The Little Albert Experiment

The Little Albert Experiment Theories Behavioral Psychology Print The Little Albert Psychology Experiment A Closer Look at the Famous Case of Little Albert By Kendra Cherry facebook twitter Kendra Cherry, MS, is an author, educational consultant, and speaker focused on helping students learn about psychology. Learn about our editorial policy Kendra Cherry Reviewed by Reviewed by Amy Morin, LCSW on September 30, 2019 facebook twitter instagram Amy Morin, LCSW, is a psychotherapist, author of the bestselling book 13 Things Mentally Strong People Dont Do, and a highly sought-after speaker. Learn about our Wellness Board Amy Morin, LCSW Updated on December 07, 2019 More in Theories Behavioral Psychology Cognitive Psychology Developmental Psychology Personality Psychology Social Psychology Biological Psychology Psychosocial Psychology In This Article Table of Contents Expand Background Classical Conditioning Stimulus Generalization Criticism After the Experiment View All Back To Top The Little Albert experiment was a famous psychology experiment conducted by behaviorist John B. Watson and graduate student Rosalie Rayner.?? Previously, Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov had conducted experiments demonstrating the conditioning process in dogs. Watson was interested in taking Pavlovs research further to show that emotional reactions could be classically conditioned in people. Verywell / Jessica Olah A Closer Look The participant in the experiment was a child that Watson and Rayner called Albert B. but is known popularly today as Little Albert. Around the age of 9 months, Watson and Rayner exposed the child to a series of stimuli including a white rat, a rabbit, a monkey, masks, and burning newspapers and observed the boys reactions. The boy initially showed no fear of any of the objects he was shown. The next time Albert was exposed  to the rat, Watson made a loud noise by hitting a metal pipe with a hammer. Naturally, the child began to cry after hearing the loud noise. After repeatedly pairing the white rat with the loud noise, Albert began to cry simply after seeing the rat. Watson and Rayner wrote: The instant the rat was shown, the baby began to cry. Almost instantly he turned sharply to the left, fell over on [his] left side, raised himself on all fours and began to crawl away so rapidly that he was caught with difficulty before reaching the edge of the table. Elements of Classical Conditioning in the Little Albert Experiment The Little Albert experiment presents an example of how classical conditioning can be used to condition an emotional response. Neutral Stimulus: The white ratUnconditioned Stimulus: The loud noiseUnconditioned Response: FearConditioned Stimulus: The white ratConditioned Response: Fear How Classical Conditioning Works Stimulus Generalization in the Little Albert Experiment In addition to demonstrating that emotional responses could be conditioned in humans, Watson and Rayner also observed that stimulus generalization had occurred.?? After conditioning, Albert feared not just the white rat, but a wide variety of similar white objects as well. His fear included other furry objects including Raynors fur coat and Watson wearing a Santa Claus beard. How Stimulus Generalization Influences Learning Criticisms of the Little Albert Experiment While the experiment is one of psychologys most famous and is included in nearly every introductory psychology course, it has also been criticized widely for several reasons. First, the experimental design and process were not carefully constructed. Watson and Rayner did not develop an objective means to evaluate Alberts reactions, instead of relying on their own subjective interpretations. Secondly, the experiment also raises many ethical concerns. The Little Albert experiment could not be conducted by todays standards because it would be unethical. What Ever Happened to Little Albert? The question of what happened to Little Albert has long been one of psychologys mysteries. Watson and Rayner were unable to attempt to eliminate the boys conditioned fear because he moved with his mother shortly after the experiment ended. Some envisioned the boy growing into a man with a strange phobia of white, furry objects. Recently, however, the true identity and fate of the boy known as Little Albert was discovered. As reported in American Psychologist, a seven-year search led by psychologist Hall P. Beck led to the discovery.?? After tracking down and locating the original experiments and the real identity of the boys mother, it was suggested that Little Albert was actually a boy named Douglas Merritte. The story does not have a happy ending, however. Douglas died at the age of six on May 10, 1925 of hydrocephalus, a build-up of fluid in his brain. Our search of seven years was longer than the little boy’s life, Beck wrote of the discovery. In 2012, Beck and Alan J. Fridlund published their discovery that Douglas Merritte was not the healthy and normal child that Watson described in his 1920 experiment.?? Instead, they found that Merritte had suffered from hydrocephalus since birth and presented convincing evidence that Watson knew about the boys condition and intentionally misrepresented the state of the childs health. These findings not only cast a shadow over Watsons legacy, but they also deepen the ethical and moral issues of this well-known experiment. In 2014, doubt was cast over Beck and Fridlunds findings when researchers presented evidence that a boy by the name of William Barger was the real Little Albert.?? Barger was born on the same day as Merritte to a wet-nurse who worked at the same hospital as Merrittes mother. While his first name was William, he was known his entire life by his middle name, Albert. While experts continue to debate the true identity of the boy at the center of Watsons experiment, there is little doubt that Little Albert left a lasting impression on the field of psychology.