Who was Ole Ivar Lovaas (1927-2010)?

Introduction

Ole Ivar Løvaas (08 May 1927 to 02 August 2010) was a Norwegian-American clinical psychologist and professor at the University of California, Los Angeles. He is most well known for his research on what is now called applied behaviour analysis (ABA) to teach autistic children through prompts, modeling, and positive reinforcement. The therapy is also noted for its use of aversives (punishment) to reduce undesired behavior, however these are now used less commonly than in the past.

Løvaas founded the Lovaas Institute and co-founded the Autism Society of America. He is also considered a pioneer of ABA due to his development of discrete trial training and early intensive behavioural intervention for autistic children.

His work influenced how autism is treated, and Løvaas received widespread acclaim and several awards during his lifetime.

Personal Life

Løvaas was born in Lier, Norway on 8 May 1927 to Hildur and Ernst Albert Løvaas. He had two siblings: an older sister named Nora and a younger brother named Hans Erik. Løvaas attended Hegg Elementary School in Lier from 1934 to 1941. He attended junior high school at Drammen Realskole until 1944, and then moved on to Drammen Latin School for high school, graduating in 1947.

Following World War II, Løvaas moved to the United States. There he married Beryl Scoles in 1955, and together they had four children. Lovaas later divorced his wife and remarried Nina Watthen in 1986.

Career

After graduating from high school, Løvaas served in the Norwegian Air Force for 18 months. He was a forced farm worker during the 1940s Nazi occupation of Norway, and often said that observing the Nazis had sparked his interest in human behaviour.

He attended Luther College in Decorah, Iowa, graduating in 1951 after just one year with his B.A. in sociology. Løvaas received his Masters of Science in clinical psychology from the University of Washington in 1955, and his PhD in learning and clinical psychology from the same school 3 years later.

Early in his career, Løvaas worked at the Pinel foundation, which focused on Freudian psychoanalysis. After earning his PhD, he took a position at the University of Washington’s Child Development Institute, where he first learned of behaviour analysis. Løvaas began teaching at UCLA in 1961 in the Department of Psychology, where he performed research on children with autism spectrum disorder at the school’s Neuropsychiatric Institute. He started an early intervention clinic at UCLA called the UCLA Young Autism Project, which provided intensive intervention inside the children’s homes. He was named professor emeritus in 1994. Løvaas also established the Lovaas Institute for Early Intervention (LIFE) that provides interventions based on his research.

Løvaas taught now prominent behaviorists, such as Robert Koegel, Laura Schreibman, Tristram Smith, Doreen Granpeesheh, John McEachin, Ron Leaf, Jacquie Wynn, and thousands of UCLA students who took his “Behaviour Modification” course during his 50 years of teaching. He also co-founded what is today the Autism Society of America (ASA), published hundreds of research articles and several books, and received many accolades for his research. Due to this research, a number of school districts have adopted his programmes. His work influenced how autism is treated.

Research

Autism Intervention

Early Research

Løvaas established the Young Autism Project clinic at UCLA in 1962, where he began his research, authored training manuals, and recorded tapes of him and his graduate students implementing errorless learning—based on operant conditioning and what was then referred to as behaviour modification—to instruct autistic children. He later coined the term “discrete trial training” to describe the procedure, which was used to teach listener responding, eye contact, fine and gross motor imitation, receptive and expressive language, academic, and a variety of other skills. In an errorless discrete trial, the child sits at a table across from the therapist who provides an instruction (i.e. “do this”, “look at me”, “point to”, etc.), followed by a prompt, then the child’s response, and a stimulus reinforcer. The prompts are later discontinued once the child demonstrates proficiency. During this time, Løvaas and colleagues also employed physical aversives (punishment), such as electric shocks and slaps, to decrease aggressive and self-injurious behaviour, as well as verbal reprimands if the child answered incorrectly or engaged in self-stimulatory behaviour.

1987 Study

In 1987, Løvaas published a study which demonstrated that, following forty hours a week of treatment, 9 of the 19 autistic children developed typical spoken language, increased IQs by 30 points on average, and were placed in regular classrooms. A 1993 follow-up study found that 8 maintained their gains and were “indistinguishable from their typically developing peers”, scoring in the normal range of social and emotional functioning. His studies were limited because Løvaas did not randomise the participants or treatment groups. This produced a quasi-experiment in which he was able to control the assignment of children to treatment groups. His manipulation of the study in this way may have been responsible for the observed effects. The true efficacy of his method cannot be determined since his studies cannot be repeated for ethical reasons. A 1998 study subsequently recommended that EIBI programs be regarded with scepticism. In 1999, the United States Surgeon General’s office wrote, “Thirty years of research has demonstrated the efficacy of applied behavioral methods in reducing inappropriate behavior and in increasing communication, learning, and appropriate social behavior”, and he also endorsed the 1987 study.

Literature Reviews

According to a 2007 review study in Paediatrics:

“The effectiveness of [EIBI] in [autism spectrum disorder] has been well-documented through 5 decades of research by using single-subject methodology and in controlled studies… in university and community settings.”

It further stated:

“Children who receive early intensive behavioral treatment have been shown to make substantial, sustained gains in IQ, language, academic performance, and adaptive behavior as well as some measures of social behavior, and their outcomes have been significantly better than those of children in control groups.”

However, the study also recommended to later generalise the child’s skills with more naturalistic ABA-based procedures, such as incidental teaching and pivotal response treatment, so their progress is maintained.

Another review in 2008 described DTT as a “‘well-established’ psychosocial intervention for improving the intellectual performance of young children with autism spectrum disorders…” In 2011, it was found that the intervention is effective for some, but “the literature is limited by methodological concerns” due to there being small sample sizes and very few studies that used random assignment, and a 2018 Cochrane review subsequently indicated low-quality evidence to support this method. Nonetheless, a meta-analysis in the same journal database concludes how some recent research is beginning to suggest that because of the heterology of ASD, there is a wide range of different learning styles and that it is the children with lower receptive language skills who acquire spoken language from Løvaas’ treatment. In 2023, a randomised control trial study of 164 participants indicated similar findings.

UCLA Feminine Boy Project

Løvaas co-authored a study with George Rekers in 1974 where they attempted to modify the behaviour of feminine male children through the use of rewards and punishment with the goal of preventing them from becoming adult transsexuals. The subject of the first of these studies, a young boy at the age of 4 at the inception of the experiment, died by suicide as an adult in 2003; his family attribute the suicide to this treatment. Despite the follow-up study (which Løvaas was not involved in) writing that the therapy successfully converted his homosexuality, his sister expressed concerns that it was overly biased as “he was conditioned to say that”, and she read his journal, which described how he feared disclosing his sexual orientation due to his father spanking him as a child as punishment for engaging in feminine behaviour, such as playing with dolls.

In October 2020, the Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis officially issued an Expression of Concern about the Rekers and Løvaas study.[30] In the editorial accompanying the Expression of Concern, the journal discusses the damage done by the study. It emphasizes that the study inflicted personal harm upon the study’s subject and his family, as well as to the gay community, for inappropriately promoting the study as evidence that conversion therapy is effective. It also argues that the field of behaviour analysis was harmed by the false portrayal that the study and the use of conversion therapy are currently representative of the field.

Awards and Accolades

Løvaas received praise from several organizations during his lifetime. In 2001, he was given the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology Distinguished Career Award. He received the Edgar Doll Award from the 33rd Division of the American Psychological Association, the Lifetime Research Achievement Award from the 55th Division of the American Psychological Association, and the Award for Effective Presentation of Behaviour Analysis in the Mass Media by the Association for Behaviour Analysis International. Løvaas also earned a Guggenheim fellowship and the California Senate Award, which is an honorary doctorate. He was named a Fellow by Division 7 of the American Psychological Association and was given the Champion of Mental Health Award by Psychology Today.

Criticism

The goal of making autistic people indistinguishable from their peers has attracted significant backlash from autistic advocates. Julia Bascom of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) has said “ASAN’s objection is fundamentally an ethical one. The stated end goal of ABA is an autistic child who is ‘indistinguishable from their peers’—an autistic child who can pass as neurotypical. We don’t think that’s an acceptable goal. The end goal of all services, supports, interventions, and therapies an autistic child receives should be to support them in growing up into an autistic adult who is happy, healthy, and living a self-determined life.”

Løvaas has also been criticised for his view of autistic people in relation to other people, as he said in a statement during an interview, “You start pretty much from scratch when you work with an autistic person. You have a person in the physical sense – they have hair, a nose, a mouth – but they are not people in the psychological sense.”

Aversives

Løvaas is credited with popularizing the use of aversives in behaviour modification, as shown in a Life magazine photo spread in 1965.

He later admitted that they were only temporarily effective and punishments became less effective over time. Eventually, Løvaas abandoned these tactics, telling CBS in a 1994 interview, “These people are so used to pain that they can adapt to almost any kind of aversive you give them.”

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ole_Ivar_Lovaas >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

What is Discrete Trial Training?

Introduction

Discrete trial training (DTT) is a technique used by practitioners of applied behaviour analysis (ABA) that was developed by Ivar Lovaas at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). DTT uses mass instruction and reinforcers that create clear contingencies to shape new skills. Often employed as an early intensive behavioural intervention (EIBI) for up to 25–40 hours per week for children with autism, the technique relies on the use of prompts, modelling, and positive reinforcement strategies to facilitate the child’s learning. It previously used aversives to punish unwanted behaviours. DTT has also been referred to as the “Lovaas/UCLA model”, “rapid motor imitation antecedent”, “listener responding”, errorless learning”, and “mass trials”.

Brief History

Discrete trial training is rooted in the hypothesis of Charles Ferster that autism was caused in part by a person’s inability to react appropriately to “social reinforcers”, such as praise or criticism. Lovaas’s early work concentrated on showing that it was possible to strengthen autistic people’s responses to these social reinforcers, but he found these improvements were not associated with any general improvement in overall behaviour.

In a 1987 paper, psychologists Frank Gresham and Donald MacMillan described a number of weaknesses in Lovass’s research and judged that it would be better to call the evidence for his interventions “promising” rather than “compelling”.

Lovaas’s original technique used aversives such as striking, shouting, and electrical shocks to punish undesired behaviours. By 1979, Lovaas had abandoned the use of aversives, and in 2012 the use of electric shocks was described as being inconsistent with contemporary practice.

Technique

Discrete trial training (DTT) is a process whereby an activity is divided into smaller distinct sub-tasks and each of these is repeated continuously until a person is proficient. The trainer rewards successful completion and uses errorless correction procedures if there is unsuccessful completion by the subject to condition them into mastering the process. When proficiency is gained in each sub-task, they are re-combined into the whole activity: in this way proficiency at complex activities can be taught.

DTT is carried out in a one-on-one therapist to student ratio at the table. Intervention can start when a child is as young as two years old and can last from two to six years. Progression through goals of the program are determined individually and are not determined by which year the client has been in the program. The first year seeks to reduce self-stimulating (“stimming”) behaviour, teach listener responding, eye contact, and rapid fine and gross motor imitation, as well as to establish playing with toys in their intended manner, and integrate the family into the treatment protocol. The second year teaches early expressive language and abstract linguistic skills. The third year strives to include the individual’s community in the treatment to optimize “mainstreaming” by focusing on peer interaction, basic socializing skills, emotional expression and variation, in addition to observational learning and pre-academic skills, such as reading, writing, and arithmetic. Rarely is the technique implemented for the first time with adults.

