1979
DOI: 10.1037/0003-066x.34.2.151
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Whatever happened to little Albert?

Abstract: s 1920 conditioning of the infant Albert B. is a wellknown piece of social science folklore. Using published sources, this article reviews the study's actual procedures and its relationship to Watson's career and work. The article also presents a history of psychologists' accounts of the Albert study, focusing on the study's distortion by Watson himself, general textbook authors, behavior therapists, and most recently, a prominent learning theorist. The author proposes possible causes for these distortions and… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
112
0
12

Year Published

1990
1990
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 209 publications
(127 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
2
112
0
12
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, see Samelson (1974) on Comte as the supposed first positivist, operationist, and behaviorist, Harris (1979) on Watson and Rayner's (1920) poorly conducted and reported "Little Albert" study, Buck (1990) on Benjamin (1988) on teaching machines, and Verhave (1990) on Watson's actual views regarding thinking-it was not merely subvocal speech.…”
Section: Chaptersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, see Samelson (1974) on Comte as the supposed first positivist, operationist, and behaviorist, Harris (1979) on Watson and Rayner's (1920) poorly conducted and reported "Little Albert" study, Buck (1990) on Benjamin (1988) on teaching machines, and Verhave (1990) on Watson's actual views regarding thinking-it was not merely subvocal speech.…”
Section: Chaptersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two excellent examples in the field of psychology of this lack of accuracy are the use of the "little Albert" story to demonstrate the role of classical conditioning in learning phobias and the use of the "Kitty Genovese" story to demonstrate the lack of bystander intervention. In reviews of the accuracy of textbook information, Harris (1979) found many errors in the secondary accounts of little Albert, as did Manning, Levine, and Collins (2007) with what really happened to Kitty Genovese. For example, Harris found that two texts indicated that little Albert was conditioned to fear a rabbit rather than a rat; many texts incorrectly included such postconditioning stimuli as a teddy bear, a white furry glove, a fur pelt, a cat, and Albert's aunt; and three texts described how Watson removed little Albert's fear of the rat, although no such reconditioning was actually done.…”
Section: The Loss Of Information Across Secondary Sourcesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Watson and Rosalie Rayner (1920) had conditioned a child's fear of a rat (see B. Harris, 1979) and, under Watson's oversight, Mary Cover Jones (1924b) eliminated a child's fear of a rabbit (see also Jones, 1924a;Ollendick & King, 1998). In 1935, Hobart andMolly Mowrer (1938) developed the bell-andpad method for treating nocturnal enuresis (see Houts, 2003).…”
Section: Applications: Scientific Processesmentioning
confidence: 99%