AQA Syllabus focus:
'Comparison of approaches in Psychology, including their assumptions and explanations of behaviour.'
Psychologists use different approaches to explain the same behavior. Comparing them helps you identify shared themes, major disagreements, and the strengths and limits of each explanation.
Core assumptions of the major approaches
Each approach begins with a different view of what causes behavior.
The behaviorist approach assumes behavior is learned from the environment through experience. It focuses on observable actions rather than internal thoughts.
Social learning theory agrees that behavior is learned, but argues that learning also happens through observing others and thinking about consequences.
The cognitive approach assumes internal mental processes are important. Behavior depends on how people process, store, and interpret information.
The biological approach assumes behavior has a physical basis, such as genes, brain structures, hormones, and neurotransmitters.
The psychodynamic approach assumes unconscious processes and early childhood experiences shape later behavior.
The humanistic approach assumes people are active agents who make choices and seek personal growth.
These assumptions matter because they lead each approach to explain the same behavior in very different ways.
Major comparison themes
Determinism and free will
A two-dimensional table that distinguishes different philosophical positions by crossing beliefs about determinism with beliefs about free will. This helps you see why approaches can be described as ‘deterministic’ in different ways, and why ‘free will’ can be defined differently depending on whether determinism is accepted or rejected. Source
Determinism: The view that behavior is caused by factors outside an individual’s conscious control.
The biological approach is strongly biologically deterministic because it explains behavior through inherited or physiological causes. The psychodynamic approach is also deterministic, but in a different way: behavior is driven by unconscious motives and unresolved conflict. The behaviorist approach is environmentally deterministic, since behavior is shaped by past conditioning.
The cognitive approach is often seen as soft deterministic. It accepts that thinking influences behavior, but these thought processes can still be studied as causes. Social learning theory is also less rigid than behaviorism because it includes mental processes such as attention and motivation. The humanistic approach is the clearest supporter of free will, arguing that behavior reflects conscious choice rather than fixed internal or external forces.
Nature and nurture
A second major comparison is the nature-nurture debate. The biological approach emphasizes nature, seeing behavior as strongly influenced by inheritance and physiology. The behaviorist approach strongly supports nurture, arguing that behavior is learned from environmental experiences.
Some approaches sit between these extremes. Social learning theory stresses environmental learning, but recognizes that cognitive factors affect whether learning is copied. The cognitive approach also includes both sides: people may have general mental abilities, but their thinking is shaped by experience. The psychodynamic approach includes innate drives but also gives great importance to childhood experience. The humanistic approach focuses less on the debate itself and more on present subjective experience and personal development.
Reductionism and holism
Reductionism: Explaining behavior by breaking it down into simpler component parts.
The biological approach is highly reductionist because it may explain complex behavior in terms of genes, brain regions, or chemicals. The behaviorist approach is also reductionist because it reduces behavior to learned stimulus-response links. The cognitive approach can be reductionist when it compares human thinking to information processing systems.
In contrast, the humanistic approach is holistic. It argues that behavior should be understood by looking at the whole person, including conscious experience, feelings, and goals. The psychodynamic approach is less reductionist than behaviorism or biology because it considers several interacting psychological forces, although critics still argue it may oversimplify behavior by focusing too much on unconscious conflict.
Comparing explanations of behavior
How each approach explains behavior
The clearest differences appear in what each approach treats as the main cause of behavior.
Behaviorist: behavior is learned through associations and consequences in the environment.
Social learning theory: behavior is learned by observing models, especially when those models appear rewarded.
Cognitive: behavior results from how information is attended to, interpreted, and remembered.
Biological: behavior is caused by physical processes, including genetic and neural influences.
Psychodynamic: behavior reflects unconscious conflict and the influence of early experiences.
Humanistic: behavior reflects conscious choices, the self-concept, and the drive toward growth.
This means some approaches explain behavior from the outside, such as behaviorism, while others focus more on internal causes, such as cognitive, biological, and psychodynamic explanations.
Scientific emphasis
The approaches also differ in how scientific their explanations are. The behaviorist and biological approaches are usually seen as more scientific because they rely on observable or measurable evidence. The cognitive approach also aims to be scientific, although it often makes inferences about mental processes that cannot be directly seen.
The psychodynamic and humanistic approaches are often criticized as less scientific because their concepts can be harder to test objectively. However, they may offer richer explanations of personal meaning and subjective experience.
Idiographic and nomothetic tendencies
Another useful comparison is whether an approach aims to discover general laws or understand the unique individual. The behaviorist, biological, and cognitive approaches are more nomothetic because they seek broad principles that apply to many people. This supports prediction and scientific testing.
The humanistic approach is mainly idiographic, focusing on the individual’s personal experience. The psychodynamic approach also includes idiographic elements because it often emphasizes detailed case material. This makes these approaches useful for understanding the person in depth, but less suited to producing universal explanations of behavior.
Practice Questions
Outline one difference between the biological approach and the behaviorist approach in explaining behavior. (2 marks)
1 mark for identifying that the biological approach explains behavior using internal physical factors such as genes, brain structures, or neurochemistry.
1 mark for identifying that the behaviorist approach explains behavior using environmental learning such as conditioning or past experience.
Credit any other clear difference in explanation.
Compare the psychodynamic approach with the humanistic approach in terms of their assumptions and explanations of behavior. (6 marks)
1 mark for stating that the psychodynamic approach is deterministic.
1 mark for stating that the humanistic approach emphasizes free will.
1 mark for explaining that the psychodynamic approach explains behavior through unconscious processes or early childhood experiences.
1 mark for explaining that the humanistic approach explains behavior through conscious choice, self-concept, or personal growth.
1 mark for an explicit comparison, such as unconscious causes versus conscious experience.
1 mark for a second explicit comparison, such as pessimistic/determined view versus optimistic/self-directed view.
Accept other accurate comparative points about assumptions or explanations of behavior.
FAQ
Social learning theory overlaps with more than one tradition.
It shares the learning focus of behaviorism because it sees behavior as acquired from the environment.
It also includes mental processes, which makes it similar to the cognitive approach.
This is why many psychologists see it as a bridge between behaviorist and cognitive explanations rather than a completely isolated approach.
Yes. Different approaches often focus on different levels of explanation.
For example, one approach may explain how a behavior is learned, while another explains why a person may be more vulnerable to showing it.
This does not always mean one approach is wrong. In many cases, combining explanations gives a fuller picture than using only one.
An interactionist explanation argues that behavior results from several factors working together.
Instead of choosing between biology, learning, or cognition, it suggests:
biological influences may create predispositions
environmental experiences may trigger or shape them
thinking may influence how the person responds
This matters because real behavior is often too complex to be explained fully by a single approach.
Reductionist explanations are useful because they make behavior easier to study scientifically.
They can:
isolate specific variables
improve measurement
support controlled research
lead to practical applications
The weakness is that they may leave out context or personal meaning. The strength is that they often produce clear, testable explanations.
Approaches that identify clear causes of behavior often produce direct interventions.
For example, if an approach explains behavior through learning, biology, or information processing, psychologists can design treatments that target those processes.
Approaches centered on personal meaning or subjective experience may still be valuable, but their applications are sometimes less standardized and harder to measure in the same way.
