Editing Little Albert experiment (section)

{{short description|Psychology experiment}}
[[File:Little-albert.jpg|thumb|250px|right|One of a series of published [[unit still photographer|stills]] taken from film of the experiment]]
[[File:Little Albert experiment (1920).webm|250px|thumb|thumbtime=192|The film of the experiment]]
The '''Little Albert experiment''' was an [[Research ethics|unethical]] study that mid-20th century psychologists interpret as [[evidence]] of [[classical conditioning]] in humans. The study is also claimed to be an example of [[Conditioned taste aversion#Stimulus generalization|stimulus generalization]] although reading the research report demonstrates that fear did not generalize by color or tactile qualities.<ref>Harris, B. (1979). "Whatever happened to little Albert?" ''American Psychologist'', 34(2), 151–160</ref> It was carried out by [[John B. Watson]] and his graduate student, [[Rosalie Rayner]], at [[Johns Hopkins University]]. The results were first published in the February 1920 issue of the ''[[Journal of Experimental Psychology]]''.

After observing children in the field, Watson hypothesized that the fearful response of children to loud noises is an innate unconditioned response. He wanted to test the notion that by following the principles of the procedure now known as "classical conditioning", he could use this unconditioned response to condition a child to fear a distinctive stimulus that normally would not be feared by a child (in this case, furry objects).<ref name="How the Challenge of Explaining Learning Influenced the Origins and Development of John B. Watson's Behaviorism"/>  However, he admitted in his research article that the fear he generated was neither strong nor lasting.