Watson and Rayner (1920) Flashcards
background and hypothesis
needed a reflex action that occurred I response to a stimulus and some other behaviour to condition to cause that same reaction.
in infancy there are some instinctive emotional reactions and they thought that these early reactions were increased through associations developed by classical conditioning.
what were the 4 hypotheses?
-they could condition fear of an animal by simultaneously presenting the animal and striking a steel bar to make a loud noise and frighten the child.
-the fear would be transferred to other animals and objects.
-there would be an effect of time on the conditioned response.
-to see how possible it is to remove the fear response in the lab.
what was little Alberts life like?
he was reared almost from birth in a hospital environment; his mother was a wet nurse in the Harriet lane home for invalid children.
albert was healthy from birth and one of the best developed youngsters ever brought to the hospital.
no one had ever seen him in a state of fear and he never cried.
why did Watson and Rayner choose Albert?
he was healthy and they thought the study would do ‘relatively little harm’.
they decided to make the attempt comforting themselves by the reflection that the attachments would arise anyway as soon as the child left the sheltered environment of the nursery.
what happened at 11 months 3 days?
the white rat was presented to albert and he began to reach for it with his left hand.
as his hand touched the animal the bar was struck behind his head and he jumped violently fell forward and buried his face in the mattress. he didn’t cry.
just as the right hand touched the rat the bar was struck again and he jumped violently, but this time whimpered.
no further tests were given for a week so they didn’t disturb the child.
what happened at 11 months 10 days?
rat presented without sound, there was a steady fixation but no tendency at first to reach for it.
rat was placed nearer and tentative reaching movements began with the right hand. the rat nosed the infant left hand and the hand was immediately withdrawn.
he started to reach for the head of the animal and withdrew it again.
he was presented with blocks immediately after to see if they shared the same process of conditioning, he picked them up and started playing with them.
the rat was presented alone and the baby began to cry, he turned sharply to the left and fell over started crawling and almost fell of the table.
why were the blocks frequently gave to him for the remainder of the tests?
to quiet him and to test his general emotional state.
they were removed from sight when the process of conditioning was under way.
when albert was crying due to the rat what was this a convincing case of?
a completely conditioned fear response.
what happened at 11 months 15 days.
(blocks were given to him after each step)
1)tested with blocks, reaching rapidly for them
2)rat alone, whimpered immediately and turned head.
3)rat alone, leaned over the the left as far away from the rat.
4)rabbit alone, negative responses began at once, burst into tears.
5)dog alone. moment fixation occurred the child shrank back, dog was then shown closer to the child’s face, he fell over to the opposite side and began to cry.
6)fur coat, withdrew immediately to the left and began to fret. Coat was but closer and he began to cry.
7)cotton wool presented in a paper package, placed on his feed and he kicked it away. hand was laid on wool and he immediately withdrew it but didn’t show much shock, he began to play with the paper, avoiding contact with the wool itself.
8)Santa’s mask, he was pronouncedly negative.
why albert reaching rapidly for blocks what does this show?
that there has been no general transfer to the room, table and blocks.
when little albert whimpers at the sight of the rat what does this show?
that the conditioned response to the rat had carried over completely for the 5 days in which no tests were given.
what other times were similar procedures and reactions observed at?
11 months and 20 days and 1 year and 21 days.
conclusion.
Watson and Rayner concluded that they had succeeded in conditioning in an infant fear of an animal the child would not ordinarily be frightened of.
stimulus generalisation also was claimed in that the conditioned response was still present after 31 days, Watson and Rayner concluded that it might last a lifetime.
even though they build up the fear by means they could remove the conditioned emotional response, it was denied and his mother took him out of the experiment.
albert was taken from the hospital the day above tests were made. they believed that these responses in the home environment are likely to persist indefinitely, unless an accidental method for removing them is there.
why is this study low in generalisability?
as this was a study of one young child it lacks population validity as the findings cannot be generalised to others. Albert had been reared in a hospital environment from birth and he was unusual as he had never been seen to show fear or rage by staff.
little albert may have responded differently in this experiment to how other young children may have, these findings will therefore be unique to him.
how is this study high in reliability?
as the use of standardised procedures such as the pre conditioning phase and the 7 episodes of joint stimulation (rat and sound) and the rat being presented alone. this allows for high control over all extraneous variables.
this standardised procedure means that it could be replicated.
