I'm not sure if a similar observation has been raised elsewhere about Watson's ethically questionable
experiment on little Albert, but I noticed that Watson himself--or his presence--was likewise a conditioned stimulus to Albert. Had Watson performed that experiment many times on Albert, anyone can bet that the little one could have learned to display a scared behavior at the mere sight or even thought of Watson. The theory, however, includes only the role of the rat, rabbit, monkey, dog, etc. and the loud metallic noise in the transfer of the putative inborn fear of Albert. Watson's presence during the experiment could have likewise turned into another potent conditioned stimulus. So, the finding could have been something like this:
WATSON'S PRESENCE > RAT > LOUD METALLIC SOUND > ALBERT BEING SCARED
And if this was done many times, it could have advanced into this:
WATSON'S MERE PRESENCE > POOR ALBERT AUTOMATICALLY SHRIEKING IN FEAR (or something like this)
Furthermore, I believe that it won't matter at all if Watson showed Albert a rat or offered him a chocolate bar. I'd wager just the same that he would have achieved the same effect with that startling noise even if it was paired with three lovely roses or a cone of ice cream. The point here is that Watson didn't realize that he played an unplanned role in eliciting fear behavior from Albert. His theory, on this count, has a missing element: his own presence.
Just a fleeting thought.
No comments:
Post a Comment