Classic Study: Watson and Rayner (1920)

Question 1

Aim

Answer 1

To see if simple emotional responses could be acquired through classical conditioning

Question 2

Procedure:

How old was little albert

Answer 2

9 months at the start of the experiment

Question 3

Procedure:

What were the 2 IV’s

Answer 3

1. presence/absence of loud noise
2. sight of the rat

Question 4

Procedure:

What was the DV

Answer 4

Albert’s response

Question 5

Procedure:

What were some of the object Albert was presented to one at a time with to test his initial baseline emotional response.

And what was his response to these objects

Answer 5

a white rat, a rabbit, a dog, a monkey, masks, cotton wool

• showed no fear response

Question 6

Procedure:

How many sessions happened

Answer 6

5 in total

Question 7

Procedure:

What happened in session 1

Answer 7

Conditioning began, White rat presented to him, when he reached out for it a metal bar was hit with a hammer behind his head producing loud noise

Question 8

Procedure:

What happened in session 2

Answer 8

A week later Albert reintroduced to white rat, rat was paired with the loud noise 5 times.

• Blocks was also given to him to test to see if he was just getting scared more easily (showed no fear)

Question 9

Procedure:

What happened in session 3

Answer 9

5 days later Albert’s responses to the rat and other objects were assessed.

Question 10

Procedure:

Session 3, what were some of the objects included in the retest?

Answer 10

Dog, John Watsons hair, fur coat, rabbit

Question 11

Procedure:

What happened in session 4

Answer 11

5 days later, new environment introduced and he was assessed for different objects again

Question 12

Procedure:

Session 4, what was the new environment introduced

Answer 12

A lecture room with 4 other people present

Question 13

Procedure:

What happened in session 5

Answer 13

1 month later, Albert tested again with different objects like Santa Claus mask, fur coat, the rat and a rabbit

Question 14

Findings:

Findings of baseline testing

Answer 14

Albert showed no fear towards the rat or any objects, but he responded to loud noise (lips trembling). - showing an unconditioned response

Question 15

Findings:

Session 1 and session 2

Answer 15

1 - reacted to the noise by crying but showed no fear towards the rat

2 - more hesitant towards the rat, didn’t reach out and crawled away when rat got close to him. After further conditioning he started crying at the rat

Question 16

Findings:

session 3

Answer 16

reacted with fear towards the white furry objects

Question 17

findings:

session 4 and session 5

Answer 17

Alberts fear response to white furry objects became less extreme but still remained.

• Time and location had affected this

Question 18

Conclusion

Answer 18

It is relatively easy to condition an emotional response to a nuetral stimulus, in this study it was done after 2 sessions.

Question 19

Strength of internal validity

Answer 19

Good tight controls helped reduce the impact of extraneous variables on the study.

Question 20

Strength of internal validity:

Evidence that tight controls helped reduce extraneous variables

Answer 20

Little albert was specifically picked because of his emotional stability. Reducing chances of individual characteristics affecting the study.

Question 21

Strength of internal validity:

Why are these tight controls good for the study’s aim

Answer 21

Helped ensure changes in Alberts behaviours were due to the conditioning nad not extraneous variables.

Question 22

Competing arguement to the good controls

Answer 22

Some aspects of the design were not well controlled for

Question 23

Competing arguement to the good controls:

Evidence that some actions were not well controlled

Answer 23

The rabbit was suddenly placed in front of Albert, and the reluctant dog was pushed towards him

Question 24

Competing arguement to the good controls:

What does this evidence mean for the results

Answer 24

These actions could have provoked a fear response to ALbert instead of the conditioning itself.

Question 25

Weakness of the reliability

Answer 25

Due to the ethical concerns of this study, it unlikely to be replicated.

Question 26

Weakness of the reliability:

Evidence of some ethical concerns

Answer 26

There was a degree of stress involved when Albert was deliberately shocked by the loud noise, which was meant to be deliberately unpleasant.

Question 27

Weakness of the reliability:

What did this mean for the study

Answer 27

It shouldn’t be replicated as it would go against BPS guidelines

Question 28

Strength of applicability

Answer 28

Study led to the understanding on the acquiring of phobias how potential on how to treat them.

Question 29

Strength of applicability:

Evidence of the good applications on treating phobias

Answer 29

Study led to technique like systematic desensitisation and flooding being developed as a treatment to helping reduced symptoms of phobias