Zusammenfassung der Ressource
Little Hans 1909
Phobias- Evaluation
- GENERALISABILITY
- Very Low
- Case Study Method- Only 1 participant
- ANDOCENTIRC= Only one sex
- ETHNOCENTRIC= Only one culture
- Not representative of
female children, and other
from different cultures
- RELIABILITY
- Lacked reliability as there
were few controls
- Therefore, cannot be easily replicated
- OPEN QUESTIONS- there was
not a set of standard questions
- QUALITATIVE DATA
- APPLICATON
- Focus on sexual matters + unconscious
- Led to PSYCHOANALYSIS
being developed
- VALIDITY
- HIGH ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY
- Conducted in his natural environment
- Hans conversed freely with his
father about his problems so
data was valid to an extent
- ETHICS
- LOW CONFIDENTIALITY
- Hans identity has since been released-
even after using pseudo name
- Herbert Graf
- ETHICAL CONSENT
- Considered ethical a
parents gave consent as he
was under 16yrs
- SUBJECTIVITY
- INCREASING
SUBJECTIVITY
- Freud has to interpret his own data
- However, other analysts
may have developed a
different conclusion
- For example; Freud
didn't consider other
reasons for Hans' phobia
- Data may be biased as it was
mostly collected by Hans'
father
- May have only
included details
to fit with
Freud's theory