Editing John B. Watson (section)

==== 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}}