Watson and Rayner 1920 Flashcards
What is the aim of Watson and Rayners study?
Watson and Rayner aimed to demonstrate that phobias could be learnt through classical conditioning, by associating by an unconditioned response (fear) with a neutral stimulus (a white rat).
They also aimed to see if this learnt fear could be generalised onto other similar stimuli.
What is the procedure of Watson and Rayners study?
- Little Albert was 9 months old at the beginning of the study.
- Albert was an unemotional character and his mother was a wet nurse at the hospital and was paid $1 for participating.
- He had no fear response to multiple stimuli (white rat, cotton wool, rabbit, dogs). The white rat was chosen as the NS for conditioning.
- Albert was shown a metal pole hanging from the ceiling which was struck by a hammer just behind his head making a loud noise and startling him. The second time his lips puckered and the third time he cries. He was afraid of the noise.
- When Albert was 11 months old, conditioning began, every time he touched the white rat, the metal pole was struck with a hammer, which triggered a fear response. After 7 more trials, Albert began to crawl away and cry at the sight of the rat without a noise.
- Albert was given blocks between presentations to return to his baseline levels of no fear.
- 17 days after conditioning, stimulus generalisation occurred- crying was seen in response to a rabbit, a dog, a Santa Claus mask. Towards the end, he was also rested in a lecture hall and the responses were still evident in the different context.
- 31 days into the experiment, Alberts mother withdrew him from the study without deconditioning.
What were the results of Watson and Rayners study?
- A phobia of white rats was conditioned in Albert, as the rat alone led to a fear response.
- Stimulus generalisation occurred as the fear response was transferred onto other stimuli objects/ animals.
- Alberts fear response lasted the full 31 days although became weaker towards the end.
What was the conclusion of Watson and Rayners study?
- An infant can be classically conditioned to develop a fear of a white rat, and objects similar to the CS can also elicit a fear response (stimulus generalisation).
- It is necessary to repeat the pairing process, as some extinction of the learnt response can be seen over time.
What is a weakness of the generalisability of Watson and Rayners study?
Only 1 participant meaning the findings have poor generalisability. Albert had a conditioned called hydrocephalus (water on the brain) which could affect his behaviour and learning. He was also selected as he was an unemotional child, meaning other children may show more learnt feared responses.
What is a weakness of the reliability of Watson and Rayners study?
But the procedure hasn’t been relocated again with other children due to ethical reasons.
What is a strengths of the reliability of Watson and Rayners study?
Standardised procedure with specific details recorded such as number of days (31) and times of day that the conditioning took place at. Alberta reactions were filmed so interpretations of fear could be checked for consistency.
What is a strength of the applicability of Watson and Rayners study?
The study sparked further research into classical conditioning and later the behaviourism approach within psychology. From this, therapies have been introduced to combat learnt phobias, such as systematic desensitisation, which involves pairing previously feared stimuli with feelings of relaxation.
What is a weakness of the validity of Watson and Rayners study?
Low ecological validity due to the artificial setting, away from his playroom and familiar nurses, and high may have made Albert nervous and act differently.
What is the 2 strengths of the validity of Watson and Rayners study?
- High level of control (hiding behind a curtain when striking the natal bar to ensure the fear was only of the noise/ rat and not him himself) to control extraneous variables.
- Baseline levels of fear established to ensure a cause and effect relationship.
What are 3 weaknesses of the ethicality of Watson and Rayners study?
- Psychological harm- the researchers purposely induced a phobia in Albert, causing much distress.
- Alberts fear was never deconditioned although Watson and Rayner did aim to do this eventually.
- Alberts mother may have only joined the study because she felt coerced to participate due to the payment and her low socio-economic status.
What are the 2 strengths of the ethicality of Watson and Rayners study?
- Others argue that Albert would go on to have distressing experiences when he started nursery, so the level of distress was no greater than everyday life and after a month, the fear response weakened so over time, it is likely the conditioning would wear off through extinction.
- Alberts mother provided consent and was given the right to withdraw as she did after 31 days.
