Classical Conditioning - WATSON & RAYNER

Question 1

3 Aims

Answer 1

1. Whether fear of an animal can be conditioned by simultaneously presenting the animal and striking a steel bar to make a loud noise to frighten the child.
2. Whether the fear would be transferred to other animals and objects.
3. Effect of time on the conditioned response.

Question 2

Procedure

Answer 2

• At age of 9 months, W&R carried out baseline tests. Introduced LA to white rat, rabbit, cotton wool. No fear responses. Loud noise by banging a steel bar resulted in LA fear response: started crying.
• 11 months + 3 days, no fear responses. Conditioning: just as hand touced rat, bar struck = jumped violently + whimpered.
• 11 months + 10 days, some effect from conditioning. Aim 1 tested, LA didn’t touch rat and whimpered. At the end, cried with rat alone and crawled away.
• 11 months + 15 days, Aim 2 tested; negative responses to other stimuli.
• 11 months + 20 days association weakened + renewed. Stimulus generalisation to dog.
• Follow up procedure: 1 year and 21 days, aiming to see if conditioning lasted longer than a month (Aim 3), resulting in success.

Question 3

Conclusions

Answer 3

• Fear response can be conditioned
• Stimulus generalisation is possible

Question 4

Evaluation: Generalisability

Answer 4

• Case study of 1 individual
• Only representative of 1 person, not generalisable to wider population
• Eg. 9 months old at start of study
• More generalisable than Pavlov’s study on dogs. Shows that Pavlov’s study can be generalisable to humans.

Question 5

Evaluation: Reliability

Answer 5

• High reliability
• Simple + well-documented methodology = easily replicated
• Eg. standardised procedures. W&R themselves conducted experiment.
• However ethical guidelines mean that research would be impossible to conduct now

Question 6

Evaluation: Applications

Answer 6

• Provides explanation on how behaviour is learnt, so can therefore be unlearnt
• Therapies for phobias eg systematic desensitization, cognitive behavioural therapy

Question 7

Evaluation: Validity

Answer 7

• High in validity - scientific. Lab conditions = high level of control. eg. use of blocks as baseline
• W&R may have been subjective when interpreting LA’s behaviour eg. interpreting crying as fear response - LA may have just been hungry
• Cause + effect links made; provides evidence to support Psych as science
• Extraneous variables removed - only W&R conducted study
• Very controlled conditions (small, quiet room) = ecological validity lowered. Most babies learn in more complex environments. W&R did move LA into a bigger room with people in it towards end of study.
• Control of stimuli LA was exposed to = artificial procedure

Question 8

Evaluation: Ethics

Answer 8

• Did not protect LA from psychological harm: became very fearful.
• Right to withdraw removed - W&R moved LA back when he crawled away
• Unclear if informed consent was given