Env. explanations of learning

Authors Avatar

                                

Describe and evaluate one of the key concepts – environmental explanations of learning.

Environmental explanations of learning can be explained and evaluated through several processes like classical conditioning, social learning theory, and learned helplessness. Each process can be assessed by looking at specific investigations conducted in each area respectively: ‘Little Albert’ by Watson and Rayner, ‘Bashing Bobo’ by Bandura and Ross, and ‘Mongrel Dogs’ by Seligman and Maier.

In 1920, two behaviorists, Watson and Rayner, conducted an experiment to explore whether our emotional responses could be classically conditioned. They believed that the roots of the complex stimulus-response relationships were built from several basic unconditioned ones. To test this theory, they attempted to instill a phobia in a 9-month old infant by the name of Little Albert.

A hammer was used to strike a steel bar behind the child to produce a loud clanging sound. In response, Albert naturally began to cry. The conditioning process then followed, and a white rat was presented to Albert. Whenever Albert reached out to touch the rat, the bar was struck to produce the clanging sound. He would jump violently and fall forward, whimpering while burying his face in the mattress. Soon, Albert began to withdraw his hand whenever the rat came near him. The process was repeated five times more in one week, followed by two more pairings 17 days after. Generalization was then observed. Albert was presented with a variety of stimuli that resembled the rat, (eg: a Santa Claus mask and a fur-coat) all of which he quickly slapped at without touching. Through their observations, Watson and Rayner concluded that emotional responses to stimuli could be learnt. The once unemotional Little Albert became afraid of rats and anything resembling one.

However, despite the observations, which appeared to support their theory, the experiment still had its weaknesses, which may have influenced its reliability and validity. For example, the experiment lacked mundane realism. The probability of someone wanting a phobia induced in them is not likely. In addition, if the exact experiment was conducted on an adult- the results may have differed greatly, because of an adult’s increased reasoning and less naivety to the environment that the experiment was conducted in. The experiment was also only conducted on one boy, and whether or not he could have truly represented the general public is questionable. For example a boy who has been brought up in a different background with lots of construction work outside his building may have been observed to be unemotional and considered the ‘ideal’ candidate for the experiment – but not be affected by loud noises. Many have argued that although the experiment lacked mundane realism, its results could still have the potential to remove natural phobias from people and condition them with something less threatening. However, since Little Albert left the hospital before he could be de-conditioned, and because the experiment was never repeated again, the evidence of the benefits of this experiment has not been substantiated.

Join now!

        The experiment also has a lot of ethical issues. The associations made might have persisted indefinitely after Albert had left the hospital without treatment to remove the phobia. The extent to which Albert would be hurt psychologically was clearly not taken into consideration, and the whole process was clearly a frightening experience for the subject. In general, there are several strengths and weaknesses of classical conditioning. For instance, a strength would be the ability classical conditioning has to explain the source of particular behaviors like phobias, and thus allow for people to help treat, reverse, or condition their phobia with ...

This is a preview of the whole essay