John Watson is considered to be the founder of behaviorism, a psychological theory that focuses on visible behavior while diminishing the notion of consciousness (Malone, 2014). He firmly believed that every human has the same set of reflective responses, which can be influenced by the use of a process called conditioning. The most famous demonstration of his statements comes in the form of an experiment, known as “Little Albert,” that remains a topic of a dispute to this day. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the influence of Pavlov on the work of Watson, describe Watson’s “Little Albert” experiment and discuss its possible controversy, as well as talk about the concept of transferring.
Pavlov’s Influence
According to Baum (2017), Pavlov had a significant impact on the development of behaviorism. The term conditioning that is widely used by behaviorists finds its origins in the works of Pavlov, who used this word to describe various gained reflexes obtained through learning. This term later became associated with the model of classical or Pavlovian conditioning, which explores the process of learning various reflexes through stimuli. Watson largely found his research on the basis of classical conditioning, as he studied a range of stimuli and their effects on animal behavior and argued that this research can be projected onto humans (Baum, 2017). Watson believed that by blurring the lines between animal and human experiments and focusing on objective observation, psychologists would achieve greater results. Moreover, expanding on Pavlov’s research, Watson insisted that virtually any basic emotion can be influenced by classical conditioning with the application of an appropriate stimulant. To prove this point, Watson conducted his most famous experiment that is now known as the study of Little Albert.
“Little Albert” Experiment
Some psychologists still argue about the authenticity and believability of the study of Little Albert. The experiment itself is not a study based on a significant amount of data, but rather a one-time demonstration of the conditioning process. The primary goal of his research was to display the way classical conditioning can affect a child’s perception of a certain object with the help of unconditioned responses. Watson and Rayner, Watson’s assistant, tried to cultivate a phobia of a variety of white furry objects in a young boy by using loud noises. Before and at the very beginning of this experiment, Albert did not experience any fear while playing with a rat and other objects. During the experiment, either Watson or Rayner produced a loud sound behind the child’s back every time he wanted to interact with the rat. Watson tried to make a noise that was loud enough to generate a reaction, thus choosing to use a hammer and a long steel bar.
Albert responded negatively to the noise and started crying. However, at first, he did not stop interacting with the rat. Gradually, the noise affected his reaction to the rat, as he did not express any desire to play with it. On the contrary, the child became scared at the sight of the rat and tried to crawl away. Furthermore, Watson reported that the child started to react negatively to other objects that looked similar to the white rat. The noise, being a stimulus, affected the child’s emotional response to multiple white furry objects, such as cotton wool and a white rabbit, thus showing the conditioned nature of the child’s fear.
Transfer
Watson used the term “transfer” to describe the events of the “Little Albert” experiment. After analyzing the results of the study, Watson concluded that Albert’s fear of white furry animals and toys is the consequence of a transfer of emotions from one object to a group of similar objects (Baum, 2017). He explained that emotional response could spread to a group of stimuli that were not introduced during the conditioning process, but that strongly resemble the conditioned stimulus. In this case, Albert was conditioned to fear the white rat and was not exposed to other types of neutral stimuli. However, due to the level of his perception, the child also became afraid of wool, white hair, and fur that were introduced to him later in the experiment. It is interesting to note, that Watson also deduced that these negative results can be countered and that the same procedure of conditioning can work with the creation of positive emotions. The process of relieving a person from the negative emotions was named counterconditioning (Baum, 2017).
Experiment Controversy
There are a number of points to consider when discussing the possible controversy of the “Little Albert” experiment. First of all, to achieve the best results a study should feature multiple subjects. This allows an experiment to be more objective and consider various outcomes. Therefore, a conclusion based on a larger quantity of results will prove more credible. Watson, however, conducted an experiment using a single subject. Such results, while significant and interesting, are not unimpeachable. Secondly, most experiments usually take a longer time to come to a definite conclusion. Watson, reportedly, finished the experiment in a scope of a few days and immediately presented his findings. If the same experiment was conducted in alternative conditions, the results might have been different.
Furthermore, according to Digdon, Powell, and Harris (2014), many scientists argue that Watson did not provide any information about the child’s health prior to the experiment. This lack of data can be a crucial part of the research, as it may greatly affect the experimental conditions and the final results. Some researchers proposed a notion that Albert may have had a prior health related condition that could change the results of the experiment. The authors also report that Watson did not introduce a clear connection between his actions and the reactions of the child (Digdon et al., 2014). Researchers, who tried to replicate the experiment by following the given instructions, were unable to come to the same conclusion as Watson.
Conclusion
Watson’s contribution to behaviorism was largely based on the practice of classical conditioning, a term first introduced by Pavlov. Watson expanded on Pavlov’s work, by ignoring the distinction between animal and human studies and exploring human action patterns through observable behavior. His study of Little Albert is one of his most famous experiments. However, it also remains one of the most controversial studies in the scientific world, as it has a number of methodological, ethical and informational flaws. The experiment is an example of classical conditioning with the use of negative and neutral stimuli. This study also shows the effect of transfer, which is a process of response distribution from one object to a group of similar objects. All in all, Watson’s work remains one of the most influential studies in behaviorist psychology.
References
Baum, W. M. (2017). Understanding behaviorism: Behavior, culture, and evolution (3rd ed.). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Digdon, N., Powell, R. A., & Harris, B. (2014). Little Albert’s alleged neurological impairment: Watson, Rayner and historical revision. History of psychology, 17(4), 312.
Malone, J. C. (2014). Did John B. Watson really “found” behaviorism? The Behavior Analyst, 37(1), 1-12.