Classical Conditioning in Brave New World

By Sheeta Mo

Science fiction reflects science progress at the time it was written. Authors apply their wild imaginations to scientific breakthroughs to visualise the world of tomorrow. What if we analyse a science fiction masterpiece with real science? Would the description be accurate or outdated? Does it present a possible future of where we are heading? The wonders jumped into my head as I read Brave New World. To ease my curiosity, I decided to draw parallels between the novel and Forty Studies that Changed Psychology by Roger R. Hock.

Brave New World by Aldous Huxley is one of the world’s classic science fiction novels. It depicted a dystopian future of our society where science was used to control people. Biological applications and psychological theories were combined to manufacture citizens into replaceable gears as early as they were embryos. I will focus on the psychological methods used to manipulate people’s minds suggested in the book.

Children were conditioned with phobias to fix them in their predetermined social classes. It was done with an extremely unethical approach, by electrocuting and scaring babies in the “INFANT NURSERIES. NEO-PAVLOVIAN CONDITIONING ROOMS” [1, p. 19]. The conditioning wired fear with flowers and books. The fear will last a lifetime to keep lower-class citizens away from literature [1].

“Books and loud noises, flowers and electric shocks–already in the infant mind these couples were compromisingly linked; and after two hundred repetitions of the same or a similar lesson would be wedded indissolubly” [1, p. 22].

It sounds overstated and cruel, but theoretically possible. Let’s examine the scene with the Classical conditioning theory of learning. Or you might recognise it as “Pavlov’s Dog”. It might be the most publicly known psychological phenomenon.

Pavlov identified two types of reflexes: unconditioned and conditioned. No learning is needed for unconditioned reflexes as it is automatic and inborn. In contrast, conditioned reflexes need to be established by learning or experience [2]. In Brave New World, the unconditioned reflex would be fear of sudden loud noises, and the conditioned reflex would be to fear flowers and books. Before conditioning, babies crawled towards flowers and books with “little squeals of excitement” [1, p. 21]. Therefore, the items were neutral stimuli [2]. How did neutral stimuli trigger fear, a conditioned response? The simplest way to explain it is through a diagram:

KEY

USC: unconditioned stimulus

UCR: unconditioned response

NS: neutral stimulus

CS: conditioned stimulus

CR: conditioned response

​Step 1	UCS (loud noises & electric shock) → UCR(fear)
Step 2	NS(flowers & books) + UCS(loud noises & electric shock) → UCR(fear)
Step 3	Repeat step 2 for 200 times.
Step 4	CS(flowers & books) → CR(fear)

Figure 1: Diagram adapted from the table in [2] to fit with the article's content

In short, the neutral stimuli were paired with unconditioned stimuli to produce fear. The process was repeated until neutral stimuli became conditioned stimuli. In the end, “the infants shrank away in horror, the volume of their howling suddenly increased” [1, p. 22] when flowers and books were shown to them without electric shocks.

You might think that it was an exaggerated fictional scene based on psychology. Unfortunately, you are wrong. It was almost a direct transcription of the Little Albert experiment carried out by Watson and Ryaner in 1920 [3].

Watson’s morally challenged study involved an 11-month-old baby named “Albert B.” He was aiming to study how emotions can be learnt. Note that Pavlov’s study only focused on reflexes (e.g. secretion of saliva) but not specifically on emotions (e.g. fear). In the experiment, Albert was presented with a white rat and several other fluffy animals and objects. Little Albert was curious, but wasn’t afraid of the objects. Then, a white rat was shown to him again while striking a steel bar to make loud noises behind the baby. Albert was frightened and started crying. The experiment was repeated seven times [3] until little Albert cried and clawed away at the sight of a white rat, even when there were no loud noises [4].

Further observation of Albert showed that conditioning could be generalised, transferred between situations, and persist over time. It meant that Albert was fearful towards not only white mice but also rabbits, fur coats, and even a Santa Claus mask [4]. His fear was not limited to the lab environment. Rather, it happened when Albert was taken to another room. The conditioned emotional response stayed over time, as little Albert was afraid of the same items even after a month of no experiment [3].

Putting it in Brave New World, the babies were likely to fear all flowers and books even if the objects had different features. They would be afraid no matter what environment they were in. It was also possible that they would stay conditioned for a lifetime (especially when there is nothing else in the society to ‘recondition’ them).

“They’ll grow up with what the psychologists used to call an ‘instinctive’ hatred of books and flowers. Reflexes unalterably conditioned” [1, p. 22].

So why is this important? Fictional works are stories after all. However, we should be alarmed if the story sounds too much like real life.

After examining the fictional scene in Brave New World with real psychology, we come to two conclusions:

a) It can be done.

b) It had been done.

Science fiction is fascinating and frightening because the future it visualises could be true. Huxley wrote the novel because he saw trends in our society that might lead us to a similar world where science is manipulated to control and exploit individuals. Conditioning people for control might not be as extreme as Huxley envisioned. It might be done subtly for ‘harmless’ reasons. For example, linking a product with positive emotions to maximise the effect of advertisement.

Science fiction is like a fire alarm. It screams sharp warning when there is any trace of smoke. We might never get a fire, but we all need an alert in our hearts. Hopefully, it never rings.

References

1. A. L. Huxley, Brave New World, Coradella Collegiate Bookshelf Editions, 1932, ch. 2, pp. 19-23. [Online]. Available: http://scotswolf.com/aldoushuxley_bravenewworld.pdf

2. R. R. Hock, “Reading 9: It’s not just about salivating dogs!,” in Forty Studies that Changed Psychology, 7. Editor, Ed., Beijing, China: Ptpress, 2017, ch. 3, sec. 9, pp. 83-90.

3. R. R. Hock, “Reading 10: Little Emotional Albert,” in Forty Studies that Changed Psychology, 7. Editor, Ed., Beijing, China: Ptpress, 2017, ch. 3, sec. 10, pp. 90-96.

4. Psychological Experiments Online. Studies Upon The Behavior Of The Human Infant : Includes Little Albert. (1920). Accessed: 03 20, 2022. [Online Video]. Available: https://video-alexanderstreet-com.ezproxy.auckland.ac.nz/watch/studies-upon-the-behavior-of-the-human-infant-includes-little-albert/transcript?context=channel:psychology

5. Little-albert.jpg, Akron psychology archives, 1920. [Online]. Available: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Little-albert.jpg