819505
Watson & Raynor (1920)
(Little Albert) Evaluation
- GENERALISABILITY
- We are unable to generalise
the study as it only used one
participant. The sample is too
small and unrepresentative of
the population. Also, the
participant used was a
nine-month old baby. The
study did not prove that
humans of all ages could be
classically conditioned,
therefore it doesn't apply to
everyone.
- Also, the study challenges the
criticism of anthropomorphism in the
learning approach as it shows that
both animals and humans can be
classically conditioned, proving that
we can, in some cases, generalise
from animals to humans.
- We are unable to generalise
the study as it only used one
participant. The sample is too
small and unrepresentative of
the population. Also, the
participant used was a
nine-month old baby. The
study did not prove that
humans of all ages could be
classically conditioned,
therefore it doesn't apply to
everyone.
- RELIABILITY
- The study was a lab
experiment, so there
was a very high level
of control of all the
variables. This
makes the study
very easy to
replicate therefore it
is reliable.
- The study was a lab
experiment, so there
was a very high level
of control of all the
variables. This
makes the study
very easy to
replicate therefore it
is reliable.
- APPLICATION
- The study can be applied to
real life as it explains how
phobias are developed
through association.
- The study can be applied to
real life as it explains how
phobias are developed
through association.
- VALIDITY
- The study has a high level of
validity as there was a high
ecological validity. However, we
can not assume that phobias are
developed through association, as
some phobias such as the dark or
heights are learned from those
around us.
- The study has a high level of
validity as there was a high
ecological validity. However, we
can not assume that phobias are
developed through association, as
some phobias such as the dark or
heights are learned from those
around us.
- ETHICS
- The study is unethical is Watson &
Raynor gave an infant a phobia that
could affect him deeply or stay with
him for life. It breaks the ethical
guideline of protection of participants.
- The study is unethical is Watson &
Raynor gave an infant a phobia that
could affect him deeply or stay with
him for life. It breaks the ethical
guideline of protection of participants.
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.