Freud, S. (1909) Analysis of a phobia of a five year old boy. (Little Hans)

1. Freud, S. (1909) Analysis of a phobia of a five year old boy. (Little Hans)

2. To recall the background and aim of Freud’s study. To describe Freud’s Study To Evaluate Freud’s Study Learning Outcomes

3. 1a) In the study by Freud, Little Hans is referred to as a little Oedipus. Briefly describe the Oedipus complex. [2] Exam Question Starter 2 minutes to prepare for your presentation on the Oedipus Complex!

4. On your Post-its...... Write the Aim of Freud’s study on Little Hans?! Come put on White board when you’re done!

5. Little Hans was a 5-year-old boy with a phobia of horses. Like all clinical case studies, the primary aim was to treat the phobia.  However, Freud's therapeutic input in this case was minimal, and a secondary aim was to explore what factors might have led to the phobia in the first place, and what factors led to its remission. By 1909 Freud's ideas about the Oedipus complex were well-established and Freud interpreted this case in line with his theory. Hans’ phobia: a fear of leaving the house and horses

6. Freud didn't actually work directly with little Hans, but instead worked through correspondence with Hans' father, who was familiar with Freud's theories, and wrote to him when he first suspected that Hans had become a case that Freud might be interested in.  Freud suggested possible lines of questioning which the father could try with Hans, and the father tried them and reported to Freud what had taken place.

7. Read through the summary booklet with your group. After reading each section....discuss and make some summary statements. Use the Summary statements to start you off with the Distillation Activity! Task

8. Distillation Activity • Procedure • Aim • Findings • Explanation

9. 1 thing that surprised me 2 Questions I want to ask 3 things I learnt today

10. Strengths Weaknesses • Case studies, such as this one carried out by Freud, are particularly useful in revealing and treating the origins of abnormal behaviour. In fact some forms of psychotherapy rely on building up a long and detailed case history as an aid to understanding and then helping the client. • The case study provided a very in-depth picture producing lots of qualitative data. In fact Freud argued that it was the special relationship between Hans and his father that allowed the analysis to progress and for the discussions with the boy to be so detailed and so intimate. • This case study only relates to one individual and we therefore have to be careful generalising from the findings. We have no way of assessing how typical Little Hans is. Therefore we have to ask whether this study is unique to the relationship between Little Hans, his Father and Freud or whether we can generalise it to other cases. • This case study is really Freud's interpretations of Hans' father's interpretation of his son's own phobia. Freud only saw Little Hans on one or two occasions. It can be argued that this leads to a drastic reduction in objectivity, particularly as the father (Max Graf) was a supporter of Freud?s ideas. Evaluation of Procedure

11. A major problem with Freud's arguments is that other explanations can be found for Little Hans' phobias. For example, Bowlby, who was also a psychoanalyst, argued that Hans' phobia could be explained in terms of attachment theory. Bowlby believed that most of Hans' anxiety arose from threats by the mother to desert the family. In fact Hans' parents did eventually split up. A further, and simpler, explanation for Hans' phobia is that he was classically conditioned to fear horses. Or in other words, Hans witnessed a horse fall and collapse in the street. Hans then generalised this fear to all horses. A major problem with Freud's explanations are that they are androcentric and ethnocentric. This study describes the Oedipus complex which is of course unique to boys. Girls, Freud argued, develop penis envy, which later becomes converted into a desire to bear children as the young child begins to recognise that it is impossible for her to develop a penis of her own. I am sure you can make up your own mind if this is sexist or not. The idea of the Oedipus complex is ethnocentric because Freud assumed that all boys must experience this stage. However Freud was writing about a particular group of people at a particular period of time. Many cultures including our own do not have families consisting of a Mother and Father living together in one home. Freud, for example, argued that through the Oedipus complex boys identify with their fathers and this established their sexual identification and if this process could not take place, Freud considered that the young child would be likely to grow up homosexual. Evidence does not support this argument. Finally, and importantly, Freud originally wanted to explain why so many of his female adult patients seemed to have deeply traumatic memories of sexual encounters with their fathers. Initially, he thought that it must be real incest, but he was eventually persuaded that this was not so and developed his ideas about the Oedipus and Electra complex (the female version of the Oedipus complex). It would seem that Freud was originally on the right track after all. Evaluation of Explanation

12. http://www.holah.co.uk/quiz/freudmulti.htm Quiz

13. Exam Questions

14. Strength (most likely answers) Any one from:  It allowed an in-depth study/lots of detail to be gathered about Hans’ fears, dreams, fantasies etc  Hans was less likely to be stressed by his father asking questions so will have answered willingly. 1 mark – Partial or vague answer eg allowed lots of detail to be gathered about Hans, answer not contextualised, mere identification of appropriate strength of a case study. 2 marks – Full description of strength contextualised as outlined above or other appropriate answer. Weakness (most likely answers) Any one from:  His father was a follower of Freud and so may have asked leading questions to get answers to support Freud’s theories  Hans was questioned by his father rather than a neutral researcher so emotional involvement may have influenced what he said. 1 mark – Partial or vague answer eg Hans’ fathers use of leading questions, answer not contextualised, mere identification of appropriate weakness of a case study. 2 marks – Full description of weakness contextualised as outlined above or other appropriate answer Answers

15. Exam Question

16. Most likely answer:  (Freud suggested that Hans’fear of horses symbolised his fear of his father) Because Hans was subconsciously experiencing the Oedipus complex so nourished jealous and hostile wishes against his father. This fear was transposed onto horses because the black on horses’ mouths and the things in front of their eyes (blinkers) resembled his father’s moustache and eyeglasses.  Other appropriate answer. 0 marks – No or irrelevant answer. 1 - 2 marks – Partial or vague answer e.g. because the black on horses’ mouths and the blinkers in front of their eyes resembled his father’s moustache and glasses. 3 - 4 marks – An increasingly accurate explanation with a good description of how horses resembled his father, linked to aspects of the Oedipus Complex, such as the explanation outlined above. Answer

17. Exam Question

18. 4a) Most likely answers may include:  Through observations (of Little Hans) / conversations / interviews/questions (with Little Hans) conducted by Hans’ father and sent to Freud via letter /correspondence.  Through the interview between Freud and Little Hans 0 marks – No or irrelevant answer e.g. by telephone, use of video 1 mark – Partial or vague answer e.g. e.g. Through observations / correspondence, by Little Hans’ father. 2 marks– Accurate description of how the data was collected as outlined above Answer

19. 4b) Most likely answers may include:  As Freud was a third party he may have misinterpreted the information passed to him by Little Hans’ father.  Freud wanted evidence to support his theory of infant sexuality and so may have interpreted the data in ways that would support his theory.  Because there was no objective evidence to support the qualitative data so interpretations were subjective.  Other appropriate answer. 0 marks – No or irrelevant answer. 1 mark – Partial or vague answer e.g. because he wanted evidence to support his theory i.e. answer not contextualised. 2 marks – Clear, appropriate, contextualised suggestion as to why there may have been a problem with the way Freud interpreted the data. Answer

20. On a scale of 1-5, circle how happy you are with explaining Freud’s study on Little Hans? Plenary Unhappy Very Happy Not Sure 1 2 3 4 5