Talk:Little Albert experiment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Portal |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, which collaborates on Psychology and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
|
||||||||
This article is largely wrong according to most historians of psychology. Watson's experiment had all sorts of horrible methodological errors in it, if I recall, such as needing to recondition over and over again which completely contaminated his results. Its popularity is more as a pop-psychology story, as a scientific study it is and was always wholly worthless. When I can find the book I have which addresses the Little Albert experiment's methodology in greater detail (the article so far does not get into the half of it) I'll update this a bit as it's not terribly accurate or useful as it stands. --Fastfission 07:44, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
The article says that he reacted in a similar way to blocks. The blocks were not a conditioned response, the blocks were there to show that while he reacted to white furry things, immediately after presentation of a white furry object, he was happy to play with the blocks. They were a control to show that it was only the white rat which provoked fear. - sars 13:22, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
There are links to Watson's study and Harris (1979) article, it'd be the best if someone'd rewrite the article to be relevant to text and it's critique. (es_uomikim 21:58, 27 October 2007 (UTC))
[edit] Little Albert later in life
What became of Albert later in life, as he grew up? Where is he now? Is he still living? Did he still have the fears the experimenters helped him develop as a baby? For how long? Does he still have those fears today? Someone please add about Albert later in his life, and how he's been and what he's done more recently. --Shultz 07:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- I was having a discussion about this case and came to this page looking for exactly that. When I first heard about it in a high school psych class a few years back, my teacher told me that nobody has any idea what became of him. I guess it's possible that still nobody's managed a follow-up study. -VJ 13:40, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- If he is still alive, the test subject will be about 87 years old. The possibility that he is no long with us is growing bigger each and every day. Not being mean here, but simply trying to explain what could have happened. Arbiteroftruth 15:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
I was told in my university psychology class that the fear became extinct - but again, this may not be fact, so please don't take it for gospel! - HS
The Little albert experiment led to the ethical guidelines today. The rule state that everything must be undone comes right back to the albert experiment. Watson himself didn't know what happened to Albert and was unable to un-condition him. It may be at the time Watson didn't think it was important to try to uncondition Albert or believed that it could just be tested on another child. It may be likely that Albert himself does not know that he is important to the psych community. It is thought that his mother found out about the experiments and refused to come back to the hospital because she did not trust Watson and wouldn't let him continue the experiments. Watson also gave very different descriptions of the experiment when it was published changing the first UCS from a rat to a rabbit and other things were ommitted and changed as time went on. Zmship 15:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] folklore
somebody really needs to update the text according to the 1979 article. I removed some errors (first animal was a rat, not a rabbit; reasons for mother moving away is unknown), but there's a lot more in this article that really needs to find its way onto this page. --Sarefo 18:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Watson studied the behavior of people as they react to a situation.
student 09 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.9.255.106 (talk) 21:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphan?
In one part of the article Albert is described as an orphan, in another it talks about his mother, which is rather confusing. If the woman in question was his biological mother, then he is not an orphan. If Albert had an adopted mother, this should be clarified. - Augustgrahl (talk) 00:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
