, 2002.PMID 12437938
- [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
- [7]Dimidjian S, Hollon SD, Dobson KS, et al. Randomized trial of behavioral activation, cognitive therapy, and antidepressant medication in the acute treatment of adults with major depression J Consult Clin Psychol, 2006.PMID 16881773
- [15]Foa EB, McLean CP The Efficacy of Exposure Therapy for Anxiety-Related Disorders and Its Underlying Mechanisms: The Case of OCD and PTSD Annu Rev Clin Psychol, 2016.PMID 26565122
- [18]Dimidjian S, Barrera M Jr, Martell C, et al. The origins and current status of behavioral activation treatments for depression Annu Rev Clin Psychol, 2011.PMID 21275642