By: Kurtis Baker Kelli Fuentes

 Born in 1925 in Alberta, Canada  Grew up in a small town  Enrolled in University of British Columbia  Enrolled an in introductory Psychology class almost by chance  Majored in psychology  Graduated in 1949  Went to graduate school at the University of Iowa, graduated in 1952  In 1974 he was elected president of the American Psychological Association

 Bandura believed that learning in social situations goes beyond anything Skinner and most learning theorist described  Bandura believed we learn a great deal through imitation  We acquire considerable information just by observing models  "Learning would be exceedingly laborious, not to mention hazardous, if people had to rely solely on the effects of their own actions to inform them what to do,” Bandura explained (Bandura, 1977). His theory integrates a continuous interaction between behaviors, cognitions, and the environment.

 Experiment examining how children observe aggressive models, notice when they are reinforced, and imitate accordingly  4-year-olds watch film in which an adult male model engaged in some moderately novel aggressive behavior  Punching, shouting, laying hands on the Bobo Doll  Aggression rewarded, Aggression punished, no- consequences  After watching, children were escorted into a room with a Bobo doll and other toys  Children who saw the model punished imitated less than the other children

Self-Efficacy: The belief in oneself. The belief that one is capable of performing in a certain manner to attain certain goals Actual Performance: Repeatedly succeeding at tasks which increase our belief in our abilities to succeed, or vice versa Vicarious Experiences: When we see others succeed at a task we infer that we can do it too Verbal Persuasion: Pep talks, when someone convinces us that we can perform a task or vice versa Psychological Cues: body feelings that one may get before performing a task that may influence their success in a good or bad way

 Albert Bandura’s theory on self-efficacy proposes that actual performance is the most influential source of self-efficacy. Will children who perform a certain task, in our project this will be dropping clips straight down into a bottle, feel more motivated through actual performance, vicarious experience, or by verbal persuasion?  "By sticking it out through tough times, people emerge from adversity with a stronger sense of efficacy." From Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, 1994

 We believe that since the children are of a younger age they will have enough confidence or willingness to try a task and complete it. We believe there will be children who are hesitant or struggle with the task but with verbal persuasion they will be able to achieve the goal in the end. The most influential source of self-efficacy is going to be vicarious experiences. After the kids see and learn that other kids can perform the task, they will be more likely to accomplish the task given.

 See for yourself!

Group 1- Actual Performance Child’s NameInitial Prediction Actual Number in Attempt #1 Second Prediction After First Attempt Emily221 Ellen312 Meredith101 Whitney222

Group 2- Positive Verbal Persuasion Children’s NameInitial Prediction Second Prediction After “Positive” Pep Talk Actual Number in Attempt of Task Travis442 Shelby442 Jackie231 Lauren341

Group 3- Negative Verbal Persuasion Children’s NameInitial Prediction Second Prediction after “Negative” Pep Talk Actual Number in Attempt of Task Elizabeth320 Denise221 Sara211 Carrie532

Group 4- Vicarious Experience Children’s NameInitial Prediction Second Prediction After Watching Another Succeed in Task Actual Number Martha131 Mike331 Alyssa340 Samantha120

Comparing Outcomes of Predictions Self-Efficacy Appraisals Initial PredictionSecond Prediction Difference Actual Performance 86-2 Positive Verbal Persuasion Negative Verbal Persuasion Vicarious Experience 812+4

Comparing Outcomes of the Actual Number Self-Efficacy AppraisalsActual Number Actual Performance6 Positive Verbal Persuasion6 Negative Verbal Persuasion4 Vicarious Experiences2

 First Point: Each child did have enough confidence and willingness to try the experiment without our verbal persuasion  As for the other part of our hypothesis we were somewhat correct. The biggest increase in the belief in oneself to perform the task was through vicarious experiences. The negative pep talk, however, was also tied at the top.  The source self-efficacy, no matter which one it may be, did not affect the students performances on how well they did  “Self-belief does not necessarily ensure success, but self-disbelief assuredly spawns failure” Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social- Cognitive Theory (1997, p. 77)

 So the results were that self-efficacy and interest increased (or decreased for negative verbal persuasion) the performance varied or remained stable.  Our results did not correlate with Albert Bandura in that while Bandura believed actual performance was the most influential source of self-efficacy, our results showed that the vicarious experience and the negative verbal persuasion influenced the self-efficacy of the children more.

 Different ages of students  More students  Different size bottles the kids can choose from to drop the clothes pins in  Do it in a different setting where the kids can’t get distracted

 Which source of self-efficacy would be more influential as we got older compared to when we are younger?