CLASSICAL CONDITIONING

What is your classic study for learning

Watson and Rayner - little Albert 1920

What was Pavlovs aim

To see if dogs could be conditioned to salivate when presented with a previously neutral stimulus

What was pavlovs sample

35 dogs of varied breeds

What design did Pavlov use

Repeated measures

State the procedure of pavlovs 1927 study

Pavlov placed each dog in an enclosed room and ensured they couldn’t hear smell or see anything. He attached then using a harness and attached a tube to their mouth to catch the saliva and drain it into a measuring cylinder.

He then presented with them with just the food to ensure they salivated.

He presented them with just the neutral stimulus of the bell sound and they didn’t salivate which confirmed this was definitely a neutral stimuli.

To condition the dogs Pavlov paired the unconditioned stimuli with the neutral stimuli so hit the bell as well as presenting the food and he did this around 20 times depending on the attentiveness of the dog.

After conditioning he presented them with just the bell to see if this alone now produced a response

What were the results of Pavlov 1927 study

Conditioned dogs started salivating 9 secs after hearing the sound and after 45 secs produced 11 drops of saliva

What were the conclusions of pavlovs 1927 study (2)

He found that when the UCS of the food was paired with the NS of the bell sound they became associated with each other ad therefore a CS of salivation occurred.

Evaluate Pavlov 1927 study

-may not be ethical

+apply to phobia treatments like systematic desensitisation which use the same principles

-not generalisable all dogs

+lab standardised procedures such as presenting the UCS and NS alone first and putting them in a sealed room to avoid EVs like noise or smells interfering with the experiment

-not the only explanation -SLT imitation

-What are the main principles of classical conditioning

-explain the process of classical conditioning in 4 main steps

Stimulus-response

Natural reflex response

• Suggests an association between UCS eg food and a UCR eg salivation

• Pairing occurs when these two stimuli are presented alongside a neutral stimulus eg bell

• the behaviour becomes associated with the NS as the NS is no longer neutral.

• The animal or person has become conditioned to respond to the NS

What is meant by extinction

The association with CS and CR is no longer there eg the bell no longer produces salivation

What is it called when an original association between CS and CR is extended to include other similar stimuli and give an example

Generalisation-

Eg when someone fears rats they may also fear rabbits and white beards

What is meant by discrimination in terms of CC and give an example

Opposite of generalisation. Only a very specific CS will produce the CR

Eg a person fears pink buttons but not other buttons

What is it called when after extinction the previously paired CR and CS suddenly reappears without reconditioning.

Spontaneous recovery

Evaluate classical conditioning as an explanation for human behaviour

+apply to phobia treatments like systematic desensitisation which use same principle

-other explanations like SLT- imitation

+watson and Rayner little Albert 1920

-lots of supporting studies from animals which cannot be generalised.

+pavlov 1927 dogs

What is the aim of Watson and Rayner - little Albert 1920

To see if a fear response could be conditioned in a human who didn’t have this fear before

Who was the sample for Watson and Rayner 1920 study

Little Albert - 11 month 3 day old boy who was raised in hospital

What is the procedure of Watson and Rayner 1920 study

Lab study using repeated measures design

Checked little Albert wasn’t scared of rats mice etc before beginning

Was deemed to be quite placid and so it was said that it wouldn’t be too unethical because he wouldn’t get too upset

Banged a metal bar behind his head to ensure it did scare him- he cried.

Let him pay with a rat and then banged the metal bar behind his head at the same time.

The left it a week before continuing with the study

A week later they presented the rat to him and he was hesitant to touch it

They let him play with blocks and he did this normally and they concluded that there was some effect from the conditioning.

11 weeks and 20 days into the study they noticed that the fear response was weakening so they renewed it.

Tried with other objects to see if the fear response generalised to rabbits etc

2 months after the original study they checked to see if the fear response remained

What were the results of Watson and rayner 1920 study

It didn’t take many trials for Albert to show a fear response

2 months after the study he still had the fear response

What were the conclusions of Watson and Rayner 1920 study

Fear response can be conditioned in 11 month old boy who didn’t have a fear before and they can be generalised to similar objects

Didn’t check if it could be extinguished

Evaluate Watson and Rayner study

-only one individual so not representative of whole population - can’t be generalised

+apply to phobia treatments

-lab so may lack ecological validity- demand characteristics

+ lab standardised controls- tried bar and rat separately before to ensure it was the cause and effect

- not the only explanation - SLT - imitation