Lesson 2 - Classical Conditioning

Question 1

What is behaviourism?

Answer 1

A way of explaining behaviour in terms of what is observed in terms of learning

Question 2

Main points about behaviourism

Answer 2

• Emerged at the start of the 1900’s
• Driving force in the development of psychology
• All behaviour is learnt
• Animals and humans share the same behavioural processes
• Watson, a behaviourist, rejected introspection by Wundt
• All behaviour should be studied scientifically in a lab setting

Question 3

Ivan Pavlov (1904)

Answer 3

• Pavlov uses CC on dogs so that they build up an association between two stimuli
• He repeatedly paired an US (food) that produces an UR (salivating) with a NS (a bell) to create a CS (a bell on its own) which results in a CR (salivating)

Key principles

Generalisation: stimuli similar to the original conditioned stimuli (the bell) will cause the conditioned response to occur, like a different bell or a similar sound

Discrimination: stimuli similar to the bell will not result in the conditioned response occurring. This can be done by presenting the similar stimuli (another bell) but not presenting food, so salivation will not occur

Extinction: the conditioned response of salivating does not occur when you ring the bell. This is because the conditioned stimulus is being presented without food

Question 4

Strengths of classical conditioning

Answer 4

• Pavlov and Watson/Rayner provide evidence to support the idea of learning and the development of phobias.
• The behavioural approach is able to be tested easily and involves scientific observation in a laboratory setting with controlled variables. This aids objectivity and replication
• We can apply classical conditioning to treatments of psychological disorders like flooding and systematic desensitisation

Question 5

think about phobias, think about free will

Weaknesses of classical conditioning

Answer 5

• The Little Albert study by Watson and Rayner was conducted in a lab setting therefore you may yield different results in a different setting, which weakens the ecological validity of the study
• It is a useful model in explaining learning in animals and young children but not in adults, so it lacks population validity
• Menzies found that only 2% of people with hydrophobia had a traumatic experience with water, whereas the other 98% of people did not have any negative experience, therefore they did not learn their phobia by classical conditioning
• It views the subject as having a machine like learning mechanism, and does not take into account human free will and their conscious thought
• It is criticised by the biological approach. It ignores the roles of genes, hormones and evolution in behaviour. An example is schizophrenia where genetics have a large role in the illness.
• It is deterministic and ignores free will.