ALBERT BANDURA’S SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY:BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

<< HENRY MURRAY’S PERSONOLOGY (CONTINUED)

ALBERT BANDURA’S SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY:Reciprocal Determinism >>

Personality Psychology PSY 405

Lesson 32

ALBERT BANDURA'S SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

Social Learning theorists explain behavior in terms of interaction between cognitive, behavioral and

environmental determinants. Bandura is a Social Learning theorist.

Bandura consider learning principles to be sufficient to explain and predict behavior and behavior change.

The focus is on interaction, between the external stimuli and internal cognitions in a social context.

1-Bandura suggests most human behavior is learned by observation. In Modeling we observe the behavior

of others and use the information as a guide for our own behavior.

2-Bandura and his colleagues have demonstrated that subjects allowed to observe a set of responses

performed by another individual (the model) tend to exhibit these same responses (model) when placed in a

similar setting.

Example: Our behavior develops as a result of observational learning. We observe the available models

and imitate these models. Such as our parents, teachers, politicians, film heroes, celebrities and even

fictional characters like Superman, Spiderman.

1- Biographical Sketch

2- Reconceptualization of Reinforcement

3-Principles of Observational Learning

Attentional Process

ii)

Retention Processes

iii)

Production Process

iv)

4-Motivational Processes

4-Reciprocal Determinism

5-The Self-System

Self-Observation

ii)

Judgmental Process

iii)

Self-Reaction

6-Applications to Therapy

7- Research

8- Summary

9-Evaluation

1-BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Bandura received his graduate training in clinical psychology at the University of Iowa, which awarded

him the Ph.D. in 1952. After a year of postdoctoral clinical training, Bandura accepted, in 1953, a position

at Stanford University, where he was professor of Social Science. He has served as chairman of the

Stanford Department of Psychology and in 1974 was elected to the presidency of the American

Psychological Association. Bandura has been the recipient of the Distinguished Scientist Award of the

American Psychological Association's Division of Clinical Psychology, the Distinguished Scientific

Contribution Award from the American Psychological Association, and the Distinguished Contribution

Award of the International Society for Research on Aggression.

Bandura has presented his theory in a series of books, with the late Richard Walters as junior author.

Bandura (1959) wrote Adolescent aggression, a detailed report of a field study in which social learning

principles were used to analyze the personality development of a group of middle-class delinquent boys,

followed by Social learning and personality development (1963), a volume in which he and Walters

133

Personality Psychology PSY 405

presented the social learning principles they had developed and the evidence on which the theory was

based. In 1969 Bandura published Principles of behavior modification, in which he outlined the application

of behavioral techniques based on learning principles to the modification of behavior, and in 1973, he

published Aggression: A social learning analysis. Social learning-theory (1977b).in which Bandura has

"attempted to provide a unified theoretical framework for analyzing human thought and behavior" (p. vi),

remains his clearest theoretical statement to date, although his Social foundations of thought and action

(1986) provides a more detailed treatment of the theory. In' addition to these theoretical statements,

Bandura and his students have contributed an extensive series of empirical articles.

In common with most learning theory approaches to personality, social learning theory is based on the

premise that human behavior is largely acquired and that the principles of learning are sufficient to account

for the development and maintenance of that behavior.

In the course of observing others behavior, individuals learn to imitate that behavior or in some way model

themselves after others. In their 1941book, Social leaning and imitation, Miller and Dollard had recognized

the significant role played by imitative processes in personality development and had sought to develop

explanations of certain kinds of imitative behavior. Bandura's 1974 article, "Behavior theories and the

models of man," provides a relatively summary of his point of view:

"Our theories have been incredibly slow in acknowledging that man can learn by observation as well as by

direct experience. . . . The rudimentary form of learning based on direct experience has been exhaustively

studied, whereas the more pervasive and powerful mode of learning by observation is largely ignored. A

shift of emphasis is needed. (p. 863)"

Bandura's career has been devoted to encouraging that shift.

2- Reconceptualization of Reinforcement

Bandura greatly broadens the definition of reinforcement. When people observe the outcomes of their own

behavior and the behavior of others, they develop hypotheses about the likely consequences of producing

that behavior in the future. This information then serves as a guide for subsequent behavior. Accurate

hypotheses produce successful performance, and inaccurate hypotheses lead to ineffective behavior.

(Notice the similarity to George Kelly's point about "construing replications) In other words, reinforcers

provide information about what a person must do in order to secure desired outcomes and to avoid

punishing outcomes. As a consequence, reinforcement can only occur when a person is aware of the

contingencies and anticipates that they will apply to future behavior. Humans' ability to anticipate outcomes

also accounts for the incentive value of reinforcers: "By representing foreseeable outcomes symbolically,

people can convert future consequences into current motivators of behavior. Most actions are thus largely

under anticipatory control" (Bandura, 1977b, p; 18). For Bandura, then, a reinforcer functions primarily as

"an informative and motivational operation rather than as a mechanical response strengthener" (1977b, p.