DTT is typically performed five to seven days a week with each session lasting from five to eight hours, totalling an average of 30–40 hours per week. Sessions are divided into trials with intermittent breaks, and the therapist is positioned directly across the table from the student receiving treatment. Each trial is composed of the therapist giving an instruction (i.e. “Look at me”, “Do this”, “Point to”, etc.), in reference to an object, colour, simple imitative gesture, etc., which is followed by a prompt (verbal, gestural, physical, etc.). The concept is centred on shaping the child to respond correctly to the instructions throughout the trials. Should the child fail to respond to an instruction, the therapist uses either a “partial prompt” (a simple nudge or touch on the hand or arm) or a “full prompt” to facilitate the child to successfully complete the task. Correct responses are reinforced with a reward, and the prompts are discontinued as the child begins to master each skill.

The intervention is often used in conjunction with the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) as it primes the child for an easy transition between treatment types. The PECS programme serves as another common intervention technique used to conform individuals with autism. As many as 25% of autistic individuals have no functional speech. The programme teaches spontaneous social communication through symbols or pictures by relying on ABA techniques. PECS operates on a similar premise to DTT in that it uses systematic chaining to teach the individual to pair the concept of expressive speech with an object. It is structured in a similar fashion to DTT, in that each session begins with a preferred reinforcer survey to ascertain what would most motivate the child and effectively facilitate learning.

Effectiveness

Limited research shows DTT to be effective in enhancing spoken language, academic and adaptive skills, as many studies are of low quality research design and there needs to be more larger sample sizes.

Society and Culture

In Media

A 1965 article in Life magazine entitled Screams, Slaps and Love has a lasting impact on public attitudes towards Lovaas’s therapy. Giving little thought to how their work might be portrayed, Lovaas and parent advocate Bernie Rimland, M.D., were surprised when the magazine article appeared, since it focussed on text and selected images showing the use of aversives, including a close up of a child being slapped. Even after the use of aversives had been largely discontinued, the article continued to have an effect, galvanising public concerns about behaviour modification techniques.

United States Cost

In April 2002, treatment cost in the US was about US$4,200 per month ($50,000 annually) per child. The 20–40 hours per week intensity of the program, often conducted at home, may place additional stress on already challenged families.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrete_trial_training >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

What is Amotivational Syndrome?

Introduction

Amotivational syndrome is a chronic psychiatric disorder characterised by signs that are linked to cognitive and emotional states such as detachment, blunted emotion and drives, executive functions like memory and attention, disinterest, passivity, apathy, and a general lack of motivation. This syndrome can be branched into two subtypes – marijuana amotivational syndrome, interchangeably known as cannabis induced amotivational syndrome which is caused by usage and/or dependency of the substance and is primarily associated with long-term effects of cannabis use, and SSRI-induced amotivational syndrome or SSRI-induced apathy caused by the intake of SSRI medication dosage. According to the Handbook of Clinical Psychopharmacology for Therapists, amotivational syndrome is listed as a possible side effect of SSRIs in the treatment of clinical depression.

Refer to Avolition.

Signs and Symptoms

Amotivational syndrome has been suspected to affect the frontal cortex or frontal lobe of the brain by the impairment of that region which monitors cognitive functions and skills that revolve around emotional expression, decision making, prioritisation, and internal, purposeful mental action. It is most often detected through signs that are linked to apathy such as disinhibited presentations, short and long term memory deficit or amnesia, a lack of emotional display also known as emotional blunting, relative disinterest, passivity, and reluctance to participate in prolonged activities that require attention or tenacity. Common symptoms that may also be experienced include incoherence, an inability to concentrate on tasks, emotional distress, a diminished level of consciousness, selective attention or attentional control, and being withdrawn and asocial. These symptoms are also generally linked to cannabis consumption and abuse, as well as SSRI medication that are often used as forms of antidepressant medication.

Subtypes

Cannabis Amotivational Syndrome

The term amotivational syndrome was first devised to understand and explain the diminished drive and desire to work or compete among the population of youth who are frequent consumers of cannabis and has since been researched through various methodological studies with this focus on cannabis, or marijuana. Cannabis amotivational syndrome is often used interchangeably with marijuana amotivational syndrome and marijuana or cannabis induced or related amotivational syndrome. Cannabis related amotivational syndrome is closely tied with cannabis use disorder which is recognised in the fifth version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and has similar conditions such as withdrawing and giving up from daily activities and neglecting major roles and responsibilities. It is one of the major complications of chronic exposure to cannabis as it includes the effects and elements of cognitive deficit or cognitive impairment that are similar to what appears in schizophrenia and depression. It is characterised by a gradual detachment and disconnect from the outer world due to a loss of emotional reactivity, drives, and aims. Responsiveness to any stimuli is limited, and those affected are unable to experience or anticipate any pleasure except through the use of cannabis. Marijuana amotivational syndrome has been looked at within the context of how motivation-related constructs influence the young adult in the context of the school or workplace as those affected have poor levels of school-related functioning, are unable to focus on schoolwork due to their lack of motivation, are less satisfied with participating in educational activities, and easily enter into conflict with scholastic authorities. Additionally, marijuana amotivational syndrome is closely linked to self-efficacy, a psychological concept which encapsulates how one values their capabilities and the amount of confidence they hold in their capabilities to persevere – this is related to motivation as people who hold a high amount of self-efficacy are more likely to make efforts to complete a task and persist longer in those efforts compared to those with lower self-efficacy.

SSRI-Induced Amotivational Syndrome

Amotivational syndrome caused or related to SSRI dosage is also commonly known as apathy syndrome, SSRI-induced apathy syndrome, SSRI-induced apathy, and antidepressant apathy syndrome. “Apathy is defined as the presence of diminished motivation in an individual – a development that is not attributable to a reduced level of consciousness, cognitive impairment (e.g. dementia), or emotional distress (i.e. depression)”. This syndrome is linked to the consumption and dosage of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), which are typically used as antidepressants, and has been reported in patients undergoing SSRI treatment as SSRIs may modulate and alter the activity occurring in the frontal lobe of the brain, one of the four major lobes in the brain that contains most of the dopaminergic pathways that are associated with reward, attention, short-term memory tasks, planning, and motivation. This syndrome may be related to serotonergic effects on the frontal lobes and/or serotonergic modulation of mid-brain dopaminergic systems which project to the prefrontal cortex, both suggesting the possibility of frontal lobe dysfunction due to the alteration of serotonin levels. This brings on a number of similar symptoms that lead to dose dependency and apathy, however, it has often been unrecognized and undiagnosed due to the lack of prevalent data and its subtle and delayed onset.

When looking at SSRI-induced amotivational syndrome as a clinical side effect, it can be looked at through a behavioural perspective as well as an emotional perspective. When looked at as a behavioural syndrome the association between apathy or low motivation and SSRI prescription has been recognised as a potential side effect, for example, behavioural apathy has been noted in several case reports. Aside from a behavioural perspective, an emotional perspective emphasizes the emotional aspects of indifference such as a lack of emotional responsiveness, a reduction in emotional sensitivity such as numbing or blunting emotion, affected patients often describe having a restricted range of emotions including those emotions that are a part of everyday life, and distinct emotional themes in affected patience that include a general reduction in the intensity or experience of all emotions, both positive and negative, and feeling emotionally detached and “just not caring”, diminishing emotionality in both personal and professional interpersonal relationships.

Treatment and Evaluation

Cannabis Amotivational Syndrome

Treatment of cannabis amotivational syndrome is like the treatment for cannabis dependence in which there should be careful evaluation for any signs of depression that predate the development of the amotivational syndrome and may be the basis for cannabis dependence and usage. The user is slowly weaned off usage through urine monitoring, self-help groups, education, and therapy in different treatment settings such as group, family, and individual therapy in order to separate themselves from cannabis consumption and any cannabis-related environment as both contribute to the cognitive aspects of amotivational syndrome.

SSRI-Induced Amotivational Syndrome

Treatments include gradually reducing or discontinuing the SSRI, changing the SSRI to another antidepressant class, or co-prescribing with the SSRI a medication that boosts dopamine, such as the antidepressant bupropion.

Current Research and Discourse

Cannabis Amotivational Syndrome

Though there is a prevalent relationship between cannabis consumption and amotivational syndrome, there is still some considerable debate that exists around cannabis consumption causing amotivational syndrome meaning that it may not be a single entity but rather a collection of behaviours that form the result of a combination of effects of an already existent or reactive depression that occurs alongside cannabis’s ability to facilitate a unique attention state. Trait absorption is often mentioned within discourses surrounding cannabis-induced amotivational syndrome and it states that the traits associated with a large majority of marijuana users, which are similar to traits found in those who have amotivational syndrome, such as boredom and a general feeling of disconnect, are absorbed and taken up by the cannabis user. It is used as a common argument against cannabis potentially being able to cause amotivational syndrome, instead, many cannabis users have stated that users often absorb what is often thought of as the typical set of traits marijuana consumers possess, which overlap with some of the traits found in amotivational syndrome. As a result, many have proposed that rather than cannabis being thought of as a psychologically harmful substance, it is instead thought of as an active placebo in which its effects on the mind are placebo effects in response to minimal physiological action rather than being a direct cause of the psychological changes seen in users.

Additionally, though research has been conducted, it is recognized that there is not enough substantial empirical research to conclude that the use of cannabis leads to amotivational syndrome. Anecdotal information such as statements taken from cannabis users includes feeling listless and lethargic. Amotivational syndrome still ranks high among the key problems associated with the drug, with researchers having adopted the phrase “amotivational” to describe lethargic cannabis users. The US Department of Health and Human Services also warns that usage in youth may result in amotivational symptoms such as an apathetic approach to life, fatigue, and poor academic and work performance. However, empirical research on the effects of cannabis on users’ motivation implies that there is no strong correlation and that there are numerous alternative explanations of these negative outcomes as a review of laboratory performance research, education data, and employment statistics fail to offer consistent evidence that directly link cannabis to any symptoms associated with amotivational syndrome. Though several studies contain data in which heavy cannabis users have reported feeling a lack of motivation, it has also been acknowledged that other variables such as comorbid drug use and baselines for low motivation may not be examined.

SSRI-Induced Amotivational Syndrome

Most research in psychological fields regarding amotivational syndrome caused by SSRI treatment has revolved around case studies and anecdotal reports to understand how SSRI medication influences levels of motivation and apathy in patients. There is considerable overlap in the clinical presentations of apathy and motivation and depression. Many patients with amotivational or apathy syndrome reported that they felt a lack of motivation that was unlike what they had sometimes experienced during previous episodes or depression, or that their feelings of apathy had no link to depression. Apathy syndrome has also been reported in a number of patients that have received or are receiving SSRI treatment over the last decade, which has also been linked to a deficit in the performance and activities of daily living, signalling a functional decline. It is a common behavioural problem that often goes undiagnosed and untreated, which is why it is considered to be clinical significant. Neuropsychological research has shown that a common feature of amotivational syndrome involves the presence of lesions and other abnormalities in the circulation of the frontal lobe. Neuroimaging studies of clinical populations have also reported correlations between apathy and structural and functional changes in the frontal lobe in the anterior cingulate gyrus and subregions of the basal ganglia. Recent case-control studies have also reported that apathy has appeared to be greater in patients who were treated with SSRI medication compared to patients who were not. Current findings are consistent with other findings supporting the correlation of SSRI and apathy due to the occurrence of abnormalities found within various regions of the frontal lobe. Though amotivational syndrome has been an emerging concern for pharmacotherapeutic industries to consider, there is still a growing body of empirical investigations that need to continue in order for the development of novel therapeutic interventions to improve, as well as treatment. Currently, empirical studies are limited and there is not a substantial enough amount of research to fully understand the link between frontal lobe abnormalities caused by SSRIs and thus resulting in amotivational syndrome. There is a lack of large-scale clinical studies that focus on the prevalence of SSRI-induced amotivational syndrome with regards to emotional blunting and apathy in both psychiatric or primary care populations, despite the high prescription rates for SSRI medication. There are also no current clinically popular scales to measure and assess SSRI-induced apathy. The Oxford Questionnaire of Emotional Side Effects of Antidepressants (OQESA) is a scale under development and presents a 26-item, Likert-style, self-report scale that aims to understand respondents’ emotional experiences such as a general reduction in emotions, a reduction in positive emotions, emotional detachment and blunting, and feelings of not caring. Respondents are also asked to what extent they believe their antidepressant is responsible for these emotional symptoms.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amotivational_syndrome >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

What is Stigma Management?

