little Albert (classic study)

Question 1

what was the aim of this study?

Answer 1

to see if a phobia of a white rate could be conditioned (classically) by simultaneously presenting a rat to little Albert whilst hitting a hammer against a metal bar.

• they also wanted to see if the fear could be transferred to other similar objects and investigate the effect of time on the conditioned response.

Question 2

why was little albert chosen as a participant?

Answer 2

• because he had been reared from birth in a hospital
• and his mother was a wet nurse
• the study took place in a hospital so his surroundings were familiar.

Question 3

why did the researchers think they would do relatively little harm to albert?

Answer 3

Albert was healthy and was well-developed, stolid and unemotional.

Question 4

when Albert was 9 months old they tested his fear reactions to what stimuli?

Answer 4

rat, rabbit and cotton wool.

Question 5

how did little A react to the stimuli when they presented when he was 9 months old?

Answer 5

he showed no fear to them.

Question 6

what did A show fear towards?

Answer 6

a hammer hitting a metal bar, that was the first time he cried in the laboratory.

Question 7

how old was little A when they checked for a seccond time that he still had no fear towards the stimuli?

Answer 7

11 months

Question 8

what did the researchers do when they realised there was still no fear towards the stimuli when albert was 11 months?

Answer 8

they started pairing the sound of the hammer hitting the metal bar with rat simultaneously.

Question 9

how long did the researchers wait before presenting the white rat on its own without the sound of the metal bar?

Answer 9

1 week

Question 10

did the researchers just test if the fear was only with the white rat or did they look at other stimuli?

Answer 10

they tested whether the fear had been generalised to other stimuli that where similar to the white rat; a Santa mask, a dog, a rabbit, a fur coat and building blocks.

Question 11

when was A tested to assess the impact of time of the conditioned response?

Answer 11

1 year and 21 days.

Question 12

what happened after he was tested when he was 1 year and 21 days?

Answer 12

his mother removed him from the study.

Question 13

what happened when the researchers first introduced the banging of the metal bar and the rat together?

Answer 13

Albert jumped on both occasions and on the second occasion he started to whimper.

Question 14

what happened after a week when the rat was presented without a sound?

Answer 14

Albert tentatively reached out to touch it

• but When the sound and rat were presented together he would cry or whimper and would move away from the rat.
• He played with the building blocks without a problem.

Question 15

did Albert’s fear transfer to any of the other stimuli?

Answer 15

• yes; and responded negatively to the Santa mask, Fur coat and the rabbit.
• played with the building blocks happily.

Question 16

what happened when the conditioned response was checked after 1 1 months and 20 days?

Answer 16

• the response to the rat was less marked than before so they renewed it

Question 17

what was the effect of timing when it was 1 year 21 days?

Answer 17

Albert showed a negative response to the rat, fur coat, santa mask and rabbit.

Question 18

what conclusions can be made?

Answer 18

• A conditioned emotional response can occur in humans after only a few pairings of stimuli, but the
  pairings might have to be repeated.
• The conditioning response can be transferred to other similar objects.
• Albert was removed from the study, so there was no means of seeing if the responses could
  be extinguished.

Question 19

how is Watson and Raynors study reliable?

Answer 19

• carefully documented; witnesses helped to record the data and there were strict controls.
• Albert’s reactions were recorded carefully,
• the setting(s) were controlled and only one
  variable was changed at a time.
  -it could have been repeated ethically, it would have been replicable and could, therefore, have been tested for reliability

Question 20

why is Watson and Raynors study helped generalisability. in the field?

Answer 20

• gives evidence that classical conditioning occurs in humans. Pavlov had shown that it exists in dogs, but it might have been difficult to generalise the results to humans
• , treatments for phobias that focus on deconditioning phobic
  stimuli (such as systematic desensitisation) could be used to help individuals overcome their issues;
  the study therefore, has application to real life.

Question 21

what ethical implications are there?

Answer 21

• he was a child and was unable to give his own consent

- he was exposed to distress. q

Question 22

how might the study not be valid?

Answer 22

The setting and tasks were artificial. It could be argued that a noise from a hammer and steel bar could represent a real-life noise and that playing with white fur and animals is natural.

Question 23

how might the study be valid?

Answer 23

internal validity.