Watson And Rayner (1920) Flashcards
What are the aims of Watson and Rayner (1920)?
To see if they could condition fear of an animal by simultaneously presenting the animal and striking a steel bar to make a loud noise to frighten the child.
Whether the fear would be transferred to other animals and objects.
To see if time would have an effect on the conditioned response.
What is the IV of Watson and Rayner (1920)?
- Before conditioning compared to after conditioning
- Types of stimulus being presented with the white rat compared to other white fluffy animals or objects.
What is the DV of Watson and Rayner (1920)?
The number of fearful behaviours Albert shows when presented with the stimuli.
Describe the procedure of Watson and Rayner (1920).
- 11 months and 3 days he was taken to a lab (well-lit room where photos normally were developed) and a white rat was presented - when he reached for it the bar was stuck loudly.
- A week later Albert returned and was exposed 5 times to the paired sight of the rat and the iron bar - from this point he was tested with blocks and showed no fear showing he wasn’t just generally getting more scared.
- Another 5 days later he returned and his responses to the rat and other objects were assessed e.g. wooden blocks, rabbit, dog, fur coat, cotton wool, Watson’s hair.
- 5 days later he was taken to a new environment (lecture room with 4 people) and was placed on a table and assessed for responses.
- He was tested again 1 month later at 1 year and 21 days old involving a satan mask, fur coat, rat, rabbit, dog and blocks.
What were the findings of Watson and Rayner (1920)?
- At the baseline test Albert displayed no fear of any objects but did respond to the loud noise (startled and lips trembled) displaying the unconditioned response.
- In session 1 he cried to the noise and by session 2 was more cautious about reaching for the rat and pulled away.
- In session 3 he reacted to white fluffy objects with fear by crying (conditioned response) whilst displaying mild fear towards the dog.
- Sessions 4 and 5 showed that his fear reactions to white fluffy objects remained but were less extreme when in a different environment.
What are the conclusions of Watson and Rayner’s study?
It is relatively easy to condition an emotional response to a neutral stimulus taking just 2 sessions of pairing to produce fear towards the rat and other objects (spontaneous generalisation).
Strengths of Watson and Rayner (1920).
G -
R - This study has standardised procedures stating how Albert was conditioned and observed over 5 sessions by presented a rat and striking an iron bar with a hammer when he would reach out to pet the rat. This is good because it allows for other researchers to explore the conclusions of Watson and Rayner’s study by replicating and improving the experiment on Little Albert. Therefore the ease of replication means that results will be able to be checked for their consistency increasing the overall reliability of this study on classical conditioning.
A - this research has applications that can help to understand how phobias are acquired. For example Albert becoming fearful of any white fluffy objects such as a fur coat supports the idea of spontaneous generalisation where phobias are generalised to similar things that originally created the fear. This allows for the development of phobia treatments such as systematic desensitisation because this study has made psychologists aware of the effects conditioning can have.
V - This study was conducted in a lab setting in a well - lit room that was usually used to develop photographs. This was good because it allowed Watson and Rayner to manipulate the surroundings to ensure high control over any extraneous variables such as potential distractions from the rat that may have conditioned a completely different fear. As a result internal validity is increased because it can be assured that Albert was purely reacting to the sound of the bar striking with the rat in front of him and not due to any other sounds or distractions in the room, increasing the overall accuracy of the experiment ensuring that the aims are properly tested for.
E -
Weaknesses of Watson and Rayner (1920).
G - This study has poor reliability due to it only including one participant who was an infant and may have been unusual as he was described as rarely being afraid or crying. Little Albert was also reared in a hospital environment which shows how the results may not be representative of how other children or adults would respond to the same stimuli in this experiment as the findings are unique to Albert. However classical conditioning is a universal way behaviours are naturally learnt which suggests the results may be applicable to others.
R -
A -
V - This study was conducted an unnatural environment of a well - lit photograph developing room. This means that the study wont reflect the learning of behaviour in everyday life. As a result the findings are not useful outside of a lab situation due to the poor ecological validity.
E - The experiment may have caused Albert some long term psychological distress with a phobia that may have stuck with him for the rest of his life, suggesting his mother did not understand the full implications of the study. Therefore it can be assumed that informed consent was not truly gained as he was not protected from harm implying the study should have never gone ahead.