Introduction

Stigma management is the process of concealing or disclosing aspects of one’s identity to minimise social stigma.

When a person receives unfair treatment or alienation due to a social stigma, the effects can be detrimental. Social stigmas are defined as any aspect of an individual’s identity that is devalued in a social context. These stigmas can be categorised as visible or invisible, depending on whether the stigma is readily apparent to others. Visible stigmas refer to characteristics such as race, age, gender, physical disabilities, or deformities, whereas invisible stigmas refer to characteristics such sexual orientation, gender identity, religious affiliation, early pregnancy, certain diseases, or mental illnesses.

When individuals possess invisible stigmas, they must decide whether or not to reveal their association with a devalued group to others. This decision can be an incredibly difficult one, as revealing one’s invisible stigma can have both positive and negative consequences depending on several situational factors. In contrast, a visible stigma requires immediate action to diminish communication tension and acknowledge a deviation from the norm. People possessing visible stigmas often use compensatory strategies to reduce potential interpersonal discrimination that they may face.

Invisible Stigma

Invisible stigmas are defined as “characteristics of a person that are socially devalued but are not readily apparent to others”, such as having a stigmatised sexual orientation, gender identity, religious affiliation, LGBT association, early pregnancy, disease, illness, etc. Invisible social identities invoke some distinct issues that cannot be easily collapsed under traditional organisational diversity research that focuses on visible differences.

When a person possesses an invisible stigma, they have to determine how to reveal their stigmas, when to reveal their stigmas, if to reveal their stigmas, whether or not their stigmas are already known to others, and whether other people would be accepting of their stigma.

Invisible Stigma Management

Individuals possessing invisible stigmas can choose either passing or revealing strategies in order to manage their identities when interacting with others. Passing strategies involve strategies that do not disclose the invisible stigma to others, including fabrication, concealment, and discretion. Revealing strategies involve identity management strategies that seek to disclose or reveal the invisible stigmas to others, such as signalling, normalising, and differentiating.

Passing

Passing can be defined as “a cultural performance whereby one member of a defined social group masquerades as another in order to enjoy the privileges afforded to the dominant group”. In other words, passing is simply choosing not to disclose one’s invisible stigma in order to appear to be part of the dominant (i.e. not stigmatised) group. Those who pass must be constantly aware of social cues in order to avoid accidentally disclosing information about their hidden identity, a worry that most individuals from dominant groups do not share. People may rely on several different strategies for passing or concealing their invisible stigma at work. These strategies include fabrication, concealment, and discretion.

Fabrication

The fabrication strategy involves purposefully presenting false information about oneself in order to hide one’s invisible stigma. Individuals using this strategy utilise deception to create a false identity in order to avoid revealing their stigmatised trait. In research involving lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals, Woods identified a similar strategy called counterfeiting which is simply the act of constructing a false heterosexual identity, which also serves as a nice example of the passing strategy of fabrication. LGBT individuals engaging in this passing strategy may even go so far as to pretend they have a heterosexual partner in front of their co-workers.

Concealment

The concealment strategy involves taking preventative measures to keep others from discovering personal characteristics for fear that may reveal an individual’s invisible stigma. Individuals using this strategy would not actively use deception like individuals using the fabrication strategy would, but they would still take an active role in carefully protecting themselves from revealing too much personal information. In research involving LGBT individuals, Woods has identified a very similar strategy called avoidance which is simply revealing no information about one’s sexual identity in order to avoid disclosure on this topic.

Discretion

The discretion strategy is subtly different from the concealment strategy as it involves an individual avoiding questions or revealing information that is specifically related to their invisible stigma. Discretion is not as active of a passing strategy as the other two strategies, but it does involve interpersonal elusiveness and speaking in ambiguous language when the conversation threatens to potentially reveal one’s stigmatised identity. An example of this strategy (and a way to distinguish it from concealment) would be a person who is very willing to reveal personal information to their co-worker but is also very reluctant to discuss any topics that they think may be related to their invisible stigma.

Revealing

When a person chooses to unveil an otherwise invisible stigma to their co-workers, they are choosing to reveal their stigma in that situation. It is important to note that individuals may vary in the degree to which they reveal invisible stigmas to their co-workers. For example, employees may choose to reveal their stigma to everyone they encounter, or they might judiciously choose a select few that they are comfortable with telling about their invisible stigma. People may rely on several different strategies for revealing their invisible stigmas at work. These strategies include signalling, normalising, and differentiating.

Signalling

The signalling strategy involves avoiding complete disclosure of one’s invisible stigma to his/her co-workers. Rather, people who use this strategy tend to drop hints and send signals to their co-workers without having to completely reveal their invisible stigma. Examples of signals may include the use of cryptic language, bringing up conversation topics that are specific to a stigmatized group, using symbols that are specific to a stigmatised group, and/or the use of nonverbal cues consistent with one’s stigmatised group membership. Individuals using this strategy are essentially inviting others to discover their stigma by providing enough clues for peers without directly revealing their stigma.

Normalising

The normalising strategy involves revealing one’s invisible stigma, but then minimising its significance as to appear just as normal as everyone else. While this strategy does involve disclosure of one’s invisible stigma, it also involves an attempt by stigmatised individuals to assimilate into organizations effectively and establish as normal of an existence as they can. Researchers have suggested that this strategy helps stigmatised individuals strike a balance between the desire to reveal their stigma and dealing with the consequences that may result from their disclosure.

Differentiating

The differentiating strategy involves not only revealing one’s invisible stigma, but also emphasizing it and how it differentiates one from others. People who use this strategy try to eliminate unfair judgement by presenting their identity as equally acceptable when compared to others. Some researchers have referred to this strategy as deploying one’s identity, citing individuals who reveal their stigmas in order to test the perceptions of dominant organisational groups in an effort to inspire organisational change.

Antecedents

Organisational Diversity Climate

Diversity climate is a term coined by Tsui and Gutek referring to social norms of acceptance or discrimination established within a workplace environment. Research has shown that accepting work environments promote more open communication (i.e. revealing) among their employees with invisible stigmas. Accepting work environments can include supportive co-workers, supportive managers, or simply the presence of other individuals who have revealed their invisible stigma without experiencing negative consequences (Ragins & Cornwell, 2007).

Professional and Industry Norms

The norms of one’s overarching industry may have implications for stigmatised individuals’ likelihood of passing or revealing in the workplace. Indeed, some have noted that individuals working for conservative industries such as the military may be less likely to reveal their stigma than individuals who work in industries that may actually encourage employees to disclose personal information about themselves, like human services.

Legal Protections

Some individuals with invisible stigmas are protected under laws at various governmental levels (i.e. local, state, and/or federal), while others are not considered among these protected groups. Not surprisingly, those with invisible stigmas that are protected under law (e.g. disability) are more likely to reveal their stigma than those with invisible stigmas that are not protected under law (e.g. sexual orientation). It is also important to note that, in the case of disability status, stigmatised individuals may actually be required to reveal their stigma in order to receive certain workplace benefits.

Interpersonal Context

An individual’s likelihood of passing or revealing is also affected by the relationship they have with the person they are interacting with as well as the demographic characteristics of the person they are interacting with. Understandably, individuals are more willing to reveal stigmatised information to those that they trust. Additionally, an individual may be more likely to reveal their invisible stigma to a person who possesses the same stigma. Finally, individuals may be generally more likely to reveal their stigmas to females than to males, believing females to be more effective communicators, especially regarding sensitive topics.

Propensity Toward Risk-Taking

Given that individuals vary in their willingness to take risks, the idea has been proposed that individuals higher in risk-taking propensity will be more likely to reveal their stigma at work than those who are lower in risk-taking propensity. This prediction stems from the fact that choosing to reveal an invisible stigma at work could be a very risky decision, especially if one receives (or perceives that they will receive) discriminatory treatment as a result of their disclosure.

Self-Monitoring

Self-monitoring can be defined as the act of controlling and managing the impression one puts forward to ensure that social roles and expectations are being met. While self-monitoring ability may not be directly related to passing or revealing behaviours, it likely is related to choosing effective strategies for managing one’s identity. Research has stated that high self-monitors are better able to examine their environment for signs of acceptance when deciding to pass or reveal, while low self-monitors may have more trouble effectively managing the impressions they are making.

Development Stage

An adult’s level of sophistication and how developed their stigmatised identity is may also have an effect on individuals’ willingness to reveal an invisible stigma. Highly developed individuals with stigmas that are central to their self-concept tend to see their stigmatised identity equally valid as other identities, and thus should theoretically not be as afraid to reveal it to others. Indeed, research has shown that individuals who ultimately reveal their stigmatised identity tend to be more assured of that identity than individuals who choose to pass.

Consequences

Consequences of Passing

The main issue that can arise from passing is that the individual feels as though they are not being true to themselves, which can create an inner sense of turmoil and lead to psychological strain for the person hiding their identity. Additionally, fears associated with revealing one’s invisible stigma (among those who are currently passing) have been shown to lead to a myriad of negative workplace consequences, including lowered job satisfaction, less organisational commitment, and higher turnover intentions. Interpersonal consequences can also arise when an individual is passing by not revealing much personal information in the workplace. These consequences include strained social relationships, social isolation, and limited mentoring opportunities.

Consequences of Revealing

Although revealing could have the positive effect of reducing the psychological strain and dissonance associated with passing strategies, many negative consequences could also result from revealing a devalued stigmatised identity. Potential consequences include opening oneself up to prejudice and discriminatory treatment at work. These negative consequences could become magnified if stigmas are revealed in an organisation that is not supportive of the individual’s invisible stigma. However, if an individual can produce social change and reduce their dissonance associated with passing by revealing their stigma, revealing in the workplace might end up being worth the risk in the long run. It is also important to note that revealing is not always a voluntary activity. For example, disabled individuals who require accommodation in the workplace must disclose the nature of their disability in order to obtain benefits under the Americans with Disabilities Act. This disclosure often unintentionally forces a person to reveal when their disability would otherwise be invisible to others.

The Disclosure Processes Model

As summarised in the above sections, individuals with invisible stigmas engage in stigma management by making decisions about whether to pass or to reveal as well as the specific strategies they will use to do so. These decisions may lead to both positive and negative consequences depending on the situation. The Disclosure Processes Model (DPM) provides an explanation for when disclosure (revealing) is beneficial for individuals with invisible stigmas. Unlike the majority of studies on stigma management, DPM views disclosure as an ongoing process, as people with invisible stigmas must constantly make decisions regarding when to reveal and when to conceal their stigmas throughout their lifetime. This model suggests that disclosure can lead to a number of different outcomes at the individual, dyadic, and social contextual levels. Also, this model suggests that alleviation of inhibition, social support, and changes in social information mediate the effect of disclosure on these outcomes. In summary, the model highlights the impact of five main components in this process— the antecedent goals, the disclosure event itself, the mediating processes, the outcomes, and the feedback loop.

Antecedent Goals

One main contribution of the disclosure processes model is to incorporate dispositional factors, namely antecedent goals, into the process of stigma management. The DPM posits that disclosure is regulated by the goal orientation (either approach-focused or avoidance-focused) held by individuals. Approach-focused goals are associated with attention to positive stimuli, positive affect, and approach-focused coping strategies, whereas avoidance-focused goals are associated with attention to negative stimuli, negative effect, and avoidance-focused coping strategies. The model suggests that goals influence outcomes throughout the entire disclosure process. Therefore, it is critical to understand how the goal orientations lead people to disclose in order to understand when disclosure is beneficial.

