Introduction
Behavior relates to the conditions and characteristics correlating with how one conducts themselves. However, the reasons that generate particular behaviors may differ. A variety of behavior theories have been developed with the intent to determine why people act a certain way. Such theories aim to highlight the factors that facilitate specific acts and actions from individuals.
Regarding existing frameworks, behavior theories can be divided into those highlighting one’s internal problems, environment, and the society in which the person operates. In regard to internal issues, the biophysical and psychodynamic theories can be mentioned. The ecologic theory, on the other hand, relates to the social and cultural environment in which an action is exemplified. Last but not least, the behavioral model and the social learning theory explain behaviors through consequences and observation. The current paper will exemplify the aforementioned theories and their practical application.
Biophysical Theory
As highlighted prior, the biophysical theory is based on the argument that physical and biological conditions impact behavior. Needless to say, all behavior results from a variety of processes that generate a response in the brain (Maag, 2018). For example, a person with brain damage will potentially behave in a certain way due to a physical injury. Additionally, glycemic dysregulation can cause responses such as irritability and aggression.
However, while the theory explains behavior in specific cases, it is certain that the framework cannot be applied to explain acts and actions in diverse settings. One cannot apply the biophysical theory unless specific evidence shows a person’s physical condition, such as in the case of brain damage. Genetic factors can also be attributed to the model. At the same time, the biophysical theory cannot explain why two individuals with similar genetic, biological, and physical characteristics behave differently.
Psychodynamic Theory
The psychodynamic theory is similar to the biophysical theory in that it is based on the prism of the behavior being generated as a result of internal processes rather than external ones. It implies that a person acts based on their id, which is inherent; ego, which is the personality constrained by norms; and superego, which is the responses, either satisfactory or dissatisfactory (Maag, 2018).
Based on the framework, behavior is constructed from the id, ego, and superego in combination with conflict occurring at a particular stage of a person’s life. The framework was developed by Freud, who highlights that conflicts can occur during the oral, anal, phallic, latency, and genital stages (Maag, 2018). However, the framework does not necessarily relate to behavior but to internal feelings that do not always generate an external response. Despite the framework’s complexity, it is difficult to apply because it would be challenging to text efficiently to determine its validity.
Ecological Theory
In contrast to the two internal theories highlighted prior, the ecological model reflects on one’s environment as an influence on behavior and behavioral patterns. The model implies that behavior is a result of reward and punishment, yet it also suggests that the context of an action has an effect on it (Maag, 2018). As a result, an individual may behave a certain way in specific circumstances and not exemplify similar traits in others. For example, a student can be disruptive in one classroom and be more studious in another depending on the teacher’s personality or the characteristics of the class itself. Based on the framework, the classroom is viewed from the prism of an ecosystem.
As in each ecosystem, the classroom one aims for an equilibrium. Most students seek to fit into the ecosystem without generating barriers. At the same time, in case disturbances occur, adaptation can be implemented (Maag, 2018). If adaptation from the party of the disturbance is not employed, whether the element is dismissed altogether or a new niche is established in which the disturbance fits. In case the solution does not prove to be successful, the classroom itself adapts to the disturbance. In a classroom setting, the theory suggests that a teacher can apply the model by giving students tools to become parts of the ecosystem despite their potentially disturbing behaviors.
Behavioral Model
Behavioral models are rooted in functionalism, implying that behavior has a function. Two elements of behavioral approaches that can be highlighted are respondent conditioning and operant conditioning, developed by Pavlov and, subsequently, Skinner (Maag, 2018). Both frameworks are centered around the idea of a response to external stimuli. However, in the case of respondent conditioning, the response is the result of a stimulus to involuntary behavior.
Operant conditioning, on the other hand, relates to a voluntary behavior and its consequences. For respondent conditioning, Pavlov’s dog is the most well-known experiment in which the dog was taught to have a specific involuntary behavior as a result of receiving a stimulus. In regard to operant conditioning, an example would be the idea of punishing children by sending them to their rooms as a result of their disruptive behavior. In this case, the respondent links a specific behavior to a consequence, which impacts further decision-making on whether disruptive behavior is to be incorporated or avoided.
Social Learning Theory
As highlighted previously, social learning relates to the aforementioned behavioral model in the assumption that behavior is a mechanism of adapting. In this case, the framework suggests that a person learns to observe and incorporate various behaviors that are imitated as a result of watching parents, siblings, and friends. Nonetheless, despite observation, individuals choose to display certain patterns depending on outside circumstances. For example, children engaged in observational learning do not display imitation when punishment is one of the outcomes that can be achieved (Maag, 2018).
Hence, for a behavior to be exemplified, the mechanism of observational learning is to be associated with reinforcement. For example, a student is to be praised for advancing in a subject through extracurricular activities due to observations of classmates. Several driving factors generate the desire to imitate the behavior above, including outcome and efficacy expectations. Hence, the student is to be certain that the behavior can be imitated and the outcomes will be positive. In case a vicarious punishment is expected as a result of an act, the student is more likely to avoid imitating or exemplifying it. As a result, the social learning theory incorporates the idea that behavior is a response to stimuli yet highlights the role of imitation and observation.
Conclusion
Behavior highlights the way a person conducts, and a variety of theories explain the choices that an individual makes in regard to their actions. The biophysical, psychodynamic, ecologic, behavioral, and social learning theories have a contrasting framework that highlights how people form their thought patterns when interacting with the world.
The internal problems highlighted in the biophysical and psychodynamic frameworks contrast with the role of setting, reward and punishment, and observation. The theories that have been proven to be more reliable, namely, the social learning theory, behavioral model, and ecological framework, are centered around the idea of reward and punishment. The subject learns through stimuli, observes others, or exemplifies behavior based on the setting and environment.
Reference
Maag, J. W. (2018). Behavior management: From theoretical implications to practical applications. Cengage Learning.