|
Post by congl95 on Oct 3, 2017 13:14:13 GMT
The behaviourists would have predicted that that monkey would have gone to the wire monkey, because of the fact it was supplying food. They believed attachment was void of feeling or emotion, and that it was purely conditioning. When a monkey received what it needed to survive, namely food, that was all that was needed to form a bond; the wire monkey could have been a natural predator for all the behaviouralists cared, they still would have thought it would form a stronger attachment. So when the monkey got frightened it would have gone to the wire mother because the attachment would have been stronger, or so they thought. The actual result was that the monkeys went to the cloth mother, even though it didn't have anything the monkey needed. The monkeys chose the comfort of the cloth mother, to sooth their anxiety, and that created a strong bond. This experiment greatly impacted the behaviourists view of human nature, and really disqualified one of their main points which was that feelings had absolutely no place in the study of psychology.
|
|