Disclosure Event

A disclosure event is defined by Chaudoir and Fisher as “the verbal communication that occurs between a discloser and a interaction partner regarding the discloser’s possession of a concealable stigmatized identity”. It can range from explicitly talking about invisible stigmas with the interaction partner to first “testing the waters” by introducing the topic indirectly before fully disclosing. During the disclosure event, the content – overall depth, breadth, duration, and emotional content – can impact the reaction of the interaction partner, The positive reactions of the interaction partner can, in turn, influence the discloser’s behaviour.

Goals and the Disclosure Event

The model predicts that disclosure goals affect the content of the disclosure event and the interaction partner response. On one hand, individuals with avoidance-focused goals disclose less frequently because they tend to focus on avoiding the possibility of social rejection and conflict. When they do decide to disclose, these individuals tend to use certain disclosure methods that they believe can minimise their psychological distress by social rejection (e.g. sending an email rather than talking face to face with the interaction partner). By using these methods, however, the disclosure is more likely to be perceived negatively by the interaction partners.

On the other hand, individuals with approach-focused goals tend to focus on the possibility of gaining social support, therefore use more direct communication strategies. They are also shown to be better at self-regulating and are more attuned to the presence of supportive interaction partner reactions. As a result, individuals with approach-focused goals may be more likely to benefit from disclosure than individuals with avoidance-focused goals.

Disclosure Mediating Processes and Outcomes

Alleviation of Inhibition

People with avoidance goals tend to be more sensitive to the possibility of social rejection and are likely to adopt avoidant coping strategies to deal with information about their identity. Therefore, they tend to experience distress or difficulty coping with their concealable stigma because they typically use passing strategies. Through alleviation of inhibition mechanism, in which people are offered the opportunity to express previously suppressed emotions and thoughts, the DPM states that these individuals may actually be most likely to benefit from disclosure.

Social Support

One of the negative consequences of passing is strained social relationship with co-workers, as stated in the previous section. Therefore, disclosure can have a substantial impact on well-being as a result of obtaining social support. For example, disclosure of sexual orientation in the workplace leads to greater job satisfaction and lower job anxiety if positive reactions to disclosures are received from co-workers. In other words, receiving positive reactions from interaction partners through disclosure can lead to positive outcomes in the workplace. The DPM suggests that people who possess approach-focused goals utilise more complex self-regulatory strategies that are critical throughout the full disclosure process (e.g. selecting appropriate interaction partners, communicating effectively about sensitive information), and therefore, they may be more likely to benefit from disclosure through collecting greater social support.

Changes in Social Information

A fundamental change in social information occurs after disclosing as people and their disclosure interaction partners now share or “co-own” information about the concealable stigma. The disclosure can then dramatically impact subsequent individual behaviour, specific interactions between the discloser and confidant, and interactions within the broader social context. For instance, after employees disclosure, they may raise awareness of their identities and, as a consequence, effectively reduce the related stigma throughout the organisation. Moreover, the model makes a suggestion on the role of goals among the three mediation processes. Specifically, in terms of predicting positive outcomes, goals may not play as a significant role in Changes in Social Information as in the other two processes. This is probably because Changes in Social Information result from the objective informational content of the identity whereas the Alleviation of Inhibition and Social Support result from self-regulatory effects of disclosure goals.

Feedback Loop

The DPM suggests that a singular disclosure event can affect both future disclosure likelihood and long-term psychological benefits. Approach-focused disclosure goals may maintain upward spirals toward greater visibility by gradually benefiting the disclosure, while avoidance-focused disclosure goals may initiate downward spirals toward greater concealment by gradually de-benefiting the disclosure. In upward spirals, individuals feel disclosing their identity more comfortably, greater support for their identity, viewing themselves more positively, and possessing a more unified sense of self. On the other hand, there are opposite effects on individuals who fall into the downward spirals.

Practical Implications

One important implication of the disclosure processes model is that there are individual differences in whether interpersonal disclosure can be beneficial. Individuals with avoidance-focused goals engage in self-regulatory efforts that weaken their ability collecting positive responses from their confidants, which also increases their chances of social rejection. This group of people may be best served by other methods of disclosure, such as by disclosing in expressive writing or therapeutic settings where they are protected from receiving social rejection.

The model also suggests that interventions with a focus on encouraging individuals to explicitly identify their disclosure goals may be one effective strategy in maximising the benefits of disclosure. Therefore, practitioners are recommended to screen and identify individuals with strong avoidance-focused disclosure goals and assist them in setting new, approach-focused disclosure goals or helping them find alternative methods of disclosure (e.g. written disclosure).

Visible Stigmas

Visible stigmas are defined as physical characteristics that are socially devalued and are readily apparent to others, such as race, age, gender, and physical disabilities or deformities.

Visible Stigma Management

Visible stigma management is very different from the management of invisible stigmas. However, when invisible stigmas shift along the continuum from being completely invisible to completely visible, they begin to operate in ways that are similar to visible stigmas. In other words, once an invisible stigma becomes visible (by wearing clothes or markers that identify one’s self, or by being ‘outed’ by others), that stigma can then be managed in similar ways as visible stigmas. In order to manage visible stigmas (or stigmas that have been made apparent to others), targets must engage in compensatory strategies, including acknowledgement, providing individuating information, and increased positivity. These strategies are used to pre-emptively reduce interpersonal discrimination that may occur as a result of an explicitly apparent stigma.

Compensatory Strategies

Several studies show that people with visible stigmas do in fact use compensatory strategies. When women believe that their writing will be evaluated by a sexist grader, they attempt to portray themselves as having non-traditional gender roles. Similarly, when black individuals are informed that they will be interacting with somebody who is a racist, they disclosed more information to their interaction partners. They were also rated by independent coders as being more engaged, more interactive, and warmer when interacting with targets that were perceived to be prejudice towards blacks than when they interacted with targets that were not perceived to have this prejudice. Lastly, obese women behave differently when they feel that their interaction partners can see them versus when they think that they can not be seen. When obese women believe that they are visible to their interaction partners, they use more likeable and socially skilled behaviours compared to when they think they can not be seen. This is likely done to counteract the negative prejudice that most people have against obese women. Taken together, these studies all demonstrate that individuals with stigmas do utilise a series of compensatory strategies in order to manage their visible stigmas.

Acknowledgement

Several studies have shown that people with visible stigmas engage in the compensatory strategy of acknowledgement, referring to the act of openly addressing one’s stigma. This strategy has been shown to be effective in improving perceptions of people with visible stigmas. For instance, individuals with visible physical disabilities are less likely to be viewed with disdain, pity, or contempt when they explicitly acknowledged their physical disability. Researchers have proposed that this effect is due to the fact that acknowledging one’s stigma releases discomfort and tension during an interaction and that not acknowledging one’s stigma is viewed as an attempt to ignore or avoid talking about one’s stigma. Acknowledging has been proposed to be effective in cases where it increases perceptions of adjustment within the stigmatised individual and reduces the suppression of negative stigma-related thoughts on the part of the perceivers. In a study on job applicants with visible stigmas, applicants who used the strategy of acknowledgement received less interpersonal discrimination than those who did not, as rated by both the applicants and independent raters.

Individuating Information

Some individuals with visible stigmas also adopt the compensatory strategy of providing individuating information to their interaction partners. This information allows the interaction partner to evaluate the target on an individual level rather than as a product of their stigma. When interaction partners are not given any information about a stigmatised individual, they tend to use stereotypes about that person’s stigma during evaluation. For instance, when told to select a leader, both men and women tend to select male leaders rather than female leaders when given no other information. However, when additional information is given about the individual, people are less likely to rely on their stereotypes. Similarly, when job applicants with visible stigmas provide individuating information to hiring managers, they are able to partially reduce the amount of interpersonal discrimination that they face.

Increased Positivity

Lastly, some individuals with visible stigmas choose to use the compensatory strategy of increased positivity in order to manage their identities. These individuals change their verbal, para-verbal, and nonverbal behaviours to increase the positivity and likeability of their interactions with others. As an example, black students tend to demonstrate behaviours that are more engaging and likeable during the interaction when told that their interaction partners are prejudiced. Similar findings have been found with overweight individuals feeling they are being stereotyped. Several studies indicate that individuals with visible stigmas do indeed try to demonstrate positive behaviours when interacting with other individuals, especially with those who are perceived to be especially prejudiced. They do so with the intention of decreasing potential negativity or discrimination that they may face and potentially increasing the perceptions of their stigmatized group. In one study on job applicants with visible stigmas, those who used the strategy of increased positivity were found to remediate the interpersonal discrimination that they faced, as rated by the applicants, observers, and independent coders.

Solutions for Organisations

When an organization enforces clear policies and practices that forbid discrimination based on sexual orientation, LGBT employees report less discrimination, which should lead to fewer lawsuits and turnover. When an organisation voluntarily adopts policies that demonstrate an accepting and non-judgemental environment, a person can seek support for their stigma (e.g. domestic partner benefits). Pregnant women in work environments that use supplementing policies (such as paid leave or remote work) often stay at work into the late stages of pregnancy, and usually return sooner compared to women at unaccommodating organisations. Practices such as these not only benefit the individual, but they also benefit the organisation in the long run. Training employees, managers, and supervisors through diversity workshops serves to better educate everyone on the misconceptions surrounding LGBT workers, and should be used to address other stigmas as well. By presenting facts and defining inappropriate behaviours, organisations show their acceptance and tolerance of stigmas. When affirmative policies and practices are up-front and seem sincere, stigmatised groups face less discrimination, which should lead to higher employee morale, and greater workplace productivity.

Limitations with Existing Research and Future Directions

Issue of Measurement

One major issue that has been raised in regard to identity management is an issue of measurement. Some researchers have expressed that research cannot move forward without appropriate measurement techniques and appropriately conceptualised behaviours for passing and revealing in the workplace. Indeed, it can be hard to distinguish between the passing behaviours identified by Herek. As for future research, other researchers have called for a better understanding of the underlying processes involved in the decision to disclose in addition to increased specificity in the classification of groups with invisible stigmas.

Problems with Dichotomising Stigma

Past research has simplified identity management strategies by dichotomising stigma into purely visible or purely invisible. This is not the case, however, in that stigmas are never completely visible or completely invisible. Oftentimes, people can tell (to some degree) whether or not the person they are interacting with has an invisible stigma, even before that person engages in disclosure behaviours. This can be due to visual, audio, or movement-based cues, or due to rumours told by other co-workers (Ambady, Conner, & Hallahan, 1999; Linville, 1998). Researchers should begin to study the degree to which people with a stigmatised identity choose to either express or suppress their concealable stigma when that stigma is somewhat known by the interaction partner.

Future Directions

Researchers have called for future studies to focus on invisible stigma in groups, the timing and trust involved in revealing, and the potential for organisational change as a result of revealing strategies. Researchers should examine how individuals possessing invisible stigmas affect the performance of a group. Additionally, researchers may examine how a group’s effectiveness in responding to a disclosure of an invisible stigma could positively or negatively affect future group outcomes. Furthermore, researchers have yet to determine how the timing of disclosure affects the disclosure interaction. Some studies suggest that disclosing later in the interaction leads to the most benefit. When individuals disclose too early in an interaction, they cause their interaction partners to feel uncomfortable, and the partners may feel as though they must also disclose private information. When individuals discloses too late in an interaction, they may hurt the interaction because they will be seen as dishonest and not trusting of the relationship to have revealed earlier on in the interaction (Quinn, 2006). Lastly, there is an opportunity for researchers to study how organisations can change when employees decide to reveal vs. conceal their invisible stigmas. When employees with invisible stigmas choose to conceal their stigma, it could lead to continued institutionalised stigmatisation of those social characteristics. On the other hand, when employees choose to disclose, the level of acceptance of their disclosure can have far-reaching consequences for the climate and environment of organisations. Disclosure interactions that are met with positivity and acceptance could lead future employees to feel open and free to express their potentially stigmatised characteristics with less fear of judgement.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigma_management >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

What is the Hedgehog’s Dilemma?

