What do you think?
Rate this book
Psychological Care of Infant & Child
ARNO Press reprint
- GenresParentingPsychology
195 pages, Hardcover
Published January 1, 1928
About the author
John B. Watson
69 books36 followersJohn Broadus Watson (January 9, 1878 – September 25, 1958) was an American psychologist who established the psychological school of behaviorism. Watson promoted a change in psychology through his address, Psychology as the Behaviorist Views it, which was given at Columbia University in 1913. Through his behaviorist approach, Watson conducted research on animal behavior, child rearing, and advertising. In addition, he conducted the controversial "Little Albert" experiment.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
December 19, 2016
This book was an....experience, as you may have noted from the quotes in the progress updates.
I want to preface this with the fact that this book from the 1920s does NOT represent behavior analysis in any way.
Watson did some groundbreaking work in respondent/reflex conditioning. Some of it is particularly horrifying and unethical, and would never be conducted in modern science. However, from a historical standpoint, both for the science of behavior as well as the general mores of the time period, it was interesting.
Watson had a lot of interesting ideas, to say the least. He gets so close to good advice in many places - always consult with your child's physician if you suspect something is wrong, don't attempt to use punishment with your child if you are angry or if the rationale is from a justice/retribution angle, don't make the things children need to learn (i.e., toilet training) a harsh or unpleasant experience, we need to better teach people on how to raise children. But so much of what he said was overly generalized, cruel, or unsubstantiated. We know so much more know about learning and for everything he said that was accurate, there was a LOT of inaccurate, just plain wrong information. That's the appeal of science, really - One person, however loud or prominent, doesn't make fact. Aggregated, checked information over time makes a fact, and that fact can always be updated or thrown out when better information comes along.
As this was a library book, and a popular one, I could real the notes people wrote in it. There was the usual, gratuitous, pointless highlighting, of course. One person with a blocky handwriting style would cross out entire sections they disagreed with and would write NO! NO! in the margins, as if they were shouting at Watson himself. Another, bafflingly, would highlight quotes and write in delicate cursive "This is practical Freudianism." in the margin. I chuckled - a classical behaviorism philosophy and Freudianism could not be more at odds. But seeing how the text was interpreted and how people reacted in this time-capsule fashion was as edifying as the book.
Do I agree with Watson? Well, no. I think his advice overall is quite terrible, despite his good intentions and despite the wealth of information he discovered on reflexes. the book added context that I think is important if I ever read Behave. Its cool to see how far we've come.
I want to preface this with the fact that this book from the 1920s does NOT represent behavior analysis in any way.
Watson did some groundbreaking work in respondent/reflex conditioning. Some of it is particularly horrifying and unethical, and would never be conducted in modern science. However, from a historical standpoint, both for the science of behavior as well as the general mores of the time period, it was interesting.
Watson had a lot of interesting ideas, to say the least. He gets so close to good advice in many places - always consult with your child's physician if you suspect something is wrong, don't attempt to use punishment with your child if you are angry or if the rationale is from a justice/retribution angle, don't make the things children need to learn (i.e., toilet training) a harsh or unpleasant experience, we need to better teach people on how to raise children. But so much of what he said was overly generalized, cruel, or unsubstantiated. We know so much more know about learning and for everything he said that was accurate, there was a LOT of inaccurate, just plain wrong information. That's the appeal of science, really - One person, however loud or prominent, doesn't make fact. Aggregated, checked information over time makes a fact, and that fact can always be updated or thrown out when better information comes along.
As this was a library book, and a popular one, I could real the notes people wrote in it. There was the usual, gratuitous, pointless highlighting, of course. One person with a blocky handwriting style would cross out entire sections they disagreed with and would write NO! NO! in the margins, as if they were shouting at Watson himself. Another, bafflingly, would highlight quotes and write in delicate cursive "This is practical Freudianism." in the margin. I chuckled - a classical behaviorism philosophy and Freudianism could not be more at odds. But seeing how the text was interpreted and how people reacted in this time-capsule fashion was as edifying as the book.
Do I agree with Watson? Well, no. I think his advice overall is quite terrible, despite his good intentions and despite the wealth of information he discovered on reflexes. the book added context that I think is important if I ever read Behave. Its cool to see how far we've come.
to-keep-reference
September 3, 2018John Watson, the leading American behaviorist (in the years before B. F. Skinner), published the best-seller Psychological Care of Infant and Child. Watson wrote of his dream that one day babies would be raised in baby farms, away from the corrupting influences of parents. But until that day arrived, parents were urged to use behaviorist techniques to rear strong children: Dont pick them up when they cry, don´t cuddle or coddle them, just dole out benefits and punishments for each good and bad action.
The Happiness Hypothesis Pág.108-109
The Happiness Hypothesis Pág.108-109
Want to Read
April 10, 2009There is no book that I've tried harder to find. If anyone can find a copy please for a reasonable price let me know. I'm positive this will be the greatest read of my life.
May 10, 2018
This is hundred-year-old pseudoscience at its worst. Chapter III is literally called "The Dangers of Too Much Mother Love." Holy shit. It would be funny to read except for the fact that this book likely did serious damage to many mother-child relationships.
December 21, 2024
absolutely horrible, foundation for a systematic destruction of intuitive care giving behaviour to infants and toddlers in the modern WEIRD society, follow up Haarer: the German mother and her first child, still more torture, the must be similar soviet approaches
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews