Footnotes
In summary, the Little Albert experiment is essential in the history of psychology because it provided empirical support for fundamental principles of classical conditioning, contributed to the development of behaviorism, raised ethical considerations in research, and challenged existing theories of human behavior. Its current influence is evident in the continued exploration of conditioned responses, behavior therapy, and the understanding of emotional reactions.
It is probable that many of the phobias in psychopathology are true conditioned emotional reactions either of the direct or the transferred type.
The principles of classical conditioning and understanding emotional responses have been crucial to developing behavior therapy and other psychological interventions. The study's findings have informed therapeutic techniques for treating phobias, anxiety disorders, and other emotional conditions.
The organism thus apparently from birth, when under the influence of love stimuli is blocked to all others.[3] This resort to sex stimulation when under the influence of noxious and emotional situations, or when the individual is restless and idle, persists throughout adolescent and adult life.
The experiment challenged prevailing psychoanalytic theories, particularly those that emphasized the role of love and sexuality in human behavior. Watson and Rayner's emphasis on the role of fear as a primal and powerful emotion introduced a significant theoretical shift in psychology.
Santa Claus mask. Withdrawal, gurgling, then slapped at it without touching. When his hand was forced to touch it, he whimpered and cried. His hand was forced to touch it two more times. He whimpered and cried on both tests. He finally cried at the mere visual stimulus of the mask.
This is still taught today as a way of conditioning your child to "attain self-discipline." The technique taught is called blanket training. There is no empirical evidence to back the claims of blanket training. Even though this experiment is heavily controversial, it made its mark in history.
The effect of time upon conditioned emotional responses. We have already shown that the conditioned emotional response will continue for a period of one week. It was desired to make the time test longer. In view of the imminence of Albert's departure from the hospital we could not make the interval longer than one month. Accordingly no further emotional experimentation was entered into for thirty-one days after the above test. During the month, however, Albert was brought weekly to the laboratory for tests upon right and left-handedness, imitation, general development, etc. No emotional tests whatever were given and during the whole month his regular nursery routine was maintained in the Harriet Lane Home. The notes on the test given at the end of this period are as follows:
The experiment sparked discussions about ethical considerations in research involving human subjects, particularly vulnerable populations such as infants. It raised awareness about the need for informed consent and the ethical treatment of participants in psychological experiments.
On this same day and immediately after the above experiment Albert was taken into the large well-lighted lecture room belonging to the laboratory. He was placed on a table in the center of the room immediately under the skylight. Four people were present. The situation [p.9] was thus very different from that which obtained in the small dark room.
This conditioned emotional reaction relied on more than just the direct stimuli. The environment played a vital role in creating that fear response. Albert knew they would expose him to things that scared him when he was in this room. This might have set him up to be anxious when entering the room.
1. White rat suddenly taken from the basket and presented to Albert. He began to reach for rat with left hand. Just as his hand touched the animal the bar was struck immediately behind his head. The infant jumped violently and fell forward, burying his face in the mattress. He did not cry, however. 2. Just as the right hand touched the rat the bar was again struck. Again the infant jumped violently, fell forward and began to whimper.
The study demonstrated the phenomenon of stimulus generalization, showing that the conditioned fear response could transfer to similar stimuli (in this case, a rabbit and a dog).
The infant practically never cried.
This is a very well-known study in psychology history. Albert had no fear when exposed to typical situations that would scare an infant. The Little Albert experiment played a pivotal role in the development of behaviorism, a school of psychology that emphasized observable behaviors and environmental factors as determinants of human psychology.
Experimental work had been done so far on only one child, Albert B. This infant was reared almost from birth in a hospital environment; his mother was a wet nurse in the Harriet Lane Home for Invalid Children. Albert's life was normal: he was healthy from birth and one of the best developed youngsters ever brought to the hospital, weighing twenty-one pounds at nine months of age. He was on the whole stolid and unemotional. His stability was one of the principal reasons for using him as a subject in this test. We [p.2] felt that we could do him relatively little harm by carrying out such experiments as those outlined below.
Albert B. is a fascinating subject for this study because of his stability and lack of emotional responsiveness.
In recent literature various speculations have been entered into concerning the possibility of conditioning various types of emotional response, but direct experimental evidence in support of such a view has been lacking.
The article starts by addressing the lack of experimental evidence. Measuring emotion is not easy because it is so subjective. People can infer anything by expressions and feelings. It is essential in history to show and represent how important experiments might not have accurate, measurable data.