21). As a consequence, Bandura considers "regulation" to be a more appropriate term than "reinforcement."

Bandura also rejects the Skinnerian understanding of how reinforcement functions. In observational

learning, reinforcement serves as "an antecedent" rather than a "consequent" influence. That is, anticipated

reinforcement is one of several factors that can influence a person to pay attention to a model, and it can

also encourage a person to rehearse the behavior that has been observed. From Bandura's point of view

reinforcement facilitates learning in an anticipatory manner by encouraging the observer to pay attention

and to rehearse the observed behavior. Bandura even proposes that direct reinforcement is not necessary in

order for learning to occur.

Bandura adds two other types of reinforcement to the classical concept of "direct reinforcement" as a

stimulus whose presence increases the frequency of occurrence for a behavior with which it is paired. First,

"self-reinforcement" occurs when an individual compares his or her own behavior to internal standard. If

the behavior meets those standards, the person may experience satisfaction, or pride, but if the behavior

violates or falls short of those standards the person responds with guilt, shame, or dissatisfaction.

Bandura is suggesting that any behavior produces two sets of consequences: self-evaluations and external

outcomes. External consequences have the greatest effect on behavior when they are compatible with self

generated consequences. Behavior is maintained by its consequences, but those consequences are not only

134

Personality Psychology PSY 405

externally applied.

As a second new type of reinforcement, Bandura suggests that "vicarious reinforcement" occurs when an

individual witnesses someone else experience reinforcing or punishing consequences for a behavior, and

that individual anticipates similar consequences if she or he produces the same behavior, Thus, an

individual may be reinforced without producing a behavior or experiencing a consequence. "Observed

consequences can change behavior in much the same manner as directly experienced consequences". Much

as Skinner had suggested that Thorndike's trial-and-error learning was an inefficient and unlikely way to

acquire complex behaviors, so Bandura suggests that Skinner's operant conditioning is an Impractical and

dangerous means for humans to acquire many behaviors. In contrast, most human behavior is learned

observationally by modeling: We observe the behavior of others and use the information as a guide for our

own subsequent behavior. We turn now to Bandura's description of modeling.

3- Principles of Observational Learning

Bandura (1962, 1977b, 1986) proposes that a fundamental way humans acquire skills and behaviors is by

observing the behavior of others. Such observational learning, or modeling, is governed by four constituent

processes: attention, retention, production, and motivation .

i- Attentional Process

People cannot learn anything unless they pay attention to and accurately perceive significant features of the

to-be-modeled behavior. We are most likely to pay attention to behaviors that are salient, simple, and

promise to have some functional value. As a consequence, a model that is vivid, attractive, competent, and

seen repeatedly is more likely to catch our attention. In addition, what a person notices is influenced by his

or her knowledge base and current orientation. The characteristics of the observers also determine how

much imitative behavior takes place in a given situation.

The characteristics of both the model and observer often jointly determine what will occur? A particularly

informative study showing the interplay of model and observer was performed by Hetherington and

Frankie (1967) with young children and their parents. The Investigators first determined by observing the

parents the degree of warmth and nurturance each expressed toward the child and which parent was

dominant in matters of child care. Subsequently, the child watched each parent play with toys and games

supplied by the investigator, following which the child was allowed to play with the same materials and the

amount of his or her Imitative behavior recorded. Children of both sexes were much more likely to imitate

a warm, nurturant parent than a cool or punitive one, but the largest effect was found with girls whose

mothers were warm. By and large, the dominant parent also commanded more Imitative behavior, although

when the father was dominant, girls imitated the mother somewhat more than the father.

ii-Retention Processes

A behavior cannot be reproduced unless we have remembered it by coding it in symbolic form. Retention

of observed behavior depends mainly upon mental Images and verbal representations. Memory can be

enhanced by organization of the material and by rehearsal. The material that is retained often is transformed

to correspond to some existing knowledge or expectation on the part of the learner.

iii-Production Process

The learner must be able to reproduce the behavior that has been observed. An observed behavior, no

matter how well it has been retained, cannot be enacted without the necessary skills and abilities.

Sometimes the production problem stems from a lack of the requisite cognitive or motor skills, but often It

reflects the performer's lack of feedback about what she or he actually is doing. This is true in learning

many athletic skills, but it also is a frequent problem with social behaviors. "It can be extremely

informative, and unnerving, to see or hear tapes of our own behavior. Trial and error, practice, and

feedback all contribute to what is often a gradual process of translating knowledge Into action.

iv- Motivational Processes

Bandura's social learning theory emphasizes the distinction between acquisition and performance because

people do not enact everything they learn. Performance of observed behavior is influenced by three kinds

of Incentives: direct, vicarious, and self-administered. A learned behavior will be enacted if it leads directly

135

Personality Psychology PSY 405

to a desired outcome, if it has been observed to be effective for the model, or if it is self-satisfying. In other

words, we are likely to produce a behavior if we believe that it is in our best interest to do so.

136

Table of Contents: