The Little Albert Experiment conducted by John Watson and Rosalie Rayner in 1920 demonstrated classical conditioning in infants by conditioning a child known as Little Albert to fear a white rat. After pairing the presentation of the rat with a loud noise that startled Albert, he developed a fear response not just to the rat but also to other similar stimuli like a fur coat. While influential, the experiment is widely criticized for its lack of consent, harming the child by inducing fear, and failure to reverse the conditioning through desensitization.

1. The Little
Albert
Experiment

2. SUBMIT BY: Aliza Riaz

3. Agenda
To know summary, analysis and
critical evaluation

4. Summary of The Little Albert Experiment
 Watson and Raynor presented
Little Albert with a white rat
and he showed no fear.
 Watson then presented the rat
with a loud bang that startled
Little Albert and made him
cry.
I

5.  After the continuous association of
the white rat and loud noise, Little
Albert was classically conditioned to
experience fear at the sight of the rat.
 Albert's fear generalized to other
stimuli that were similar to the rat,
including a fur coat, some cotton
wool, and a Father Christmas mask.
II

6. Analysis
 The first major ethical concern we encountered in this exam period was that of
Watson and his “Little Albert” study. The modern code of ethics denounces
evoking fear responses from human participants, unless the participant has been
made aware of and consented beforehand. As an infant, Albert was obviously
unable to give consent and also unable to realize that what he was taking part in
was controlled research.
 Scaring a child to the point where he is visibly terrified and crying seems
unequivocally immoral. I take more issue with the fact that Watson didn’t remove
the fear in Albert by de-conditioning him, even though he had time to allow for it.
The impact of the study might justify ethical wrongs it committed. It is one of the
most influential studies on phobias of all time, paving the way for
counterconditioning (Cover Jones) and other therapies that have allowed millions
of people to overcome incapacitating fears and emotional issues

7. Analysis
 While the experiment is one of psychology's most famous and is included in
nearly every introductory psychology course, it is widely criticized for several
reasons. First, the experimental design and process were not carefully
constructed. Watson and Rayner did not develop an objective means to
evaluate Albert's reactions, instead of relying on their own subjective
interpretations.
 The experiment also raises many ethical concerns. Little Albert was harmed
during this experiment—he left the experiment with a previously nonexistent
fear. By today's standards, the Little Albert experiment would not be allowed

8. Critical Evaluation
The researchers confounded their own
experiment by conditioning Little Albert
using the same neutral stimuli as the
generalized stimuli (rabbit and dog).
Some doubts exist as to whether or not this fear
response was actually a phobia. When Albert was
allowed to suck his thumb he showed no response
whatsoever. This stimulus made him forget about
the loud sound. It took more than 30 times for
Watson to finally take Albert's thumb out to observe
a fear response.

9. Critical Evaluation
Other limitations included no control subject
and no objective measurement of the fear
response in Little Albert (e.g. the dependent
variable was not operationalized).
As this was an experiment of one individual the findings
cannot be generalized to others (e.g. low external
validity). Albert had been reared in a hospital environment
from birth and he was unusual as he had never been seen
to show fear or rage by staff. Therefore, Little Albert may
have responded differently in this experiment to how other
young children may have, these findings will therefore be
unique to him.

10. Critical Evaluation
•The Little Albert Experiment was
conducted before ethical guidelines were
implemented in psychology, and this study
can only be judged retrospectively.
For example, (i) the experiment was
conducted without the knowledge or consent
of Albert's parents, (ii) creating a fear
response is an example of psychological
harm, and finally (iii) Watson and Raynor
did not desensitize Albert to his fear of rats.

11. ThankYou!