The Little Albert experiment is one of the most infamous studies in the history of psychology. Conducted by John B. Watson and Rosalie Rayner in 1920, the experiment was designed to explore the nature of human emotional responses and how they can be conditioned. The study involved exposing a young child, known only as Little Albert, to various stimuli to see how he would react. The results were shocking and have led to widespread criticism of the ethics of the study.
Little Albert was a nine-month-old baby who was selected for the study because he was healthy and had no previous history of psychological problems. The study was conducted at Johns Hopkins University and involved exposing the baby to a series of stimuli, including a white rat, a rabbit, a dog, and a monkey. At first, Little Albert was not afraid of any of these things. However, the researchers gradually introduced a loud noise, which was made by striking a metal bar with a hammer, every time Little Albert was shown one of these stimuli.
After a few repetitions, Little Albert began to associate the noise with the stimuli and showed signs of fear when he saw them. Eventually, he became afraid of the stimuli even without the noise, and his fear even extended to other similar objects.
The Little Albert experiment was groundbreaking at the time because it demonstrated that emotional responses could be conditioned through association. However, it also had a number of serious consequences. For one, Little Albert was never unconditioned from his fear. The researchers ended the experiment before they could attempt to do so. This meant that Little Albert was left with a permanent phobia of rats, rabbits, dogs, and other similar objects.
In addition to the harm done to Little Albert, the experiment has also faced criticism for its lack of ethics. Today, the American Psychological Association has strict guidelines for ethical research that includes informed consent, the right to withdraw, and protection from harm. However, the Little Albert experiment violated all of these guidelines.
For one, Little Albert’s mother was not informed about the details of the experiment or the potential harm it could cause to her child. Additionally, there was no attempt made to reverse the conditioning or alleviate Little Albert’s fears after the experiment was completed. The fact that the researchers ended the experiment early also meant that they were not able to observe the long-term effects of the conditioning on Little Albert’s mental health.
The Little Albert experiment remains a controversial and much-discussed study to this day. It is often cited as an example of unethical research practices and the potential harm that can result from them. Additionally, the study has been criticized for its lack of scientific rigour. The sample size was small, and the experiment was not well-controlled, which makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions from the results.
Despite these criticisms, the study has had a lasting impact on the field of psychology. It has been cited in numerous studies and has influenced the development of behavioural psychology and the study of emotion. It has also inspired further research into the nature of conditioning and its effects on human behaviour.
The Little Albert experiment is a dark chapter in the history of psychology. While it demonstrated that emotional responses can be conditioned through association, it also caused harm to an innocent child and violated ethical guidelines that are now considered standard in the field. Today, the study serves as a warning to researchers about the importance of ethical considerations and the potential consequences of unethical practices. While the study’s impact on the field of psychology is undeniable, it is a reminder that scientific progress must always be balanced against ethical considerations and the well-being of research participants.
Adam Mulligan, a psychology graduate from the University of Hertfordshire, has a keen interest in the fields of mental health, wellness, and lifestyle.