evaluating watson & rayner

• 1. alternative evidence
• 1a. limitation of conclusions is that conditioning is not the only explanation for phobias, one alternative explanation is that phobias are developed by biological preparedness
• 1a. these stimuli are referred to as ancient fears - things that would have been dangerous to us in our evolutionary past, such as snakes, heights, strangers and rats
• 1a. seligman argued that animals, including humans, are genetically programmed to rapidly learn an association between certain stimuli and fear
• 1a. theory contradicts Watson and Rayner’s conclusions by suggesting that rather than being caused by conditioning, Alberts behaviour may have been adaptive
• 1b. their theories about phobia development have been criticised for not providing and explanation for why a phobia persists over time
• 1b. avoidance of a phobic object will allow an individual to escape the negative emotions of fear (negative reinforcement), this will cause the individual to continue to avoid the phobic object and so the phobia continues
• 1b. mowrer proposed a two-process model of phobia development - that classical conditioning may explain how a phobia is acquired but operant conditioning processes will result in it being maintained
• 1b. theory provides support for the idea about the role of conditioning in phobia development
• 2. methodology and procedures
• 2a. strength is that it was a controlled observation
• 2a. observation was carried out in a lab environment where the researchers has control over all of the variables in the study
• 2a. example, the researchers were able to control the number of times the steel bar was struck with a hammer and the type of stimulus Albert was presented with
• 2a. strength as it means the study could be easily replicated, high reliability, and that the researchers can be more confident that the fear response was caused by the variables in the study, high internal validity
• 2b. limitation is that they used one individual, lack of population validity
• 2b. only used one individual, so any conclusions could only be drawn from him
• 2b. for example, Albert was described as calm and even tempered, they suggested that if he had been emotionally unstable, he may have responded with greater fear
• 2b. without any comparisons the observed responses from albert cannot be generalised
• 3. ethical issues and social implications
• 3a. Watson & Rayner’s study emphasized that phobias may be created through conditioned emotional reactions during infancy.
• 3a. This finding demonstrates the importance & effectiveness of conditioning to rid phobias which is now widely used in therapy (Systematic Desensitization)
• 3a. Conditioning is also as a strong method that has been applied to controlling the behaviour in children in the home and in education.
• 3b. W&R seemed unsure whether they had created excessive fear in Albert, quite early on they did say they stopped tests for a week, in order not to disturb him too much.
• 3b. This suggests that the researchers were aware they were distressing him.
• 3b. his experience was made worse. Each time Albert got frightened, he started to suck his thumb (which calmed him down). However, in order to see the full affect they removed his thumb from his mouth as it also reduced the effect of the loud noise conditioning
• 3b. Even though W&R intended to remove Albert’s conditioned responses, Albert was suddenly removed from the hospital, so this could not be done creating lasting emotional effects