The Analysis of Behavior Therapy - Essay Example

Ethical Principles for Psychologists of Ethical Principles for Psychologists Experiments conducted by behaviorists who aimed for an objective science, played a role in shaping the ethical considerations considered today by the American Psychological Association. This is because they are considered as the first psychologists who provided a study of behavior that employed scientific principles. Experiments by Watson and Rayner (1920) and Mary Cover Jones have played a role in laying down the foundation of today’s ethical principles. Mary C. Jones is considered to be the proponent of behavior therapy (Schultz & Schultz 2011) as she managed to desensitize her subject, three-year-old Peter into fearing rabbits. While Peter was eating, a rabbit was brought into the room but it was kept at a far distance enough not to trigger a fearful response. Over a series of trials lasting several weeks, the rabbit was brought progressively closer at the same time Peter was eating. Eventually, he got used to the rabbit and could touch it without showing any fear. Eating was the conditioned stimulus that resulted in having no fear (conditioned response). This experiment contributed positively to building knowledge especially in developmental psychology pending that Jones was able to prove that desensitization of learned fears was possible. With Watson and Rayner (1920) in their experiment, they went on to demonstrate Watson’s theory of conditioned emotional responses. The study on Albert was particularly important in testing the theory. Initially, Albert had no fear in the presence of white rats. However, he was startled when he heard banging a steel bar with a hammer. It was loud. The noise was considered an unconditioned stimulus that elicited a fear response whereas the rat was the neutral stimulus (Powell, Honey and Symbaluk, 2013). The two were paired and in the first trial, Albert jumped violently and fell forward burying his face in the mattress. Through a series of trials, Albert became more and more fearful. At a point when the rat was presented without the noise, he crawled so rapidly that he experienced difficulty before reaching the edge of the table. The unfortunate twist to this is that Albert generalized his fear to other objects similar to the rat including rabbits, fur coats, dogs, and even Santa Claus masks (Powell, Honey & Symbaluk, 2013). Watson & Rayner failed to conduct the final part of the experiment which involved extinguishing the fear they had already conditioned little Albert to and this raised very many questions especially those in reference to ethical concerns. The above experiments were conducted decades before the establishment of ethical guidelines that are meant to guide psychologists in their conduct. They provided a platform in which psychologists began to question the treatment of participants in experiments. Evolution and growth of the psychological field also influenced the implementation of ethical guidelines following that numerous research was being carried out. This meant that people needed to be protected. The American Psychological Association, in particular, managed to do this by coming up with a code of ethics. It consists of 5 principles which are general guidelines for the conduct of psychologists and 10 ethical standards (APA, 2002) Some of the ethical principles stipulated by the American Psychological Association that the experiments of Jones and Watson either violated or adhered to include: informed consent, interruption of psychological services, avoiding harm and the principle of integrity. Informed Consent This follows the notion that participants in a study should be provided with information about the study’s purpose and procedures in a language that they can understand to decide if they wish to participate. According to the APA (2002), in the instance where a person is legally incapable of giving informed consent, Psychologists nevertheless have to (1) provide an appropriate explanation (2) seek individual consent (3)consider such person’s preferences and best interest (4) obtain permission from legally authorized person. Watson and Rayner in their experiment failed to consider this as they did not manage to obtain consent from little Albert’s mother. They also failed to follow up with her to undo the fear that they had conditioned him to. They responded to this unfortunate outcome by assuring readers that all babies like Albert would have likely developed a similar fear anyway (YoungPeter, 2008). Interruption of Psychological Services As outlined in the APA 3.12, “unless otherwise covered by the contract, psychologists make reasonable efforts to plan for facilitating services in the event that psychological services are interfered with.” The sudden interruption in the psychological experiment Watson & Rayner were conducting was interfered with which goes against the ethical principle. This happened as Albert and his mother moved from the hospital and was unable to desensitize the fear he had learned Avoiding Harm According to APA (2002), psychologists take reasonable steps to avoid harming their clients and to minimize harm where it is foreseeable. With Little Albert, harm caused especially emotional distress. This being evident in Albert reacting by jumping violently and falling forward to bury his face in the mattress upon seeing the white rat. The use of a loud noise is also in violation of this ethic as the noise he was exposed to could have potentially damaged his ears. This was not just once but was through subsequent trials, being only 11 months old at the time of the experiment made it worse, (Schultz &Schultz, 2011). In today’s context, such an experiment would be against the APA standards. Principle of Integrity In as much as this is a principle it still guides psychologists in their conduct and ethical principles, it helps to promote accuracy, honesty, and truthfulness in the science. (APA, 2002). Watson failed in this regard while conducting the experiment as the environment was not controlled, the use of a mask by Watson causing Albert distress and eventually fearing him (Schultz and Schultz, 2011). On other hand, Mary Cover Jones in her experiment with Peter displayed integrity as she managed to desensitize Peter from fearing a rabbit by associating it with eating and this was through counter-conditioning. In a way, she managed to correct Watson and Rayner’s wrongs There are other ethics that Watson did not adhere to, however, more study is to unveil on such. The aspect of confidentiality was not observed as the experiment is printed in ever psychology textbook with it being a reference point for learning. On the positive side, they managed to keep his identity anonymous, as Albert is not considered the real name, The framework of psychological knowledge is built on a body of research; the importance of ethics in this regard is unavoidable. Being a science primarily based on human behavior, the study of it can prove to be contentious following the complexities associated with human beings. In this time where utilitarianism, is at the forefront, psychology is obligated to protect people from harm at the same time help them. It is from the experiments of Watson and Milgram whom we have not mentioned that we learn what is acceptable. It is also from the work of Cover Jones that we get an example of what is appropriate and counts as ethical. References American Psychological Association (2002). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Web. 5 May 2015. Powell, Honey and Symbaluk. (2013). Introduction to Learning and behavior. Belmont: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Schultz and Schultz (2011).A History of Modern Psychology. (10Ed.) Belmont: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Watson, J.B. and Rayner, R. (1920). Conditioned Emotional Reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 3, 1-14. Youngpeter, K. (2008). Controversial psychological research methods and their influence on the development of formal ethical guidelines. Student Journal of Psychological Science, 1(1), 4-12. Read More