Watson's Little Albert experiment?

Question

Hi

What are some of the ethics that were breached in this classical conditioning experiment?

Thanks

I just need the main ones....

and also..if you can...can you explain to me what "beneficience" means? thankyou

Answer 1

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters

The Little Albert experiment was an experiment showing empirical evidence of classical conditioning. This study was also an example of stimulus generalisation. It was conducted in 1920 by John B. Watson. The study was done at Johns Hopkins University.

John B. Watson, after observing children in the field, was interested in finding support for his notion that the reaction of children, whenever they heard loud noises, was prompted by fear. Furthermore, he reasoned that this fear was innate or due to an unconditioned response. He felt that following the principles of classical conditioning, he could condition a child to fear another distinctive stimulus which normally would not be feared by a child.


Albert was 11 months and three days old at the time of the first test. Because of his young age, the experiment today would be considered unethical. Since this experiment, and others which pushed the boundaries of experimental ethics, the American Psychological Association has banned studies considered unethical.

By present-day standards, Watson's experiment was unethical for several reasons. Albert's mother was not informed of the experiment. It was performed without her consent. Researchers today are required to obtain fully informed consent from participants or in the case of infants/children, from their parents/guardians before any study can begin.

It is also today considered unethical[citation needed] to evoke responses of fear in a laboratory setting, unless a participant has given informed consent to being intentionally frightened as part of an experiment. Experiments should not cause the participants to suffer any distress or harm in any way. If a participant was to become distressed during an experiment, the researcher is required to abandon the study and immediately address the needs of the participant. The welfare of the participants must always be the paramount consideration in any form of research.

Furthermore Albert was never systematically desensitized to the conditioned emotional response and Albert may have suffered permanent psychological damage because of the emotional trauma resulting from the experimental procedures to which he was subjected.

Beneficence: The act of doing good; helping others. (Salus aegroti suprema lex)

With Regard to Medical Ethics, this concept involves the physician making the decisions that are best for the patient, without regard to personal gain or the interests of others. "Do good and avoid evil."

Source(s):

en.wikipedia.com

Answer 2

"Beneficence" is doing good. If you say, beneficience and nonmaleficence, that means "do good and do no harm"

Watson's experiment with little Albert conditioned him to be afraid of fluffy creatures, basically. It did quite a bit of harm to the lil guy, and was fairly unnecessary. The main problem (besides the unnatural levels of stress Albert was exposed to) was that Watson never took any noted efforts to extinguish these fears he instilled in little Albert. There was no debriefing or undoing of the conditioning.