Macabre Unit are a grime crew from Bedford. Macabre Unit are known to be th… Read Full Bio ↴Macabre Unit are a grime crew from Bedford. Macabre Unit are known to be the biggest crew hailing from the area of Bedford, and are associated with Ice Cream Inc. and London Road Crew (LRC).
Producers: 9ner, R.Demon, Projects, Doom, Raff, Shaq, Droid, Blaze, Nasher, Nusense
DJs: R.Demon, Wreckless, Raff, Droid, Dappa
MCs: 9Ner, Dodge/D-Low, Nusense, N-Do, Loq, Skeppy, Brut Kid, Venom, Genesis, Primal, Gidney, Toxic, Blaze, Nasher, Dia-Bolic, Gamma/Septic, Logical, Gat-Man, Endo
Toxic is currently serving a prison sentence for armed robbery.
Producers: 9ner, R.Demon, Projects, Doom, Raff, Shaq, Droid, Blaze, Nasher, Nusense
DJs: R.Demon, Wreckless, Raff, Droid, Dappa
MCs: 9Ner, Dodge/D-Low, Nusense, N-Do, Loq, Skeppy, Brut Kid, Venom, Genesis, Primal, Gidney, Toxic, Blaze, Nasher, Dia-Bolic, Gamma/Septic, Logical, Gat-Man, Endo
Toxic is currently serving a prison sentence for armed robbery.
More Genres
No Artists Found
More Artists
Load All
No Albums Found
More Albums
Load All
No Tracks Found
Genre not found
Artist not found
Album not found
Search results not found
Song not found
Zombie
Macabre Unit Lyrics
No lyrics text found for this track.
The lyrics are frequently found in the comments by searching or by filtering for lyric videos
The lyrics are frequently found in the comments by searching or by filtering for lyric videos
@peachxii2079
Explanation: While the experiment is one of psychology's most famous and is included in nearly every introductory psychology course, it is widely criticized for several reasons. First, the experimental design and process were not carefully constructed. Watson and Rayner did not develop an objective means to evaluate Albert's reactions, instead of relying on their own subjective interpretations.
The experiment also raises many ethical concerns. Little Albert was harmed during this experiment—he left the experiment with a previously nonexistent fear. By today's standards, the Little Albert experiment would not be allowed.
What Ethical Guidelines Do Psychologists Follow?
What Happened to Little Albert?
The question of what happened to Little Albert has long been one of psychology's mysteries. Before Watson and Rayner could attempt to "cure" Little Albert, he and his mother moved away. Some envisioned the boy growing into a man with a strange phobia of white, furry objects.
Recently, the true identity and fate of the boy known as Little Albert was discovered. As reported in American Psychologist, a seven-year search led by psychologist Hall P. Beck led to the discovery.1 After tracking down and locating the original experiments and the real identity of the boy's mother, it was suggested that Little Albert was actually a boy named Douglas Merritte.
The story does not have a happy ending, however. Douglas died at the age of six on May 10, 1925, of hydrocephalus (a build-up of fluid in his brain), which he had suffered from since birth. "Our search of seven years was longer than the little boy’s life," Beck wrote of the discovery.
In 2012, Beck and Alan J. Fridlund reported that Douglas was not the healthy, normal child Watson described in his 1920 experiment.3 They presented convincing evidence that Watson knew about and deliberately concealed the boy's neurological condition. These findings not only cast a shadow over Watson's legacy, but they also deepened the ethical and moral issues of this well-known experiment.
In 2014, doubt was cast over Beck and Fridlund's findings when researchers presented evidence that a boy by the name of William Barger was the real Little Albert.4 Barger was born on the same day as Merritte to a wet-nurse who worked at the same hospital as Merritte's mother. While his first name was William, he was known his entire life by his middle name, Albert.
While experts continue to debate the true identity of the boy at the center of Watson's experiment, there is little doubt that Little Albert left a lasting impression on the field of psychology. CREDIT GOES TO Ilikehorses #SaveUkraine I DID NOT TYPE ANYTHING BESIDES CREDIT AND THE TOP THING Saying explanation
@lGNITED
This experiment is terrifying, it had MANY flaws with the experiment. For those who don't get it.
Here's an explanation.
