The Little Albert study, conducted by Watson and Rayner, holds a significant place in the history of psychology. Confirming Little Albert’s true identity has become an important topic of discussion within the psychological community. Since 2009, when Beck et al. conducted research suggesting that Little Albert was Douglas Merritte, doubts have arisen and opinions have varied. In 2014, Digdon et al. proposed another candidate, Albert Barger, as Little Albert. On the centennial anniversary of Watson’s publication of the Little Albert study, both teams engaged in scholarly debates about identifying Little Albert, which were featured in published articles involved academic journal editors. This debate revolves around whether revealing Little Albert’s actual identity raises moral concerns about Watson’s experiment, the subsequent impact on Little Albert’s physical and mental well-being, and the sensationalized reporting of the study’s results. The “archive fever,” “colonial historiography,” and “critical research” aspects of the Little Albert study serve as inspiration for the study of modern Chinese psychological history.
