The Little Albert experiment is one of the exemplary psychology experiments conducted by behaviorist John B. Watson. In this experiment, Watson showcased how humans could be classically conditioned, that is, how their behaviors or actions could be influenced given the stimuli they are exposed to.
Through the little Albert experiment, Watson demonstrated how classical conditioning could be used to create fears and phobias in humans. This experiment is used as an example by psychologists to explain how one can condition emotional responses in humans.
However, despite being one of the important experiments in the history of psychology, the experiment is condemned on ethical grounds. Since there was no code of ethics at the time the experiment was undertaken, researchers challenge the little Albert ethical issues.
Let’s have a look at the Little Albert experiment ethical issues and see how could the little Albert experiment be improved.
Little Albert Experiment Ethical Issues
1. Experiment Caused Harm to the Subject
As per the ethical code followed today, psychologists must be careful that they are not harming the subject in the wake of conducting the experiments on them. This is where the Little Albert experiment is challenged. It is believed that Watson harmed Little Albert as he was conditioned for the fear of rats which he previously did not have. This could also make Little Albert endure pain and mental suffering throughout life.
2. No Consent Was Taken by Watson
Watson did not abide by the principle of informed consent. As per this principle, the researchers or psychologists must take the consent of the subject or someone authorized on his/her behalf.
Unfortunately, while conducting this experiment, Watson should have taken little Albert’s mother’s consent which he did not do.
3. Subject Did Not Have the Right To Withdraw
Little Albert and his mother did not have the right to withdraw from the experiment whenever they wanted. As per today’s code of ethics, the subject has the right to move out of the experiment whenever he/she wishes to.
4. Watson Did Not Adopt Highest Standards
Watson is condemned for not using methods of the highest standard to undertake the experiment. For example, he conducted the Albert experiment on a single individual. Also, the experiment was not conducted in a controlled environment.
How Could the Little Albert Experiment be Improved?
1. Causing No harm to the Subject
Watson could have taken proper measures so that Little Albert was not harmed. Albert was classically conditioned for the fear of white rats, which he previously did not have. This could have made Albert suffer for life.
2. Reconditioning Little Albert for the Fear of White Rats
Watson was unable to recondition little Albert and free him from the fear of white rats. This is because both Little Albert and his mother left the hospital before Watson could recondition the infant.
3. Taking Informed Consent of Albert’s Mother
Watson should have taken the consent of Albert’s mother for conducting the experiment. As per today’s code of ethics, it is necessary for the researchers to take the consent of either the participant or someone authorized on his/her behalf.
4. Giving Albert and his Mother the Right to Withdraw
As per the current code, researchers are liable to give the right of withdrawal to the participant. Watson should have given such a right to Albert and his mother which he, unfortunately, did not do.
Conclusion
The nine-month-old infant little Albert was conditioned for the fear of white rats by Watson and his student Rosalie Rayner. Although this became one of the classic experiments in psychology, it was condemned for being unethical. The Little Albert experiment showcased how classical conditioning can be adopted to influence the emotional responses in humans. It exemplifies why conditioning plays such an important role in the life of an individual.
