Evaluate, using the UNCRC, how far Watson and Rayner’s (1920) study promotes the rights of the child. (8) Flashcards
Intentional distress was caused to Little Albert when they made the loud banging noise as the stimulus for the startle/fear response.
Every child has the right to express their feelings and for these to be taken seriously, it could be argued that crying and showing fear represented his feelings and the research should have been stopped.
- Due to his age, consent was gained from Little Albert’s mother for him to take part in the study.
His mother had parental responsibility under Article 18 and would have considered what was best for him and believed the study was safe.
Little Albert’s fear response was renewed when it began to fade so they intentionally continued to cause harm.
The harm caused conflicts with the UNCRC statement that the interests of the child must be a top priority, Watson and Rayner prioritised their research aims and continued to cause harm.
The identity of Little Albert and his mother were kept confidential.
Under the UNCRC Article 16 children have the right to privacy and the identity of Little Albert was never made public, so in this way ethical considerations had been undertaken.