Introduction

The hedgehog’s dilemma, or sometimes the porcupine dilemma, is a metaphor about the challenges of human intimacy. It describes a situation in which a group of hedgehogs seek to move close to one another to share heat during cold weather. They must remain apart, however, as they cannot avoid hurting one another with their sharp spines. Though they all share the intention of a close reciprocal relationship, this may not occur, for reasons they cannot avoid.

Arthur Schopenhauer conceived this metaphor for the state of the individual in society. Despite goodwill, humans cannot be intimate without the risk of mutual harm, leading to cautious and tentative relationships. It is wise to be guarded with others for fear of getting hurt and also fear of causing hurt. The dilemma may encourage self-imposed isolation.

Schopenhauer

The concept originates in the following parable from the German philosopher Schopenhauer:

One cold winter’s day, a number of porcupines huddled together quite closely in order through their mutual warmth to prevent themselves from being frozen. But they soon felt the effect of their quills on one another, which made them again move apart. Now when the need for warmth once more brought them together, the drawback of the quills was repeated so that they were tossed between two evils, until they had discovered the proper distance from which they could best tolerate one another. Thus the need for society which springs from the emptiness and monotony of men’s lives, drives them together; but their many unpleasant and repulsive qualities and insufferable drawbacks once more drive them apart. The mean distance which they finally discover, and which enables them to endure being together, is politeness and good manners. Whoever does not keep to this, is told in England to ‘keep his distance’. By virtue thereof, it is true that the need for mutual warmth will be only imperfectly satisfied, but on the other hand, the prick of the quills will not be felt. Yet whoever has a great deal of internal warmth of his own will prefer to keep away from society in order to avoid giving or receiving trouble or annoyance. (Schopenhauer, 1851; Parerga and Paralipomena).

Freud

It entered the realm of psychology after the tale was discovered and adopted by Sigmund Freud. Schopenhauer’s tale was quoted by Freud in a footnote to his 1921 work Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego (German: Massenpsychologie und Ich-Analyse). Freud stated, of his trip to the United States in 1909:

“I am going to the USA to catch sight of a wild porcupine and to give some lectures.”

Social Psychological Research

The dilemma has received empirical attention within the contemporary psychological sciences. Jon Maner and his colleagues (Nathan DeWall, Roy Baumeister, and Mark Schaller) referred to Schopenhauer’s “porcupine problem” when interpreting results from experiments examining how people respond to ostracism. The study showed that participants who experienced social exclusion were more likely to seek out new social bonds with others.

In Popular Culture

The parable of the hedgehog’s dilemma was referenced in the anime series Neon Genesis Evangelion, especially in its fourth episode of the same name.

The award-winning short film Henry is a modernist version of the hedgehog’s dilemma: in this story, the hedgehog eventually finds social comfort through a turtle, that is, a fellow social creature who is invulnerable to the hedgehog’s spines. In the context of the original dilemma, this can be taken to represent the need for variability in human social preferences.

The Japanese vocaloid song Harinezumi by Tota Kasamura is about the hedgehog’s dilemma.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedgehog%27s_dilemma >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

What is Observational Learning?

Introduction

Observational learning is learning that occurs through observing the behaviour of others. It is a form of social learning which takes various forms, based on various processes. In humans, this form of learning seems to not need reinforcement to occur, but instead, requires a social model such as a parent, sibling, friend, or teacher with surroundings. Particularly in childhood, a model is someone of authority or higher status in an environment. In animals, observational learning is often based on classical conditioning, in which an instinctive behaviour is elicited by observing the behaviour of another (e.g. mobbing in birds), but other processes may be involved as well.

Human Observational Learning

Many behaviours that a learner observes, remembers, and imitates are actions that models display and display modelling, even though the model may not intentionally try to instil a particular behaviour. A child may learn to swear, smack, smoke, and deem other inappropriate behaviour acceptable through poor modelling. Albert Bandura claims that children continually learn desirable and undesirable behaviour through observational learning. Observational learning suggests that an individual’s environment, cognition, and behaviour all incorporate and ultimately determine how the individual functions and models.

Through observational learning, individual behaviours can spread across a culture through a process called diffusion chain. This basically occurs when an individual first learns a behaviour by observing another individual and that individual serves as a model through whom other individuals learn the behaviour, and so on.

Culture plays a role in whether observational learning is the dominant learning style in a person or community. Some cultures expect children to actively participate in their communities and are therefore exposed to different trades and roles on a daily basis. This exposure allows children to observe and learn the different skills and practices that are valued in their communities.

Albert Bandura, who is known for the classic Bobo doll experiment, identified this basic form of learning in 1961. The importance of observational learning lies in helping individuals, especially children, acquire new responses by observing others’ behaviour.

Albert Bandura states that people’s behaviour could be determined by their environment. Observational learning occurs through observing negative and positive behaviours. Bandura believes in reciprocal determinism in which the environment can influence people’s behaviour and vice versa. For instance, the Bobo doll experiment shows that the model, in a determined environment, affects children’s behaviour. In this experiment Bandura demonstrates that one group of children placed in an aggressive environment would act the same way, while the control group and the other group of children placed in a passive role model environment hardly shows any type of aggression.

In communities where children’s primary mode of learning is through observation, the children are rarely separated from adult activities. This incorporation into the adult world at an early age allows children to use observational learning skills in multiple spheres of life. This learning through observation requires keen attentive abilities. Culturally, they learn that their participation and contributions are valued in their communities. This teaches children that it is their duty, as members of the community, to observe others’ contributions so they gradually become involved and participate further in the community.

Influential Stages and Factors

The stages of observational learning include exposure to the model, acquiring the model’s behaviour and accepting it as one’s own.

Bandura’s social cognitive learning theory states that there are four factors that influence observational learning:

  1. Attention: Observers cannot learn unless they pay attention to what’s happening around them. This process is influenced by characteristics of the model, such as how much one likes or identifies with the model, and by characteristics of the observer, such as the observer’s expectations or level of emotional arousal.
  2. Retention/Memory: Observers must not only recognise the observed behaviour but also remember it at some later time. This process depends on the observer’s ability to code or structure the information in an easily remembered form or to mentally or physically rehearse the model’s actions.
  3. Initiation/Motor: Observers must be physically and/intellectually capable of producing the act. In many cases, the observer possesses the necessary responses. But sometimes, reproducing the model’s actions may involve skills the observer has not yet acquired. It is one thing to carefully watch a circus juggler, but it is quite another to go home and repeat those acts.
  4. Motivation: The observer must have motivation to recreate the observed behaviour.

Bandura clearly distinguishes between learning and performance. Unless motivated, a person does not produce learned behaviour. This motivation can come from external reinforcement, such as the experimenter’s promise of reward in some of Bandura’s studies, or the bribe of a parent. Or it can come from vicarious reinforcement, based on the observation that models are rewarded. High-status models can affect performance through motivation. For example, girls aged 11 to 14 performed better on a motor performance task when they thought it was demonstrated by a high-status cheerleader than by a low-status model.

Some have even added a step between attention and retention involving encoding a behaviour.

Observational learning leads to a change in an individual’s behaviour along three dimensions:

  1. An individual thinks about a situation in a different way and may have incentive to react to it.
  2. The change is a result of a person’s direct experiences as opposed to being in-born.
  3. For the most part, the change an individual has made is permanent.

Effect on Behaviour

According to Bandura’s social cognitive learning theory, observational learning can affect behaviour in many ways, with both positive and negative consequences. It can teach completely new behaviours, for one. It can also increase or decrease the frequency of behaviours that have previously been learned. Observational learning can even encourage behaviours that were previously forbidden (for example, the violent behaviour towards the Bobo doll that children imitated in Albert Bandura’s study). Observational learning can also influence behaviours that are similar to, but not identical to, the ones being modelled. For example, seeing a model excel at playing the piano may motivate an observer to play the saxophone.

Age Difference

Albert Bandura stressed that developing children learn from different social models, meaning that no two children are exposed to exactly the same modelling influence. From infancy to adolescence, they are exposed to various social models. A 2013 study found that a toddlers’ previous social familiarity with a model was not always necessary for learning and that they were also able to learn from observing a stranger demonstrating or modelling a new action to another stranger.

It was once believed that babies could not imitate actions until the latter half of the first year. However, a number of studies now report that infants as young as seven days can imitate simple facial expressions. By the latter half of their first year, 9-month-old babies can imitate actions hours after they first see them. As they continue to develop, toddlers around age two can acquire important personal and social skills by imitating a social model.

Deferred imitation is an important developmental milestone in a two-year-old, in which children not only construct symbolic representations but can also remember information. Unlike toddlers, children of elementary school age are less likely to rely on imagination to represent an experience. Instead, they can verbally describe the model’s behaviour. Since this form of learning does not need reinforcement, it is more likely to occur regularly.

As age increases, age-related observational learning motor skills may decrease in athletes and golfers. Younger and skilled golfers have higher observational learning compared to older golfers and less skilled golfers.

Observational Causal Learning

Humans use observational Moleen causal learning to watch other people’s actions and use the information gained to find out how something works and how we can do it ourselves.

A study of 25-month-old infants found that they can learn causal relations from observing human interventions. They also learn by observing normal actions not created by intentional human action.

Comparisons with Imitation

Observational learning is presumed to have occurred when an organism copies an improbable action or action outcome that it has observed and the matching behaviour cannot be explained by an alternative mechanism. Psychologists have been particularly interested in the form of observational learning known as imitation and in how to distinguish imitation from other processes. To successfully make this distinction, one must separate the degree to which behavioural similarity results from:

  • Predisposed behaviour;
  • Increased motivation resulting from the presence of another animal;
  • Attention drawn to a place or object;
  • Learning about the way the environment works, as distinguished from what we think of as;
  • Imitation (the copying of the demonstrated behaviour).

Observational learning differs from imitative learning in that it does not require a duplication of the behaviour exhibited by the model. For example, the learner may observe an unwanted behaviour and the subsequent consequences, and thus learn to refrain from that behaviour. For example, Riopelle (1960) found that monkeys did better with observational learning if they saw the “tutor” monkey make a mistake before making the right choice. Heyes (1993) distinguished imitation and non-imitative social learning in the following way: imitation occurs when animals learn about behaviour from observing conspecifics, whereas non-imitative social learning occurs when animals learn about the environment from observing others.

Not all imitation and learning through observing is the same, and they often differ in the degree to which they take on an active or passive form. John Dewey describes an important distinction between two different forms of imitation: imitation as an end in itself and imitation with a purpose. Imitation as an end is more akin to mimicry, in which a person copies another’s act to repeat that action again. This kind of imitation is often observed in animals. Imitation with a purpose utilises the imitative act as a means to accomplish something more significant. Whereas the more passive form of imitation as an end has been documented in some European American communities, the other kind of more active, purposeful imitation has been documented in other communities around the world.

Observation may take on a more active form in children’s learning in multiple Indigenous American communities. Ethnographic anthropological studies in Yucatec Mayan and Quechua Peruvian communities provide evidence that the home or community-centred economic systems of these cultures allow children to witness first-hand, activities that are meaningful to their own livelihoods and the overall well-being of the community. These children have the opportunity to observe activities that are relevant within the context of that community, which gives them a reason to sharpen their attention to the practical knowledge they are exposed to. This does not mean that they have to observe the activities even though they are present. The children often make an active decision to stay in attendance while a community activity is taking place to observe and learn. This decision underscores the significance of this learning style in many indigenous American communities. It goes far beyond learning mundane tasks through rote imitation; it is central to children’s gradual transformation into informed members of their communities’ unique practices. There was also a study, done with children, that concluded that Imitated behaviour can be recalled and used in another situation or the same.

Apprenticeship

Apprenticeship can involve both observational learning and modelling. Apprentices gain their skills in part through working with masters in their profession and through observing and evaluating the work of their fellow apprentices. Examples include renaissance inventor/painter Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo, before succeeding in their profession they were apprentices.

Learning without Imitation

Michael Tomasello described various ways of observational learning without the process of imitation in animals:

  • Exposure: Individuals learn about their environment through close proximity to other individuals that have more experience. For example, a young dolphin learning the location of a plethora of fish by staying near its mother.
  • Stimulus enhancement: Individuals become interested in an object from watching others interact with it. Increased interest in an object may result in object manipulation, which facilitates new object-related behaviours by trial-and-error learning. For example, a young killer whale might become interested in playing with a sea lion pup after watching other whales toss the sea lion pup around. After playing with the pup, the killer whale may develop foraging behaviours appropriate to such prey. In this case, the killer whale did not learn to prey on sea lions by observing other whales do so, but rather the killer whale became intrigued after observing other whales play with the pup. After the killer whale became interested, then its interactions with the sea lion resulted in behaviours that provoked future foraging efforts.
  • Goal emulation – Individuals are enticed by the end result of an observed behaviour and attempt the same outcome but with a different method. For example, Haggerty (1909) devised an experiment in which a monkey climbed up the side of a cage, stuck its arm into a wooden chute, and pulled a rope in the chute to release food. Another monkey was provided an opportunity to obtain the food after watching a monkey go through this process on four separate occasions. The monkey performed a different method and finally succeeded after trial and error.

Peer Model Influences

Observational learning is very beneficial when there are positive, reinforcing peer models involved. Although individuals go through four different stages for observational learning: attention; retention; production; and motivation, this does not simply mean that when an individual’s attention is captured that it automatically sets the process in that exact order. One of the most important ongoing stages for observational learning, especially among children, is motivation and positive reinforcement.

Performance is enhanced when children are positively instructed on how they can improve a situation and where children actively participate alongside a more skilled person. Examples of this are scaffolding and guided participation. Scaffolding refers to an expert responding contingently to a novice so the novice gradually increases their understanding of a problem. Guided participation refers to an expert actively engaging in a situation with a novice so the novice participates with or observes the adult to understand how to resolve a problem.

Cultural Variation

Cultural variation can be seen by the extent of information learned or absorbed by children in non-Western cultures through learning by observation. Cultural variation is not restricted only to ethnicity and nationality, but rather, extends to the specific practices within communities. In learning by observation, children use observation to learn without verbal requests for further information, or without direct instruction. For example, children from Mexican heritage families tend to learn and make better use of information observed during classroom demonstration than children of European heritage. Children of European heritage experience the type of learning that separates them from their family and community activities. They instead participate in lessons and other exercises in special settings such as school. Cultural backgrounds differ from each other in which children display certain characteristics in regards to learning an activity. Another example is seen in the immersion of children in some Indigenous communities of the Americas into the adult world and the effects it has on observational learning and the ability to complete multiple tasks simultaneously. This might be due to children in these communities having the opportunity to see a task being completed by their elders or peers and then trying to emulate the task. In doing so they learn to value observation and the skill-building it affords them because of the value it holds within their community. This type of observation is not passive, but reflects the child’s intent to participate or learn within a community.

Observational learning can be seen taking place in many domains of Indigenous communities. The classroom setting is one significant example, and it functions differently for Indigenous communities compared to what is commonly present in Western schooling. The emphasis of keen observation in favour of supporting participation in ongoing activities strives to aid children to learn the important tools and ways of their community. Engaging in shared endeavours – with both the experienced and inexperienced – allows for the experienced to understand what the inexperienced need in order to grow in regards to the assessment of observational learning. The involvement of the inexperienced, or the children in this matter, can either be furthered by the children’s learning or advancing into the activity performed by the assessment of observational learning. Indigenous communities rely on observational learning as a way for their children to be a part of ongoing activities in the community (Tharp, 2006).

Although learning in the Indigenous American communities is not always the central focus when participating in an activity, studies have shown that attention in intentional observation differs from accidental observation. Intentional participation is “keen observation and listening in anticipation of, or in the process of engaging in endeavours”. This means that when they have the intention of participating in an event, their attention is more focused on the details, compared to when they are accidentally observing.

Observational learning can be an active process in many Indigenous American communities. The learner must take initiative to attend to activities going on around them. Children in these communities also take initiative to contribute their knowledge in ways that will benefit their community. For example, in many Indigenous American cultures, children perform household chores without being instructed to do so by adults. Instead, they observe a need for their contributions, understand their role in their community, and take initiative to accomplish the tasks they have observed others doing. The learner’s intrinsic motivations play an important role in the child’s understanding and construction of meaning in these educational experiences. The independence and responsibility associated with observational learning in many Indigenous American communities are significant reasons why this method of learning involves more than just watching and imitating. A learner must be actively engaged with their demonstrations and experiences in order to fully comprehend and apply the knowledge they obtain.

Indigenous Communities of the Americas

Children from indigenous heritage communities of the Americas often learn through observation, a strategy that can carry over into adulthood. The heightened value towards observation allows children to multi-task and actively engage in simultaneous activities. The exposure to an uncensored adult lifestyle allows children to observe and learn the skills and practices that are valued in their communities. Children observe elders, parents, and siblings complete tasks and learn to participate in them. They are seen as contributors and learn to observe multiple tasks being completed at once and can learn to complete a task while still engaging with other community members without being distracted.

Indigenous communities provide more opportunities to incorporate children in everyday life. This can be seen in some Mayan communities where children are given full access to community events, which allows observational learning to occur more often. Other children in Mazahua, Mexico are known to observe ongoing activities intensely. In native northern Canadian and indigenous Mayan communities, children often learn as third-party observers from stories and conversations by others. Most young Mayan children are carried on their mother’s back, allowing them to observe their mother’s work and see the world as their mother sees it. Often, children in Indigenous American communities assume the majority of the responsibility for their learning. Additionally, children find their own approaches to learning. Children are often allowed to learn without restrictions and with minimal guidance. They are encouraged to participate in the community even if they do not know how to do the work. They are self-motivated to learn and finish their chores. These children act as a second set of eyes and ears for their parents, updating them about the community.

Children aged 6 to 8 in an indigenous heritage community in Guadalajara, Mexico participated in hard work, such as cooking or running errands, thus benefiting the whole family, while those in the city of Guadalajara rarely did so. These children participated more in adult regulated activities and had little time to play, while those from the indigenous-heritage community had more time to play and initiate in their after-school activities and had a higher sense of belonging to their community. Children from formerly indigenous communities are more likely to show these aspects than children from cosmopolitan communities are, even after leaving their childhood community.

Within certain indigenous communities, people do not typically seek out explanations beyond basic observation. This is because they are competent in learning through astute observation and often nonverbally encourage to do so. In a Guatemalan footloom factory, amateur adult weavers observed skilled weavers over the course of weeks without questioning or being given explanations; the amateur weaver moved at their own pace and began when they felt confident. The framework of learning how to weave through observation can serve as a model that groups within a society use as a reference to guide their actions in particular domains of life. Communities that participate in observational learning promote tolerance and mutual understand of those coming from different cultural backgrounds.

Other Human and Animal Behaviour Experiments

When an animal is given a task to complete, they are almost always more successful after observing another animal doing the same task before them. Experiments have been conducted on several different species with the same effect: animals can learn behaviours from peers. However, there is a need to distinguish the propagation of behaviour and the stability of behaviour. Research has shown that social learning can spread a behaviour, but there are more factors regarding how a behaviour carries across generations of an animal culture.

Learning in Fish

Experiments with ninespine sticklebacks showed that individuals will use social learning to locate food.

Social Learning in Pigeons

A study in 1996 at the University of Kentucky used a foraging device to test social learning in pigeons. A pigeon could access the food reward by either pecking at a treadle or stepping on it. Significant correspondence was found between the methods of how the observers accessed their food and the methods the initial model used in accessing the food.

Acquiring Foraging Niches

Studies have been conducted at the University of Oslo and University of Saskatchewan regarding the possibility of social learning in birds, delineating the difference between cultural and genetic acquisition. Strong evidence already exists for mate choice, bird song, predator recognition, and foraging.

Researchers cross-fostered eggs between nests of blue tits and great tits and observed the resulting behaviour through audio-visual recording. Tits raised in the foster family learned their foster family’s foraging sites early. This shift—from the sites the tits would among their own kind and the sites they learned from the foster parents—lasted for life. What young birds learn from foster parents, they eventually transmitted to their own offspring. This suggests cultural transmissions of foraging behaviour over generations in the wild.

Social Learning in Crows

The University of Washington studied this phenomenon with crows, acknowledging the evolutionary trade-off between acquiring costly information first-hand and learning that information socially with less cost to the individual but at the risk of inaccuracy. The experimenters exposed wild crows to a unique “dangerous face” mask as they trapped, banded, and released 7-15 birds at five different study places around Seattle, WA. An immediate scolding response to the mask after trapping by previously captured crows illustrates that the individual crow learned the danger of that mask. There was a scolding from crows that were captured that had not been captured initially. That response indicates conditioning from the mob of birds that assembled during the capture.

Horizontal social learning (learning from peers) is consistent with the lone crows that recognised the dangerous face without ever being captured. Children of captured crow parents were conditioned to scold the dangerous mask, which demonstrates vertical social learning (learning from parents). The crows that were captured directly had the most precise discrimination between dangerous and neutral masks than the crows that learned from the experience of their peers. The ability of crows to learn doubled the frequency of scolding, which spread at least 1.2 km from where the experiment started to over a 5-year period at one site.

Propagation of Animal Culture

Researchers at the Département d’Etudes Cognitives, Institut Jean Nicod, Ecole Normale Supérieure acknowledged a difficulty with research in social learning. To count acquired behaviour as cultural, two conditions need must be met: the behaviour must spread in a social group, and that behaviour must be stable across generations. Research has provided evidence that imitation may play a role in the propagation of a behaviour, but these researchers believe the fidelity of this evidence is not sufficient to prove the stability of animal culture.

Other factors like ecological availability, reward-based factors, content-based factors, and source-based factors might explain the stability of animal culture in a wild rather than just imitation. As an example of ecological availability, chimps may learn how to fish for ants with a stick from their peers, but that behaviour is also influenced by the particular type of ants as well as the condition. A behaviour may be learned socially, but the fact that it was learned socially does not necessarily mean it will last. The fact that the behaviour is rewarding has a role in cultural stability as well. The ability for socially-learned behaviours to stabilise across generations is also mitigated by the complexity of the behaviour. Different individuals of a species, like crows, vary in their ability to use a complex tool. Finally, a behaviour’s stability in animal culture depends on the context in which they learn a behaviour. If a behaviour has already been adopted by a majority, then the behaviour is more likely to carry across generations out of a need for conforming.

Animals are able to acquire behaviours from social learning, but whether or not that behaviour carries across generations requires more investigation.

Hummingbird Experiment

Experiments with hummingbirds provided one example of apparent observational learning in a non-human organism. Hummingbirds were divided into two groups. Birds in one group were exposed to the feeding of a knowledgeable “tutor” bird; hummingbirds in the other group did not have this exposure. In subsequent tests the birds that had seen a tutor were more efficient feeders than the others.

