'Even though Little Albert was just one child, the behavioural explanation of anxiety disorders can be generalised to everyone.' To what extent do you agree with this statement? Use examples of research you have studied to support your answer.

Mark scheme

Marking points from the official mark scheme (May/June 2018). The mark or mark type is shown in brackets.

1. Marks: use generic levels of response in table C.
2. Syllabus: explanations of phobias: behavioural (classical conditioning, Watson, 1920).
3. Most likely (any other appropriate responses should be credited): For: ∞ The behavioural explanation of learning (classical conditioning) occurs for all people with many things (not just Little Albert)
4. ∞ The behavioural explanation led to the development of ways in which fears and phobias can be reduced (e.g. systematic desensitisation).
5. ∞ The principles can be generalised, not necessarily the specific example.
6. Against: ∞ People are different and what applies to many people will not apply to many others.
7. ∞ The approach excludes the role of cognitive factors (such as the DiNardo example with fears of dogs)
8. ∞ The case study of little Albert had weaknesses – claims that Albert was not a normal child.