1. Bandura Developmental Psychology The Core Studies

2. Background Observational learning – learning through observation of that behaviour in another individual (known as a model) Identification – an idea from the social learning theory, that we identify with a model when we adopt their behaviour in order to become like them. Social learning theory - is an approach to child development which states that children develop through learning from other people around them.

3. Aims & hypotheses To investigate whether behaviours learnt by children by imitation in one setting could be repeated in a different setting even when the adult model was not present Participants exposed to an aggressive model would be more likely to reproduce similar acts of aggression than those exposed to a non- aggressive model and those who did not see a model at all. Participants exposed to a non-aggressive model would be less aggressive than those not exposed to a model at all. Participants would imitate aggression modelled by a same sex adult more than that modelled by an opposite-sex adult. Boys would be more inclined than girls to imitate aggression

4. Sample There was a total of 72 participants All children from the nursery school of Stanford University. 36 males 36 females Ages ranged from 37 months to 69 months Mean age was 52 months

5. Method Lab experiment Elements of observation Independent measures/matched pairs Snapshot study IV: The gender of the child, gender of the model, behaviour of the model DV: Children’s level of aggression when given a bobo doll

6. Controls All were in the rooms for the same amount of time All children played with the same bobo doll The children in each condition were matched according to aggression levels so that this did not become a confounding variable. They did this by observing the children in the nursery and judged their aggressive behaviour on four 5-point rating scales. It was then possible to match the children in each group so that they had similar levels of aggression in their everyday behaviour.

7. Splitting of participants As stated, there were 36 boys and 36 girls Firstly, the participants were split into three groups (the conditions) of 24 24 witnessed an aggressive male model, 24 witnessed a non aggressive model and 24 did not witness a model (control group) From there, the participants were split again according to gender of the child and model

8. Splitting of participants Aggressive model No model Non- aggressive model 6 boys agg male 6 boys agg fema 6 girls agg male 6 boys non agg m 6 boys non agg f 6 girls agg fema 6 girls non agg m 6 girls non agg f 12 boys12 girls

9. Procedure Stage 1 – Modelling the behaviour children were brought to the experimental room by the experimenter, and the model, who was in the hallway outside the room, was invited to come in and join in the game. The room was set out for play and the activities were chosen because they had been noted to have high interest for nursery school children. One corner was arranged as the child's play area, where there was a small table and chair, potato prints and picture stickers. After settling the child in its corner the adult model was escorted to the opposite corner of the room where there was a small table, chair, tinker- toy set, a mallet and a five foot inflatable Bobo doll. After the model was seated the experimenter left the experimental room. In the non- aggressive condition, the model ignored Bobo and assembled the tinker- toys in a quiet, gentle manner. In the aggressive condition the model began by assembling the tinker-toys, but after one minute turned to Bobo and was aggressive to the doll in a very stylised and distinctive way. An example of physical aggression was "raised the Bobo doll and pommeled it on the head with a mallet", An example of verbal aggression was, "Pow!" and "Sock him in the nose". After ten minutes the experimenter entered and took the child to a new room which the child was told was another games room.

10. Procedure Stage 2 – Aggression Arousal the child was subjected to 'mild aggression arousal'. The child was taken to a room with relatively attractive toys. As soon as the child started to play with the toys the experimenter told the child that these were the experimenter's very best toys and she had decided to reserve them for the other children.

11. Procedure Stage 3 – Test for delayed imitation Then the child was taken to the next room for stage 3 of the study where the child was told it could play with any of the toys in there. The experimenter stayed in the room "otherwise a number of children would either refuse to stay alone, or would leave before termination of the session". In this room there was a variety of both non-aggressive and aggressive toys. The non- aggressive toys included a tea set, crayons, three bears and plastic farm animals. The aggressive toys included a mallet and peg board, dart guns, and a 3 foot Bobo doll. The child was kept in this room for 20 minutes during which time their behaviour was observed by judges through a one-way mirror. Observations were made at 5-second intervals therefore giving 240 response units for each child.

12. Response measures Three measures of imitation were obtained. The observers looked for responses from the child that were very similar to the display by the adult model. These were: Imitation of physical aggression (for example, punching the doll in the nose) Imitative verbal aggression (for example, repeating the phrases "Pow!" or "Sock him in the nose".) Imitative non-aggressive verbal responses (for example child repeats “He keeps coming back for more”)

13. How observations were carried out Data was gathered by two observers (the male model and another observer) who watched the final 20 minute session, during which the child could play with a variety of toys including a bobo doll. The observers rated the child’s behaviour in terms of pre-determined response categories whilst sitting in an adjoining observation room and watching the child through a one-way mirror. The observers recorded what the child was doing every 5 seconds. Responses were recorded in the following categories and provided an aggression score: imitative aggression responses, partially imitative responses, non- imitative responses.

14. Results 1. The children in the aggressive model condition made more aggressive responses than the children in the non-aggressive model condition 2. Boys made more aggressive responses than girls; 3. The boys in the aggressive model conditions showed more aggressive responses if the model was male than if the model was female; 4. The girls in the aggressive model conditions also showed more physical aggressive responses if the model was male but more verbal aggressive responses if the model was female; (However, the exception to this general pattern was the observation of how often they punched Bobo, and in this case the effects of gender were reversed).

15. Conclusions The findings support Bandura's Social Learning Theory. That is, children learn social behaviour such as aggression through the process of observation learning - through watching the behaviour of another person. Witnessing aggression in a model can be enough to produce aggression by an observer. This is important because it had been widely believed prior to the study that learning aggression was a more gradual process. Children selectively imitate gender specific behaviour. Thus boys are more likely to imitate physically aggression and girls are more likely to imitate verbal aggression.

16. Strengths of the study Collected quantitative data therefore can be analysed statistically and the experimental groups could be easily compared together Experiments are the only means by which cause and effect can be established. Thus it could be demonstrated that the model did have an effect on the child's subsequent behaviour because all variables other than the independent variable are controlled. Inter-rater-reliability was present within the study therefore can be seen as a reliable source

17. Weaknesses A few ethical guidelines are broken which can make the study seem unethical. For example, the right to withdraw, due to the participant’s age and them being children, was restricted. They may have also suffered from psychological harm after witnessing aggression. Ecological validity of the study can be seen as low because the study is a laboratory experiment, thus making the situation very unrealistic to real life. The aggression displayed is also very artificial so can be seen as invalid. In real life situations with fighting, the opponent can hit back, there can be emotions such as empathy involved so it is very unrealistic.

18. Evaluation of the Sample Equal number of boys (36) and girls (36) so the sample was representative of both genders and results in relation to learning aggression from adult models could be generalised to all (American) children. Due to them all being American children however, the sample can be seen as being ethnocentric, restricting the sample from being generalizable to how all children all over the world learn aggression and copy it.

19. Changes to the study Reduce ethnocentrism by taking a sample from all over Conduct the study in natural environment (at home) Make the models familiar for the child Improve ethics