4.3.1 - classic study

Question 1

aim

Answer 1

The aim was to use classical conditioning principles to see if they could cause a human baby to develop a fear he did not have previously

Question 2

procedure

Answer 2

• The participant was a nine month old, healthy, well developed and unemotional baby named Albert
• Before conditioning he was shown a white rat(NS) that caused no fear
• and then they hit a steel bar with a hammer (UCS) to find his natural reflex was fear (UCR)
• during conditioning they used the hammer/steel bar (UCS) every time he tried to touch the rat (NS) which enforced fear (UNR)
• Due to association, when Albert saw the rat (CS) he felt fear (CR)
• 1 month later fear was still present but a weaker response

Question 3

results

Answer 3

• There was also shown to similar fury objects like rabbits and fur coats which showed stimulus generalization
• pairing of rat and loud noise created an association producing fear as a conditioned response

Question 4

Evaluation - strengths

Answer 4

R) this study is reliable as it has well-controlled procedures. For example they measured fear in little Albert before the conditioning took place, act as a baseline comparison. Therefore it could be repeated by different people so that results would be more reliable

A) This study has application. Results found out the pairing of the rat and the loud noise created an association producing fear as a conditioned response. Therefore aversion therapy can be used using principles of classical conditioning in order to reduce or avoid undesirable behavior patterns by conditioning.

Question 5

eval - weaknesses

Answer 5

G) this is not generalizable as the participant was only one infant aged child who was healthy and on emotional. Replication also failed to reproduce findings. Therefore the results cannot be representative of all the ages, genders or ethnicities or people who may be neurodivergent
E) this was not ethical as little Albert showed clear signs of distress as he was crying and trying to get away. However the study continued for weeks despite his distress. Therefore Albert was at risk of psychological harm as they neglected his well-being by inducing fear.