Case Study; Watson and Rayner (1920) - Little Albert Experiment

Emotional Tests (9 months)

Procedure; Albert's initial emotional responses were tested by confrontation with things such as a white rat, a rabbit, a dog, masks and a sudden loud noise (hammer on steel bar)

Findings; Albert never showed any fear to objects before conditioning, after the bar was struck "the child started violently" (Watson and Rayner 1920)

Session 1 (11 months, 3 days)

Procedure; Albert was shown a white rat and as he reached for the rat the bar was struck twice (joint stimulation)

Findings; Albert jumped forward and buried his head on the table, 2nd time, he whimpered

Session 2 (11 months, 10 days)

Procedure; Albert was shown the rat with no sound to test the effectiveness of the previous session, he was then exposed to joint stimulation (five times)

Findings; Albert stared at the rat until he was encouraged to reach for it but then withdrew his hand, this caution was not displayed with the control object (wooden blocks)

Session 3 (11 months, 15 days)

Procedure; examined whether the learned link could be applied to to other objects, Albert was shown the rat, wooden blocks, the rabbit, the dog, a seal fur coat, cotton wool and Watson's hair

Findings; Albert showed fear towards the rat (retained conditioned response), same fear response shown to the rabbit, the dog and fur coat, but no extreme reaction to Watson's hair

Session 4 (11 months, 20 days)

Procedure; used joint stimulation in a new environment (large, light lecture room with four people), Albert was placed on a table in the centre of the room

Findings; Albert's reactions to the rat, rabbit and dog were less extreme, after exposure to joint stimulation, the fear responses were stronger, the reaction remained the same toward the wooden blocks

Session 5 (12 months, 21 days)

Procedure; Albert had been to the lab in the interim but had had no emotional tests, Albert's reaction was trialled with a Santa mask, fur coat, the rat, the rabbit, the dog and the wooden blocks

Findings; Albert's reaction to furry objects was less extreme but he still avoided them and occasionally cried

Ease

very easy to condition a child

Generalisation

similar objects - similar fear responses

Phobias

phobias can be learned through experience/conditioning

Methodology and Procedures: POSITIVES

- high control

• high internal reliability (consistency)

- wooden blocks

• validity (acted as a control)

- video evidence

• empirical + objective evidence

Methodology and Procedures: NEGATIVES

- small sample

• androcentric

• cannot be generalised

• age bias

- artificial

• lacks ecological validity (accuracy)

- recording fear

• researcher bias (used their own opinion to determine the resultant behaviour)

Ethical and Social Implications: POSITIVES

- confidentiality

• Albert is a pseudonym

- protection from physical harm

- consent

• parental consent

- debrief

• parent was debriefed

Ethical and Social Implications: NEGATIVES

- consent

• participant did not consent

- protection from psychological harm

• created a phobia

- confidentiality

• videoed the study

- withdraw

• participant did not have the verbal capacity to withdraw