Evaluate Watson and Rayner (1920) Little Albert - (8 marks)

Question 1

GENERALISABILITY

Answer 1

• Low generalisability
  One baby boy was used who was 9 months old at the start of the study and 11 months old at the end of the study. → A case study
• Androcentric sample - cannot be generalised to females and the wider population. It was one individual case study and therefore it is harder to apply to other people

Question 2

HIGH RELIABILITY

Answer 2

• High Reliability
• Standardised procedure -Albert was presented with different objects and was assessed on how he responded to the object. Then a metal rod was introduced which was used to hit the back of his head. The study was carefully documented and filmed
• Therefore the study hasn’t yet be replicated due to ethical concerns but a standardised procedure makes it easy to follow and to be replicated.

Question 3

LOW RELIABILITY

Answer 3

• Low Reliability
• Small sample → individual differences affect data
• We can view Albert’s responses and see his fear - inter rate reliability

Question 4

APPLICATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS TO REAL LIFE

Answer 4

• Therapies
• The research was only done on one fear (aerphobia). It has lead to techniques such as flooding and system desensitization
• It can be generalized to the wider population and can be applied to other research

Question 5

HIGH INTERNAL VALIDITY

Answer 5

• High Internal Validity
• Watson hid behind the curtains when striking the iron bar
• This ensured that Albert will associate the noise with the rat and not with Watson or the bar

Question 6

LOW ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY

Answer 6

• Low ecological validity
• Albert was away from his playroom and familiar noises
• This may have made him nervous. However he did not seem to be nervous and he was with his mother the whole time

Question 7

ETHICS - PROTECTION FROM HARM

Answer 7

• Protection from harm
• Little Albert was conditioned to have a fear using a distressing sound of banging a bar - this would have caused mental health harm to Albert
• Therefore meant it would have been very unethical as Little Albert would have long lasting harm due to the fear and distressed caused to him

Question 8

ETHICS - RIGHT TO WITHDRAW

Answer 8

• Right to withdraw
• Albert’s mother eventually withdrawn Albert from the study
• This means that no further damaged was caused to Albert