Read the following three case studies. (These are also loaded to the week’s Learning Resources.)
Study 1: Study 1 concerns Watson’s famous Little Albert. Although we all know the story of Little Albert, we may not have read Watson and Rayner’s original 1920’s study. Take into consideration the context and spirit of the times, or Zeitgeist, if you will, when analyzing this study.
Green, C. D. (1999). Conditioned emotional reactions. Classics in The History of Psychology: An Internet Resource. http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Watson/emotion.htm
Study 2: Study 2 tells the story of Wendell Johnson, or more specifically, Mary Tudor’s study of children in an orphanage in Iowa. It’s called the Monster Study for a reason as you will see.
Reynolds, G. (2003, March 16). The stuttering doctor’s monster study. New York Times Magazine. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/16/magazine/the-stuttering-doctor-s-monster-study.html?pagewanted=all
Study 3: Study 3 concerns Seligman and Maier’s (1967) Learned Helplessness study. Again, reading these original studies enables us to form our own judgments.
Seligman, M. E., & Maier, S. F. (1967). Failure to escape traumatic shock. Journal of experimental psychology, 74(1), 1-9. http://psych.hanover.edu/classes/learning/papers/seligman%20maier%201967.pdf
2. Main post: After reading the three case studies, select one to analyze.
a. Relying on the week’s learning resources, develop an analysis to present as your main post to this discussion form.
b. Give background information and explain which of the General Principles and/or which of the Ethical Standards was violated in the study. Explain how you came to this conclusion, sharing why you believe it was violated.
c. Do you think that the study you chose would be approved by an IRB today? Why do you think the study was allowed, or tolerated, at the time?
d. Post your analysis to the class. Include relevant in-text citation and references when used
