Differences Between Watson And Rayner's Experiment
itioned by Transfer
John B Watson and Rosalie Rayner conducted an experiment in the 1920’s. The experiment included an infant named Albert, who was unemotional and hardly had any exposure to a stimulus to cause an exuberant emotional reaction. Emotional test had been conducted on Albert; a stimulus that was used in the initial experiment, items such as a white rat, dog, rabbit, and other various “furry” items, he showed no fear in any instance.
Starting at nine months old Albert was exposed to a sharp metal to metal noise consistently until it had produced crying and fear. If Watson and Rayner had followed the guidelines of the scientific method to acquire knowledge these next few paragraphs may clarify whether or not they did. The first step …show more content…
One last step in the scientific method is to analyze data from the experiment based on their findings they said, “These experiments would seem to show conclusively that directly conditioned emotional responses as well as those conditioned by transfer persistent, although with certain loss in the intensity of reaction, or longer period of time than one month.” The experiments were confirmed by casual observation of the mother and hospital attendants. After they reached their conclusion they publicized their findings making this experiment public, a key factor in the scientific method. Since they had given Albert, a child who originally was an emotionless being, a conditioned to stimulus of rats mainly animals or furry items, he may carry this throughout his life and shape his development. Another hypothesis they wanted to test was if you could remove these conditioned responses but unfortunately the subject was removed from the hospital, which may have led to some more findings. All in all the study had followed the scientific method, even though it may have been slightly unethical by producing fear in a child, but ethics are new subject in the field psychology which would not have been practiced back in the
John B Watson and Rosalie Rayner conducted an experiment in the 1920’s. The experiment included an infant named Albert, who was unemotional and hardly had any exposure to a stimulus to cause an exuberant emotional reaction. Emotional test had been conducted on Albert; a stimulus that was used in the initial experiment, items such as a white rat, dog, rabbit, and other various “furry” items, he showed no fear in any instance.
Starting at nine months old Albert was exposed to a sharp metal to metal noise consistently until it had produced crying and fear. If Watson and Rayner had followed the guidelines of the scientific method to acquire knowledge these next few paragraphs may clarify whether or not they did. The first step …show more content…
One last step in the scientific method is to analyze data from the experiment based on their findings they said, “These experiments would seem to show conclusively that directly conditioned emotional responses as well as those conditioned by transfer persistent, although with certain loss in the intensity of reaction, or longer period of time than one month.” The experiments were confirmed by casual observation of the mother and hospital attendants. After they reached their conclusion they publicized their findings making this experiment public, a key factor in the scientific method. Since they had given Albert, a child who originally was an emotionless being, a conditioned to stimulus of rats mainly animals or furry items, he may carry this throughout his life and shape his development. Another hypothesis they wanted to test was if you could remove these conditioned responses but unfortunately the subject was removed from the hospital, which may have led to some more findings. All in all the study had followed the scientific method, even though it may have been slightly unethical by producing fear in a child, but ethics are new subject in the field psychology which would not have been practiced back in the