Bottlenose Dolphin

Herman (2002) suggested that bottlenose dolphins produce goal-emulated behaviours rather than imitative ones. A dolphin that watches a model place a ball in a basket might place the ball in the basket when asked to mimic the behaviour, but it may do so in a different manner seen.

Rhesus Monkey

Kinnaman (1902) reported that one rhesus monkey learned to pull a plug from a box with its teeth to obtain food after watching another monkey succeed at this task.

Fredman (2012) also performed an experiment on observational behaviour. In experiment 1, human-raised monkeys observed a familiar human model open a foraging box using a tool in one of two alternate ways: levering or poking. In experiment 2, mother-raised monkeys viewed similar techniques demonstrated by monkey models. A control group in each population saw no model. In both experiments, independent coders detected which technique experimental subjects had seen, thus confirming social learning. Further analyses examined copying at three levels of resolution.

The human-raised monkeys exhibited the greatest learning with the specific tool use technique they saw. Only monkeys who saw the levering model used the lever technique, by contrast with controls and those who witnessed poking. Mother-reared monkeys instead typically ignored the tool and exhibited fidelity at a lower level, tending only to re-create whichever result the model had achieved by either levering or poking.

Nevertheless, this level of social learning was associated with significantly greater levels of success in monkeys witnessing a model than in controls, an effect absent in the human-reared population. Results in both populations are consistent with a process of canalisation of the repertoire in the direction of the approach witnessed, producing a narrower, socially shaped behavioural profile than among controls who saw no model.

Light Box Experiment

Pinkham and Jaswal (2011) did an experiment to see if a child would learn how to turn on a light box by watching a parent. They found that children who saw a parent use their head to turn on the light box tended to do the task in that manner, while children who had not seen the parent used their hands instead.

Swimming Skill Performance

When adequate practice and appropriate feedback follow demonstrations, increased skill performance and learning occurs. Lewis (1974) did a study[54] of children who had a fear of swimming and observed how modelling and going over swimming practices affected their overall performance. The experiment spanned nine days, and included many steps. The children were first assessed on their anxiety and swimming skills. Then they were placed into one of three conditional groups and exposed to these conditions over a few days.

At the end of each day, all children participated in a group lesson. The first group was a control group where the children watched a short cartoon video unrelated to swimming. The second group was a peer mastery group, which watched a short video of similar-aged children who had very good task performances and high confidence. Lastly, the third group was a peer coping group, whose subjects watched a video of similar-aged children who progressed from low task performances and low confidence statements to high task performances and high confidence statements.

The day following the exposures to each condition, the children were reassessed. Finally, the children were also assessed a few days later for a follow-up assessment. Upon reassessment, it was shown that the two model groups who watched videos of children similar in age had successful rates on the skills assessed because they perceived the models as informational and motivational.

Do-as-I-do Chimpanzee

Flexible methods must be used to assess whether an animal can imitate an action. This led to an approach that teaches animals to imitate by using a command such as “do-as-I-do” or “do this” followed by the action that they are supposed to imitate . Researchers trained chimpanzees to imitate an action that was paired with the command. For example, this might include a researcher saying “do this” paired with clapping hands. This type of instruction has been utilised in a variety of other animals in order to teach imitation actions by utilising a command or request.

Observational Learning in Everyday Life

Observational learning allows for new skills to be learned in a wide variety of areas. Demonstrations help the modification of skills and behaviours.

Learning Physical Activities

When learning skills for physical activities can be anything that is learned that requires physical movement, this can include learning a sport, learning to eat with a fork, or learning to walk. There are multiple important variables that aid in modifying physical skills and psychological responses from an observational learning standpoint. Modelling is a variable in observational learning where the skill level of the model is considered. When someone is supposed to demonstrate a physical skill such as throwing a baseball the model should be able to execute the behaviour of throwing the ball flawlessly if the model of learning is a mastery model. Another model to utilise in observational learning is a coping model, which would be a model demonstrating a physical skill that they have not yet mastered or achieved high performance in. Both models are found to be effective and can be utilised depending on the what skills is trying to be demonstrated. These models can be used as interventions to increase observational learning in practice, competition, and rehabilitation situations. Observational learning is also dependent on the learner’s intentions and goals where performance can be enhanced by increasing instruction and beneficial feedback depending on the individual’s age, personality, and abilities.

Neuroscience

Recent research in neuroscience has implicated mirror neurons as a neurophysiological basis for observational learning. Mirror neurons were first discovered in 1991 by researchers led by Giacomo Rizzolatti. The scientists had a device connected to a monkey to monitor brain activity. When the scientists came into the lab eating ice cream, the device buzzed. This accidental finding led them to mirror neurons which are an essential part in imitation and observational learning. These specialised visuomotor neurons fire action potentials when an individual performs a motor task and also fire when an individual passively observes another individual performing the same motor task. In observational motor learning, the process begins with a visual presentation of another individual performing a motor task, this acts as a model. The learner then needs to transform the observed visual information into internal motor commands that will allow them to perform the motor task, this is known as visuomotor transformation. Mirror neuron networks provide a mechanism for visuo-motor and motor-visual transformation and interaction. Similar networks of mirror neurons have also been implicated in social learning, motor cognition and social cognition.

Clinical Perspective

Autism Spectrum Disorder

Discrete trial training (DTT) is a structured and systematic approach utilised in helping individuals with autism spectrum disorder learn. Individuals with autism tend to struggle with learning through observation, therefore something that is reinforcing is necessary in order to motivate them to imitate or follow through with the task. When utilising DTT to teach individuals with autism modelling is utilised to aid in their learning. Modelling would include showing how to reach the correct answer, this could mean showing the steps to a math equation. Utilising DTT in a group setting also promotes observational learning from peers as well.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_learning >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

What is Habit Reversal Training?

Introduction

Habit reversal training (HRT) is a multicomponent behavioural treatment package originally developed to address a wide variety of repetitive behaviour disorders.

Behavioural disorders treated with HRT include tics, trichotillomania, nail biting, thumb sucking, skin picking, temporomandibular disorder (TMJ), lip-cheek biting and stuttering. It consists of five components: awareness training, competing response training, contingency management, relaxation training, and generalisation training.

Research on the efficacy of HRT for behavioural disorders have produced consistent, large effect sizes (approximately 0.80 across the disorders). It has met the standard of a well-established treatment for stuttering, thumb sucking, nail biting, and TMJ disorders. According to a meta-analysis from 2012, decoupling, a self-help variant of HRT, also shows efficacy.

Refer to Decoupling for Body-Focused Repetitive Behaviours.

For Tic Disorders

In case of a tic, these components are intended to increase tic awareness, develop a competing response to the tic, and build treatment motivation and compliance. HRT is based on the presence of a premonitory urge, or sensation occurring before a tic. HRT involves replacing a tic with a competing response—a more comfortable or acceptable movement or sound—when a patient feels a premonitory urge building.

Controlled trials have demonstrated that HRT is an acceptable, tolerable, effective and durable treatment for tics; HRT reduces the severity of vocal tics, and results in enduring improvement of tics when compared with supportive therapy. HRT has been shown to be more effective than supportive therapy and, in some studies, medication. HRT is not yet proven or widely accepted, but large-scale trials are ongoing and should provide better information about its efficacy in treating Tourette syndrome. Studies through 2006 are “characterized by a number of design limitations, including relatively small sample sizes, limited characterisation of study participants, limited data on children and adolescents, lack of attention to the assessment of treatment integrity and adherence, and limited attention to the identification of potential clinical and neurocognitive mechanisms and predictors of treatment response”. Additional controlled studies of HRT are needed to address whether HRT, medication, or a combination of both is most effective, but in the interim, “HRT either alone or in combination with medication should be considered as a viable treatment” for tic disorders.

Comprehensive Behavioural Intervention for Tics

Comprehensive Behavioural Intervention for Tics (CBIT), based on HRT, is a first-line treatment for Tourette syndrome and tic disorders. With a high level of confidence, CBIT has been shown to be more likely to lead to a reduction in tics than other supportive therapies or psychoeducation. Some limitations are: children younger than ten may not understand the treatment, people with severe tics or ADHD may not be able to suppress their tics or sustain the required focus to benefit from behavioural treatments, there is a lack of therapists trained in behavioural interventions, finding practitioners outside of specialty clinics can be difficult, and costs may limit accessibility. Whether increased awareness of tics through HRT/CBIT (as opposed to moving attention away from them) leads to further increases in tics later in life is a subject of discussion among TS experts.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habit_reversal_training >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

What is Decoupling for Body-Focused Repetitive Behaviours?

Introduction

Decoupling is a behavioural self-help intervention for body-focused and related behaviours (DSM-5) such as trichotillomania, onychophagia (nail biting), skin picking and lip-cheek biting.

Outline

The user is instructed to modify the original dysfunctional behavioural path by performing a counter-movement shortly before completing the self-injurious behaviour (e.g. biting nails, picking skin, pulling hair). This is intended to trigger an irritation, which enables the person to detect and stop the compulsive behaviour at an early stage.

A systematic review from 2012 suggested some efficacy of decoupling, which was corroborated by Lee et al. in 2019.

Whether or not the technique is superior to other behavioural interventions such as habit reversal training awaits to be tested. Decoupling is a variant of habit reversal training.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decoupling_for_body-focused_repetitive_behaviors >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

What is Covert Conditioning?

Introduction

Covert conditioning is an approach to mental health treatment that utilises the principles of applied behaviour analysis, or cognitive-behaviour therapies (CBTs) to help individuals improve their behaviour or inner experience. This method relies on the individual’s ability to use imagery for purposes such as mental rehearsal. In some populations, it has been found that an imaginary reward can be as effective as a real one. The effectiveness of covert conditioning is believed to depend on the careful application of behavioural treatment principles, including a comprehensive behavioural analysis.

Some clinicians include the mind’s ability to spontaneously generate imagery that can provide intuitive solutions or even reprocessing that improves people’s typical reactions to situations or inner material. However, this goes beyond the behaviouristic principles on which covert conditioning is based.

Therapies and self-help methods have aspects of covert conditioning. This can be seen in focusing, some neuro-linguistic programming methods such as future pacing, and various visualisation or imaginal processes used in behaviour therapies, such as CBTs or clinical behaviour analysis.

Therapeutic Interventions

“Systematic desensitisation” associates an aversive stimulus with a behaviour that the client wishes to reduce or eliminate. This is achieved by imagining the target behaviour followed by imagining an aversive consequence. “Covert extinction” attempts to reduce a behaviour by imagining the target behaviour while imagining that the reinforcer does not occur. “Covert response cost” seeks to reduce a behaviour by associating the loss of a reinforcer with the target behaviour that is to be decreased.

“Contact desensitisation” intends to increase a behaviour by imagining a reinforcing experience in connection with modelling the correct behaviour. “Covert negative reinforcement” attempts to increase a behaviour by connecting the termination of an aversive stimulus with increased production of a target behaviour.

“Dialectical behaviour therapy” (DBT) and “Acceptance and commitment therapy” (ACT) uses positive reinforcement and covert conditioning through mindfulness.

Effectiveness

Previous research in the early 1990s has shown covert conditioning to be effective with sex offenders as part of a behaviour modification treatment package. Clinical studies continue to find it effective with some generalisation from office to natural environment with this population.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_conditioning >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.

What is Behaviour Management?

Introduction

Behaviour management, similar to behaviour modification, is a less-intensive form of behaviour therapy. Unlike behaviour modification, which focuses on changing behaviour, behaviour management focuses on maintaining positive habits and behaviours and reducing negative ones. Behaviour management skills are especially useful for teachers and educators, healthcare workers, and those working in supported living communities. This form of management aims to help professionals oversee and guide behaviour management in individuals and groups toward fulfilling, productive, and socially acceptable behaviours. Behaviour management can be accomplished through modelling, rewards, or punishment.