Albert played with many animals and interacted with them well, however, they'd make a loud sound whenever he interacted with the white mouse, scarring him and making him have a fear of white furry stuff, ever since then they tried tests with similar things with the white rat, white, furry, anything that's like that will scare Albert, but with other animals he'd interact with them well.
The point of this experiment was to show evidence of "classical conditioning and stimulus generalization in humans".
The experiment has been heavily criticized.
1. Albert was harmed during this experiment while just being a baby.
2. The experiment wasn't carefully constructed, the design of the experiment wasn't proper, they were based off of Albert's reactions, "Is he going to run?" "Is he going to get away?" "Is he going to like the noise?", it was all based on reactions off of Albert, basically, they didn't have an objective and they went off with Albert's reactions.
It gets worse.
After trying to search for Albert, they found out his name is Douglas Merritte, however in the 7 years of searching, he died when he was 6, "Our search of seven years was longer than the little boy’s life.".
@ILikeHorsesss
While the experiment is one of psychology's most famous and is included in nearly every introductory psychology course, it is widely criticized for several reasons. First, the experimental design and process were not carefully constructed. Watson and Rayner did not develop an objective means to evaluate Albert's reactions, instead of relying on their own subjective interpretations.
The experiment also raises many ethical concerns. Little Albert was harmed during this experiment—he left the experiment with a previously nonexistent fear. By today's standards, the Little Albert experiment would not be allowed.
What Ethical Guidelines Do Psychologists Follow?
What Happened to Little Albert?
The question of what happened to Little Albert has long been one of psychology's mysteries. Before Watson and Rayner could attempt to "cure" Little Albert, he and his mother moved away. Some envisioned the boy growing into a man with a strange phobia of white, furry objects.
Recently, the true identity and fate of the boy known as Little Albert was discovered. As reported in American Psychologist, a seven-year search led by psychologist Hall P. Beck led to the discovery.1 After tracking down and locating the original experiments and the real identity of the boy's mother, it was suggested that Little Albert was actually a boy named Douglas Merritte.
The story does not have a happy ending, however. Douglas died at the age of six on May 10, 1925, of hydrocephalus (a build-up of fluid in his brain), which he had suffered from since birth. "Our search of seven years was longer than the little boy’s life," Beck wrote of the discovery.
In 2012, Beck and Alan J. Fridlund reported that Douglas was not the healthy, normal child Watson described in his 1920 experiment.3 They presented convincing evidence that Watson knew about and deliberately concealed the boy's neurological condition. These findings not only cast a shadow over Watson's legacy, but they also deepened the ethical and moral issues of this well-known experiment.
In 2014, doubt was cast over Beck and Fridlund's findings when researchers presented evidence that a boy by the name of William Barger was the real Little Albert.4 Barger was born on the same day as Merritte to a wet-nurse who worked at the same hospital as Merritte's mother. While his first name was William, he was known his entire life by his middle name, Albert.
While experts continue to debate the true identity of the boy at the center of Watson's experiment, there is little doubt that Little Albert left a lasting impression on the field of psychology.
@meowtaindewd
the little albert experiment didn’t “go wrong” it went exactly as they suspected it would; it was just extremely unethical.
@chibiusa995
i was just about to say that
@chibiusa995
they were testing classical conditioning and it worked
@soumyatripathi2047
Exactly
@eshalthegreat2857
Actually can anyone of you tell me what happened because i just don't get it.
@soumyatripathi2047
@Eshal The Great see so basically this was an experiment done to show how classical conditioning works classical conditioning is a type of learning. Here a little boy name Albert was the subject here his behavior is being observed. Little Albert was presented with a white rat and he showed no fear.
They then presented the rat with a loud bang that startled Little Albert and made him cry.
After the continuous association of the white rat and loud noise, Little Albert was classically conditioned to experience fear at the sight of the rat.
Albert's fear generalized to other stimuli that were similar to the rat, including a fur coat, some cotton wool, and a Father Christmas mask.
@picklesandoxfordcommas
any "experiment" done on a baby is unethical from the start.
@ChamStar625
This is the comment I was looking for
@iamthespiderunderyourbed
Depends, if its just like idk like this diaper vs that one or smth like that. JUST NOT THIS TF
@kira7601
I mean it depends, if it's something innocent, that cannot be bad in any way for the baby, it's okay i guess.
Small actions, for example, asking questions or see the reaction of the baby in front of harmless things.