Classic Watson And Rayner

Question 1

aim

Answer 1

is possible to induce fear in human child of prev ns via cs
whether fear will be transfered to other similar obj

Question 2

procedure

Answer 2

albert 9 months old, emtional response baseline was measured using white rat,rabbit, dog, monkey, various masks, cotton wool
no fear= ns
11months= 5 sessions for conditioning where loud noise was repeatedly paired w loud noise

Question 3

p

Answer 3

1 white rat, towards bar struck loudly behind head
2 exposed 5 times, wooden block no fear
3 5 days latee response towards rat, white furry obj measured
4 diff new enviro and response measured
5 12 months= santa mask, fur coat, rat and a dog

Question 4

findings

Answer 4

baseline= no fear of obj, loud noise= cry
3 cry and rapidly crawly away from rat without loud noise
4 and 5 fear to white fury obj remained but less extreme in diff enviro

Question 5

conclusion

Answer 5

phobia not prev feared could be learnt, supported aim
conditioned emo response could last a long time as evident after 1 month

Question 6

cs process before and after

Answer 6

UCS + NS= UCR | loud noise+ white rat= cried

White fury obj+ loud noise= fear

Question 7

strength

Answer 7

I standardised p, v carefully selected and controlled
J Albert selected due emo stability, less likely anxious and affect fear c, ext v removed
E changes in behaviour due to conditioning and learning rather than ext v

Question 8

s counter

Answer 8

Not all aspects were controlled
Eg white rat suddenly placed, dog pushed= sudden actions could have triggered fear

Question 9

weakness

Answer 9

I not rep of true phobia acquisition
J children acquire fear spontaneously whereas Watson and Rayner induced in controlled methodical way
E not rep of real life learning of fears and DVT of phobia