Little Albert rides again

Comments that there is merit in the thesis of B. Harris's article on inaccuracies in J. B. Watson and R. Rayner's (1920) study of Little Albert. Watson himself wrote different accounts of the experiment. The articles on Little Albert demonstrate that distortions are widespread, but the int...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American psychologist 1980-02, Vol.35 (2), p.216-217
Main Authors: Cornwell, David, Hobbs, Sandy, Prytula, Robert
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Classical Conditioning
History of Psychology
Human
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Comments that there is merit in the thesis of B. Harris's article on inaccuracies in J. B. Watson and R. Rayner's (1920) study of Little Albert. Watson himself wrote different accounts of the experiment. The articles on Little Albert demonstrate that distortions are widespread, but the interpretations of these distortions remain problematic. Two sorts of evidence are still lacking: (1) systematic parallel studies of the reporting of other major experiments and (2) further evidence on Watson.
ISSN:0003-066X
1935-990X
DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.35.2.216