Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    Watson & Rayner (1920)

    Uploaded by

    Wilhem Liabunya
    1. The Watson and Rayner (1920) study involved conditioning a fear response in a child participant known as Little Albert through pairing neutral stimuli with frightening stimuli. 2. The number and timing of pairings between the stimuli were carefully recorded as a control, but Albert's fear response was not objectively measured and may have been overemphasized by the researchers. 3. The study broke several current ethical guidelines by conducting experiments on a child without parental consent and potentially causing psychological harm that was not addressed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Watson & Rayner (1920)

    Uploaded by

    Wilhem Liabunya
    11 views4 pages
    1. The Watson and Rayner (1920) study involved conditioning a fear response in a child participant known as Little Albert through pairing neutral stimuli with frightening stimuli. 2. The number and timing of pairings between the stimuli were carefully recorded as a control, but Albert's fear response was not objectively measured and may have been overemphasized by the researchers. 3. The study broke several current ethical guidelines by conducting experiments on a child without parental consent and potentially causing psychological harm that was not addressed.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1. The Watson and Rayner (1920) study involved conditioning a fear response in a child participant known as Little Albert through pairing neutral stimuli with frightening stimuli. 2. The number and timing of pairings between the stimuli were carefully recorded as a control, but Albert's fear response was not objectively measured and may have been overemphasized by the researchers. 3. The study broke several current ethical guidelines by conducting experiments on a child without parental consent and potentially causing psychological harm that was not addressed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    11 views4 pages

    Watson & Rayner (1920)

    Uploaded by

    Wilhem Liabunya
    1. The Watson and Rayner (1920) study involved conditioning a fear response in a child participant known as Little Albert through pairing neutral stimuli with frightening stimuli. 2. The number and timing of pairings between the stimuli were carefully recorded as a control, but Albert's fear response was not objectively measured and may have been overemphasized by the researchers. 3. The study broke several current ethical guidelines by conducting experiments on a child without parental consent and potentially causing psychological harm that was not addressed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 4

    Watson & Rayner (1920)

    • Create a classical conditioning model for Watson & Rayner (1920)


    • p8
    Watson & Rayner (1920)
    1. Using p354 of the textbook (+ booklet) – create a storyboard of the
    Watson and Rayner study
    1. Helped to develop phobia treatments
    2. Controls:
    Number and timing of pairings were carefully recorded
    3. There was no objective measurement of the fear
    response in Little Albert
     Researcher bias – Watson may have over-emphasized the
    fear displayed after conditioning
    4. One participant
    5. How many ethical guidelines did it break!?!
     Note - the experiment was conducted without the
    knowledge or consent of Albert's parents…
    6. Albert was away from his playroom and familiar
    nurses during the experiment - this may have made
    him nervous
    1. G
     One participant
    2. R
     Controls: number and timing of pairings were carefully recorded
    3. A
     Helped to develop phobia treatments, including systematic
    desensitisation and flooding
    4. VI
     There was no objective measurement of the fear response in Little
    Albert – researcher bias – Watson may have over-emphasized the
    fear displayed after conditioning
    5. VE
     Albert was away from his playroom and familiar nurses during the
    experiment - this may have made him nervous
    6. E
     Consent, right to withdraw, psychological harm
     They didn’t extinguish his fear reaction, possibly leaving Albert with
    long term phobia

    You might also like