Editing John B. Watson (section)

=== ''Psychological Care of Infant and Child'' (1928) ===
The 20th century marked the formation of qualitative distinctions between children and adults.<ref name="Houk">{{cite web|title='Psychological Care of Infant and Child': A Reflection of Its Author and His Times|url=http://www.mathcs.duq.edu/~packer/DevPsych/Houk2000.html|author=Houk, Suzanne|year=2002|website=Duquesne Mathematics|publisher=Duquesne University|orig-date=2000|access-date=May 16, 2020|archive-date=September 26, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180926145608/http://www.mathcs.duq.edu/~packer/DevPsych/Houk2000.html}}</ref> In 1928, Watson wrote the book ''Psychological Care of Infant and Child'' with help from [[Rosalie Rayner]], his assistant and wife. In it, Watson explains that [[Behaviorism|behaviorists]] were starting to believe psychological care and analysis were required for infants and children.<ref name="WJB">Watson, John B. 1928. ''Psychological Care of Infant and Child''. New York: [[W. W. Norton & Company|W. W. Norton Company]].</ref> All of Watson's exclamations were due to his belief that children should be treated as a young adult. As such, he warns against the inevitable dangers of a mother providing too much love and affection, because love—along with everything else understood by the behaviorist perspective—Watson argues, is conditioned. He uses invalidism to support his warning, contending that, since society does not overly comfort children as they become young adults in the real world, parents should not set up these unrealistic expectations. Moreover, he disapproves of [[thumb sucking]], [[masturbation]], [[homosexuality]], and encourages parents to be honest with their children about sex.<ref>"Watson, John Broadus." Pp. 662–63 in ''The Gale Encyclopedia of Psychology'' (2nd ed.), edited by [[Bonnie Strickland|B. Strickland]]. Detroit: [[Gale (publisher)|Gale]]. 2001.</ref> He would reason such views by saying that "all of the weaknesses, reserves, fears, cautions, and inferiorities of our parents are stamped into us with sledge hammer blows,"<ref name=":3" /> inferring that emotional disabilities were the result of personal treatment, not inheritance.<ref name=":3" />

Watson deemed his slogan to be "''not more babies but better brought up babies''," in support of the 'nurture' side of the '[[Nature versus nurture|nature vs nurture]]' debate, claiming that the world would benefit from extinguishing pregnancies for 20 years while enough data was gathered to ensure an efficient [[Parenting|child-rearing]] process. Further emphasizing nurture, Watson argued that nothing is instinctual, but rather everything is built into a child through the interaction with their environment. Parents, therefore, hold complete responsibility as they choose what environment to allow their child to develop in.<ref name="WJB" />

Though having researched many topics throughout career, child-rearing became Watson's most prized interest. His book would be extremely popular, having sold 100,000 copies after just a few months of release. Many critics were surprised to see even his contemporaries come to accept his views.<ref name="HBR+W">Hergenhahn, B. R. (2005). ''An Introduction to the History of Psychology''. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning</ref> His emphasis on [[child development]] started to become a new phenomenon and would influence some of his successors, though the field had already been delved into by psychologists prior to Watson. [[G. Stanley Hall]], for instance, became very well known for his 1904 book ''Adolescence''. Hall's beliefs differed from Watson's behaviorism, as the former believed that one's behavior is mostly shaped by heredity and genetically predetermined factors, especially during childhood. His most famous concept,  the ''storm and stress theory'', normalized [[adolescents]]' tendency to act out with conflicting mood swings.<ref>Santrock, J. W. 2008. ''Adolescence''. New York: [[McGraw-Hill Education|McGraw-Hill]].</ref>

Although he wrote extensively on child-rearing, including in ''Psychological Care of Infant and Child'', as well as in many popular magazines, Watson later regretted having written in the area altogether, conceding that he "did not know enough" to do a good job.{{citation needed|date=October 2023}}

==== Criticism ====
Critics determined that Watson's ideas mainly stemmed from his beliefs.<ref name="HBR+W" /> How much Rosalie Rayner agreed with her husband's child-rearing ideas has also been an important question, as she later penned an article entitled "I am a Mother of Behaviorist Sons", <ref>Watson, R. R. (1930). I am the mother of a behaviorist’s sons. Parent’s Magazine & Better Family Living, 5(12), 16-18, 67-68.</ref> in which she wrote about the future of their family.<ref>Harris, B. 2014. "Rosalie Rayner, Feminist?" ''Revista de Historia de la Psicología'' 35:61–69.</ref>

R. Dale Nance (1970) worried that Watson's personal indiscretions and difficult upbringings could have affected his views while writing his book. This would include having been raised on a poor farm in South Carolina and having various family troubles, such as abandonment by his father.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Nance|first1=R. D.|year=1970|title=G. Stanley Hall and John B. Watson as child psychologists|journal=Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences|volume=6|issue=4|pages=303–16|doi=10.1002/1520-6696(197010)6:4<303::aid-jhbs2300060402>3.0.co;2-m|pmid=11609658}}</ref> Suzanne Houk (2000) shared similar concerns while analyzing Watson's hope for a businesslike and casual relationship between a mother and her child.<ref name="Houk" /> Houk points out that Watson only shifted his focus to child-rearing when he was fired from [[Johns Hopkins University]] due to his affair with Rayner.<ref name="Houk" /> Laura E. Berk (2008) similarly examines the roots of the beliefs that Watson came to honor, noting the [[Little Albert experiment]] as the inspiration of Watson's emphasis on environmental factors.<ref name=":10">Berk, Laura E. 2008. ''Infants and Children: Prenatal Through Middle Childhood''. IL: [[Pearson Education]].</ref> Little Albert did not fear the rat and white rabbit until he was conditioned to do so. From this experiment, Watson concluded that parents can shape a child's behavior and development simply by a scheming control of all stimulus-response associations.<ref name=":10" />

Watson's advice to treat children with respect but relative [[emotional detachment]], has been strongly criticized. J. M. O'Donnell (1985) deems Watson's views as radical calculations. This discontent stems partly from Watsons' description of a 'happy child', whereby a child can only cry when in physical pain, can occupy himself through his problem-solving abilities, and whereby the child strays from asking questions.<ref>O'Donnell, J. M. 1985. ''The Origins of Behaviorism.'' New York: [[New York University Press]].</ref> Other critics were more wary of Watson's new interest and success in child psychology.{{citation needed|date=August 2020}}