Lecture Notes: The Little Albert Experiment

Introduction

• The lecture discusses one of the least ethical studies in psychology.
• Focus is on the "Little Albert Experiment" which is commonly taught in psychology classes.
• The study explored classical conditioning, originally pioneered by Pavlov.

Background on Classical Conditioning

• Pavlov's Experiment: Involved conditioning dogs to salivate to a bell by pairing it with food.
  • Phase 1: Dogs shown food; produced saliva.
  • Phase 2: Food paired with a bell.
  • Phase 3: Dogs salivated to just the bell.
• Classical conditioning can lead to fear conditioning in animals.

The Little Albert Experiment

• Conducted in the 1920s by John Watson at Johns Hopkins University.
• Objective: To condition a baby to fear non-scary things.
• John Watson "stole" a baby from a hospital without mother's consent.

Experiment Procedure

1. Initial Stage:
   • Little Albert was shown various stimuli (e.g., a white rat, a dog, masks) without fear.
2. Conditioning Stage:
   • Every time Albert was shown these stimuli, loud noises were made behind him.
   • This frightened Albert, causing him to cry.
   • Albert developed an association between the stimuli and the loud noise.
3. Resulting Fear:
   • Albert began to cry when seeing the stimuli alone, indicating conditioned fear.
   • Watson and his students prevented Albert from escaping the stimuli.

Ethical Concerns

• Experiment led to distress and potential trauma for Little Albert.
• His mother eventually stopped the experiment.
• Watson's planned "deconditioning" phase was not conducted.

Aftermath & Controversy

• Little Albert's identity remains unknown with two main theories:
  1. Douglas Meritt:
     • Son of a wet nurse at the hospital.
     • Died at age six from a condition unrelated to the experiment.
  2. William Albert Barger:
     • Born in the same hospital, lived to 87.
     • Allegedly had a fear of dogs and animals.
• The real identity of Little Albert is debated.

Conclusion

• The experiment is statistically insignificant with a sample size of one.
• Ethically, the study is indefensible and would not be approved today.
• The legacy of the Little Albert experiment serves as a cautionary tale in research ethics.

The lecture ends by emphasizing that studies like this should never happen again.