Little Emotional Albert Summary

“Little Emotional Albert” Article Report

In 1920, the search to prove that humans learn their emotional reactions was started by J.B. Watson and his research assistant Rosalie Rayner. The research that was conducted was to help Watson’s movement, behaviorism, which has the viewpoint that behaviors are created from outside factors of the person because of many different environmental stimuli, say a rat.

The rat would become the main focus of fear during this experiment. Watson recruited a young male, about nine months in age, named Albert B. who was raised as an orphan from birth. From the basic examination, Albert seemed to be a healthy baby, not mentally and physically. Since Albert was able to pass these first test, the researchers would

then start to present him with common fears (rabbits, rats, and masks) and watched his reactions closely. Albert showed little fear to the stimuli he would even reach out to touch them. These stimuli would be called neutral stimuli because there was no fear produced when exposed to them.
Following this stage, the researchers would test Albert’s reaction to loud noises. The thought was that since most humans will experience fear with loud noises, especially infants, that Albert would also. The researchers would be correct, causing Albert to cry and be frightened. This is called an unconditioned stimulus because there is no learning that is needed for the response, in this case, fear
With these results, Albert would then be set up for the testing stage. While Albert was nine months old when the research on him began, he would be eleven months old when the actual testing would begin. Albert was presented with a white rat and seemed to be interested in the animal. That was until researchers would strike the metal bar to create a loud noise (unconditioned stimulus). That day, the same procedure was done three times. The rat and loud noise would be presented one week later to Albert again with the same procedure.
After the multiple tests, Albert was presented with the white rat again, but this time without the loud noise.

Extreme fear was shown almost immediately, as though the metal bar was being struck. As we know, the loud noise was no longer present. Albert had been conditioned to think that when a white rat was placed in front of him, that something that was frightening would occur. Thus, anytime a white rat is present, Albert will experience fear.

To test if the fear had been learned specifically for the white rat or was generalized, Watson brought in similar stimuli. First, Albert was tested to make sure he still experienced fear with the rat and he did. Then, a white rabbit was placed in front of him and he experienced fear almost immediately. Many other stimuli were tested (dog, white fur coat, and cotton) and the same response, fear was present.

Watson wanted to know if this fear would transfer outside of an experimental setting. Albert was taken to a brighter room with more people and placed the same stimuli in front of him. Fear was still present on Albert’s face, but he seemed to be less fearful than before.

Finally, Watson was wondering if the learned response would continue over time. Testing would stop for a period of 31 days. At the end of this period, all of the stimuli would be tested again showing that Albert still remained afraid of these

stimuli.
This study is significant to our lives today because we now know that people learn their fears. If someone would pronounce their fear of dogs, we can assume that there was a bad experience with a dog at some point in their lives. Since a person can learn to be afraid of objects, they can also learn to not be afraid of objects. With this tool, therapists can treat their patients with extreme fear by placing the fearful stimuli in an area with positive reinforcement, this is called extinction. This is allowing people who would normally move their days around, so that they did not have to experience their fear, to live a normal life again. It has also led us to research how expressions develop in infants to help adults communicate.
While the results were a great advancement in science, there were many ethical problems. Causing a child to be fearful of objects for the rest of their life that they were not afraid of before, is just wrong. Exposing Albert to very fearful things to make him cry, repeatedly, makes them seem heartless. Also, making a child a “lab rat” for the first year of their life is no way to have an infant live. Albert had no choice whether he wanted to take part in the study or not, therefore possibly destroying a child.