Little Albert Experiment
Watch the Video of Watson's Little Albert experiment then respond to the Blog question below.
Watson wanted to show that Classical Conditioning can work with humans so he used baby Albert for his demonstration. What are your concerns about using a baby to demonstrate Classical Conditioning?
The first of my concerns is that Watson only used one child for his study; in order to get am ore accurate result with less room for error, he should have conducted the experiment on a more varying group of children. Also, every child's fear and reactions to stimuli are different. Therefore, Albert's reactions could have been unusual compared to other children his age. In addition, babies are prone to being scared easily, and their minds are still growing rapidly, so there is much room for reaction to new stimuli. It would have been interesting to see him conduct the same study on an older group of people. Having said this, childhood might be the most effective time in life to make associations.
ReplyDeleteYou make some very valid points Danielle. I have concerns about intentionally making a baby afraid, especially if you aren't sure you can undo the damage that is done.
DeleteMy concerns with using a baby to demonstrate classical conditioning is the potential future trauma for the poor kid and animals. Watson has no idea what the future effects will be. My second concern is what mother will send there kid to this study for future analysis to show if all babies will act the same. Watson is shocked that little Albert crawls away when he puts on a mask at the end. What kid wouldn't be scared if that was happening. Watson should have used a bunch of kids between ages 5-10 to see if they would have common results or a trend.
ReplyDeleteGood point. Would you feel differently if he had the same success with 100 babies?
Deleteif 100 babies all had the same conclusion all it would prove is babies can demonstrate it. Watson should show it on different age groups just like Pavlov did with the dogs. He didn't just use puppies.
DeleteI have several concerns about the experiment. First, I think it is completely unethical to use an infant to prove that classic conditioning works on human beings. The goal of the experiment was to frighten the child and it caused him psychological trauma. There could have been other ways to go about the experiment that did not involve harming the child psychologically. Another one of my concerns is that "Little Albert", was not a healthy child so there is no way to tell if his reactions were normal. I think that Watson should have had more than one test subject, if the experiment were to be conducted successfully.
ReplyDeleteAgree, why do you think this experiment became so famous?
DeleteI think the experiment became famous because Watson used a human being as his test subject, one that could not give consent. Many people found the experiemnt shocking and immoral even though it proved classical conditioning worked on people.
DeleteAs I reread your initial comment above I am puzzled how you know that the child had psychological trauma. Being afraid of something isn't trauma but it is certainly uncomfortable.
DeleteMy concerns are much like my peers above the experiment is not reliable due to only using one subject and the subject used was a child which could be easily minpulated due to lack of knowledge. The child could have future trauma due to the experiment then having the experiment make an impact on him and his future. There was nit much room in the experiment for his choice weather he wanted to do this because of his age which ultimetly makes this experiment not accurate and unseucessful.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Ellie's comment, I agree that it was highly unethical to use an infant as a test subject; having said that, I disagree that the result caused psychological trauma. The results are said to have diminished over time, and because the child had a terminal illness, it is impossible to determine the long-term effects of the experiment into adulthood.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Tara's comment, I agree that the child "could be easily manipulated due to the lack of knowledge." Because of Albert's age he must have been easily influenced and freightened by the experiment. However, I disagree that the test was not successful. Watson's experiment is well known and incorporated in psychology today. It has taught us about associations and led to the idea of discrimination and generalization, ergo, I find that in the larger picture, it was a successful experiment.
ReplyDeleteIn this experiment, using one child doesn't get enough information and isn't at all that accurate. And since each kid is different when they are at that age, they should of used a more diverse set of kids including age, size, race, and personality. I personally did not like this experiment because of what they did to the kid, and caused trama. This kid, personally should not be affected in his future life, like he was. I don't think that this experiment worked because of what I said before.
ReplyDeleteIt is good to see your concerns for the child. However, if the experiment was done on many children, as some have suggested, then the damage would be done to many. Also, has there really been damage done to this child?
DeleteMy concern about the experiment is this would totally affect the baby's future life, which is bad. This experiment basically is about planting something in the baby's brain, and the baby is going to remember it probably for the rest of his life since he has been educated to react towards such thing the way that he has been taught at a very early age, because babies or infants tend to learn easier and faster compared to adults. They will remember the things that they have been taught constantly. That is why Watson used Little Albert for his demonstration. It might work really well for him, but not for this poor little baby. Demonstrating Classical Conditioning on Little Albert is definitely going to affect his life and traumatized him.
ReplyDeleteWhat if this child lived in a bad area infested by diseased rats. Learning to be afraid of the rats and crying to alert adults when one is seen might be considered a good survival technique. Would we feel differently about this experiment then?
DeleteI agree with Natashia's comment I believe the infant was traumatized by the experiment . I think that because his fear was still evident a month after it was supposed to be extinct, which Watson did not expect.
DeleteIn response to Danielle's response to my comment how can the experiment be successful if it was only done to one child it does not prove it if it is not done more than once there needs to be room for trial and error.
ReplyDeleteAgreed also the baby had some brain disease that could have effected the results. So more babies would need to prove it.
DeleteSince doing this to a baby seems cruel and unethical, isn't it a good thing that they didn't repeat the experiment?
ReplyDelete