Research

Influential behaviour management researchers B.F. Skinner and Carl Rogers both take different approaches to managing behavio.

Skinner claimed that anyone can manipulate behaviour by identifying what a person finds rewarding. Once the rewards are known, they can be given in exchange for good behaviour. Skinner called this “Positive Reinforcement Psychology.”

Rogers proposed that the desire to behave appropriately must come before addressing behavioural problems. This is accomplished by teaching the individual about morality, including why one should do what is right. Rogers held that a person must have an internal awareness of right and wrong.

Many principles and techniques are the same as in behaviour modification. However, they are considerably different and administered less often.

In the Classroom

Behaviour management is often applied by a classroom teacher as a form of behavioural engineering, in order to raise students’ retention of material and produce higher yields of student work completion. This also helps to reduce classroom disruption and places more focus on building self-control and self-regulating a calm emotional state.

American education psychologist, Brophy (1986, p.191) writes:

Contemporary behavior modification approaches involve students more actively in planning and shaping their own behavior through participation in the negotiation of contracts with their teachers and through exposure to training designed to help them to monitor and evaluate their behavior more actively, to learn techniques of self-control and problem solving, and to set goals and reinforce themselves for meeting these meetings.

In general, behaviour management strategies are effective at reducing classroom disruption. Recent efforts have focused on incorporating principles of functional assessment.

Such strategies can come from a variety of behavioural change theories, although the most common practices rely on using applied behaviour analysis principles such as positive reinforcement and mild punishments (like response cost and child time-out). Behavioural practices like differential reinforcement are often used. These may be delivered in a token economy or a level system. In general, the reward component is considered effective. For example, Cotton (1988) reviewed 37 studies on tokens, praise, and other reward systems and found them to be effective in managing student classroom behaviour. A comprehensive review of token procedures to match children’s level of behavioural severity is found in Walker’s text “The Acting Out Child.”

Behaviour management systems have three main parts:

  • Whole group;
  • Table group; and
  • Individual.

Examples may include marble jars for the class, prize charts for tables, and a grid chart with 25 spaces for individual students. Many types of charts can be found to use in each situation.

Effective behaviour management depends on using tools that are appropriate to each situation. One effective tool is the High Card/Low Card system. To use a high card, the educator or instructor uses strong intervention to address the issue. Some examples of High Cards are:

  • Sending a student to the office.
  • Keeping a student after school hours.
  • Calling home to the student’s parent.

A Low Card approach is a less invasive way to address a behavioural issue and may include:

  • Speaking to a student privately.
  • Making eye contact during the issue.
  • Changing the seating arrangement.

Some student behaviours must be addressed immediately and could cause a teacher to interrupt teaching in order to resolve the issue. This is known as a direct cost situation. This typically arises in extreme behaviour situations like physical disputes between students, loud outbursts in class, or disrupting the class disrespectfully.

Purkey proposed a visualisation way to keep track of the methods used to manage student behaviour. He called it the “Blue-card, orange-card theory”. Blue cards help reinforce good behaviour and ways to encourage a student. Orange cards, in contrast, are things that may be critical, discouraging, or demeaning. Some examples of blue cards might be bringing up the good things a student has done before focusing on the behaviour that needs to change, therefore reminding the student that they have worth and causing them to feel encouraged. An orange card could list ways to critique a student’s work in front of the class, which would lower their feelings of self-worth, providing an example of what to avoid. Teachers can be aware and provide students with required critique and feedback, while reinforcing their self-image. Purkey’s theory helps teachers understand how they can edit behavioural management specifically in the classroom.

In Supported Living

When bringing behavioural management in relation with supported living the purpose of this is to keep a person’s dignity. Most of the time, residents have some behaviour that is meant to be improved in order for them to live a more normal life. Our main goal of the behavioural management is to help them become as independent as possible. Of course, it is important to recognise that not every resident will be back to being completely independent.

There are a lot of ways to help residents be more independent and we will look at some of those here.

It is important we first take a look at each resident’s history. Many of them will have gone through an experience that may have started the behaviour change in the first place. Some examples of these are child abuse, trauma, anxiety, depression, etc.

Once a person is in the behaviour management process, we have to consider their behaviour daily. We should also be meeting with them regularly in order to keep accurate data of their behaviour. In this way we can look back and make modifications to what they need during the behaviour management process.

Each resident will be different and need a variety of attention. But it is important to consider what will be needed in order to get to their success. The main goal of the behaviour management is to address the behaviour issue in order to keep them independent.

When with a resident there are a variety of behaviours you may come into contact with. You will not only need to know what to do in each situation but also how to act. Your behaviour is crucial to the progress of their behaviour. There may be situations when yourself can not handle the behaviour and will need to lead to a bigger solution. Redirecting them to a psychologist, psychiatrist, hospital, or a behaviour management centre may be beneficial.

Building Prosocial Behaviour

Behavioural management principles have used reinforcement, modelling, and punishment to foster prosocial behaviour. This is sometimes referred to as behavioural development, a sub-category of which is behaviour analysis of child development. The “token economy” is an example of behavioural management approach that seeks to develop prosocial behaviour. In this model, socially appropriate behaviours are encouraged and reinforced since these are equivalent to points that can be exchanged for rewards. Examples of situations and behaviours where tokens can be earned include attending groups, taking medication, and refraining from aggressive behaviours, among others.

Several studies have been done in this area to discover effective methods of building prosocial behaviour. Midlarsky and colleagues (1973) used a combination of modelling and reinforcement to build altruistic behaviour. Two studies exist in which modelling by itself did not increase prosocial behaviour; however, modelling is much more effective than instruction-giving (such as “preaching”). The role of rewards has been implicated in the building of self-control and empathy. Cooperation seems particularly susceptible to rewards. Sharing is another prosocial behaviour influenced by reinforcement. In a Harvard study, it was proven that acts of kindness and expressing gratitude in the classroom can cause better behaviour and increased mood overall.

Reinforcement is particularly effective in the learning environment if context conditions are similar. Recent research indicates that behavioural interventions produce the most valuable results when applied during early childhood and early adolescence. Positive reinforcement motivates better than punishment. Motivation to behaviour change is also less damaging to the relationship.

More controversy has arisen concerning behaviour management due to the role of punishment in forming prosocial behaviour. However, one study found that sharing rates of children could be increased by removing factors that caused a failure to share. The socialisation process continues by peers with reinforcement and punishment playing major roles. Peers are more likely to punish cross-gender play and reinforce play specifically to gender.

Positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, and negative punishment are all forms of operant conditioning. Reinforcements are an attempt to change behaviour, either positively or negatively. Positive reinforcement attempts to increase a behaviour by adding something the target wants (e.g. awarding good behaviour with a treat). Negative reinforcement is attempting to increase behaviour by removing something unwanted from the target. (e.g. a child’s room is messy and their mother nags them to clean it up, they will eventually try to keep it clean to stop the mother from nagging them). Punishment is trying to decrease behaviour, either by using negative or positive stimuli. Positive punishment is when one adds an unwanted stimulus to decrease the target’s behaviour (e.g. spanking a child when they behave badly). Here, spanking is being added to decrease undesired behaviour. Negative punishment is when one removes something the target enjoys or likes to decrease their undesired behaviour. (e.g. a child comes home past curfew every weekend, so if their mother bans them from watching TV when they are past curfew, the child will eventually try to come home on time). This is negative punishment because the child likes to watch TV, so when the mother takes that away from them, they dislike the consequence. Thus, they will be more likely to come home in time to avoid having that privilege taken away.

Abraham Maslow is a very well-known humanist psychologist, known for his work on the hierarchy of needs, in which he states that humans must have one level of needs satisfied before attaining the next level. There are five needs that are being satisfied in sequence: physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualisation. Maslow also claims that humans’ needs are never completely fulfilled and that this affects how people behave (e.g. if a person’s needs are never fully satisfied, then they might not always behave well, even if they do receive a treat for good behaviour). A related concept, the “Hawthorne Effect”, involves the manipulation of behaviour of somebody being observed. For example, if someone is being studied in an experiment, that person might perform better or work harder because they are aware of the attention they are receiving. It is this effect of observation that is called the “Hawthorne Effect”. This is interesting because if a child who is behaving very poorly, no matter what, is put in an experiment, they might increase their good behaviour. After all, they are receiving attention from the researcher. The point of operant conditioning in behaviour modification is to regulate the behaviour. This method uses different techniques and ties them all together to monitor behaviour. It can lead to problems, however, when talking about Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs because in this model Maslow goes on to explain how no one’s needs are fully met. The highest point on Maslow’s pyramid is self-actualisation which Maslow argues is the goal in which we do not reach. This can pose a problem when it comes to behaviour modification because one might think if that individual can not reach that ultimate goal, why try at all. Self-actualisation is the goal in which humans have this sense of belonging or accomplishment. Humans have an inherent need to achieve goals and attain self-satisfaction; when we do not attain those goals and needs, we feel dissatisfied. When a person does not meet that top goal, that person might feel a void, discouraged because they cannot seem to reach that ultimate step. Using these behavioural modifications or techniques, people can teach themselves how to better attain these goals.

Managing Defensive Behaviour

Understanding and dealing with defensiveness is an important personal skill. Following are some of the strategies:

  • Recognize that defensive behaviour is normal, as “defensive behaviours are intended to reduce a perceive threat or avoid an unwanted threat,” It is normal for one to be defensive when they feel that something is their fault. These actions are attempted in order to avoid blame or change of action.
  • Never attack a person’s defences. Do not try to “explain someone” to themselves by saying things like, “you know the real reason you are using that excuse is that you cannot bear to be blamed for anything.” Instead, try to concentrate on the act itself rather than on the person.
  • Postpone action. Sometimes it is best to do nothing at all. People frequently react to sudden threats by instinctively closing off and hiding their feelings. When given time the person will be able to give a more composed reaction or answer. These feelings often come from being overloaded, especially in the workplace where overload can have a taxing effect on a person’s ability to meet task expectations.
  • Recognize human limitations. Do not expect to be able to solve every problem that comes up, especially the human ones. More importantly, remember that a layman should not try to be a psychologist. Offering employees understanding is one thing; trying to deal with deep psychological problems is another matter entirely.
  • Knowing personal limits and expectations is important in helping others with defensive behaviour. Being able to have effective self-observation is important because if there is no solid idea of one’s feelings, then trying to help others will come across as too aggressive or too reserved. A smart way to start this change is by asking oneself a couple of different questions, such as “what am I feeling”, “what am I thinking”, “how else can I think about that,” etc. Then proceed to automatically notice if the feelings are winding up or down to act accordingly.

An effective strategy to dealing with defensiveness is the SCARF model which was developed by an Australian neuroscientist named David Rock. The five letters stand for status, certainty, autonomy, relatedness, and fairness. Understanding each domain will help explain the fight or flight response when someone is faced with a stressful situation; and focus on each individuals’ skills.

Status threats relate to how important the threat is to others and ourselves, looking at how the situation will help lift or put down the other people involved and forget about ego(s).

Certainty threats deal with predicting the future such as when someone says “I never get told anything in this company.” It is actually them asking to be kept in the loop about decisions that are being made.

Autonomy threats are based on the control throughout a situation; if someone is having this threat they will feel like they have not had any say or input and become frustrated as a result. In these situations, giving that person a choice is the best option.

Relatedness threats deal with how comfortable someone feels around other people. In this case, the leader of the group needs to make sure that everyone is feeling included and important. Making sure that everyone’s voice is heard and they are important individuals.

Finally, the fairness threat is the perception of both parties that the exchange of content and relation is fair and equal. No one wants to feel like they are putting in 80 percent while the other side is only putting in 20%.

This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavior_management >; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA.