1. Albert Bandura, Dorothea Ross and Sheila A. Ross
3 Core study Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models
Albert Bandura, Dorothea Ross and Sheila A. Ross

2. Aim
to see if imitated behaviour would be displayed in new settings

3. Background
Bandura and Huston (1961) found that children imitated behaviour exhibited by an adult model.

4. Hypotheses
Subjects exposed to aggressive models would reproduce aggressive acts resembling those of their models.
Observation of non-aggressive models would inhibit aggressive behaviour.
Subjects will imitate the behaviour of a same- sex model more than model of the opposite sex.
Boys would display more aggression than girls.

5. Method
laboratory experiment with controlled observation

6. Independent variables
whether children observe model or not
whether children observe aggressive or not aggressive model
whether children observe same or opposite sex model
gender of child

7. Dependent variables (1)
Number of aggressive acts
imitation of physical aggression
e.g. striking Bobo with mallet
imitative verbal aggression
e.g. saying ‘Sock him!’
imitative non-aggressive verbal responses
e.g. saying ‘He sure is a tough fella.’
sitting on Bobo doll
sits on Bobo doll but is not aggressive with it
There is a lot of information here, students need to know examples of the behaviours, not necessarily all the behaviours.

8. Dependent variables (2)
mallet aggression
e.g. striking object other than Bobo doll with mallet
non-imitative aggression
e.g. punches Bobo doll
non-imitative physical and verbal aggression
aggressive gun play
Number of the times they were observed (behaviour units) in which children played non-aggressively or sat quietly and did not play at all.
There is a lot of information here, students need to know examples of the behaviours, not necessarily all the behaviours.

9. Participants 72 children from Stanford University nursery school
36 boys and 36 girls
age range 37–69 months
mean age 52 months

10. Procedure
Children were observed in nursery by a male model and a teacher and given an aggression rating on physical and verbal aggressions, aggressive inhibition and aggression toward inanimate objects.
Children were divided into eight groups of 6 plus a control group of 24.
They were matched on age, gender and aggression rating.

11. Stage 1
10 minutes
Children in experimental group were taken by an adult to a room and invited by role model to come in and play.
The child was sat at a table with potato prints and stickers.
Model was taken to corner of room with the Bobo doll (5 foot), mallet and a tinker toy.

12. Stage 1 cont (1) In the non-aggressive condition
the adult played with the tinker toys.

13. Stage 1 cont (2) In aggressive condition
the adult began assembling tinker toys
after one minute the adult began being aggressive with Bobo doll:
three repetitions of
laying Bobo doll down, sitting on it and hitting its nose
raising Bobo up and hitting it with the mallet
throwing Bobo up and kicking it around the room
this was interspersed with verbally aggressive responses
‘Sock him in the nose’, ‘Kick him’, ‘He sure is a tough fella’.

14. 2 minutes approximately
Stage 2
2 minutes approximately
The child was taken by experimenter to a second room.
There were lots of attractive toys:
fire engine, doll set, jet fighter plane, doll’s pram
Child was told by experimenter he/she could play.
As soon as child involved, the experimenter told child they were best toys and they were reserved for other children.

15. Stage 3
20 minutes
The child was taken to room not in nursery with variety of toys:
e.g. Bobo doll (3 foot), mallet, dart gun, tea set, crayons, farm animals.
Child was observed through one-way mirror every 5 seconds by male model and one other researcher.
The Bobo doll was scaled down for the children from the 5ft adult-sized Bobo doll

16. Results
Hypothesis 1
Subjects exposed to aggressive models produced significantly more aggressive acts than non-aggressive and control groups.

17. Results
Hypothesis 2
Boys who observed non-aggressive models produced significantly less aggression than control group boys.
No significant differences for girls
Subjects in non-aggressive condition showed significantly more non-aggressive play with dolls than either aggressive or control.
Subjects in non-aggressive condition spend more than twice as much time sitting quietly and not playing than in the aggressive condition.

18. Results
Hypothesis 3
Subjects did imitate the behaviour of same-sex model more than model of opposite sex.
Boys showed more imitation of male models
Girls showed more imitative verbal and more non-imitative aggression of female models.

19. Results
Hypothesis 4
Boys did display more imitative physical aggression than girls.
No difference in verbal aggression
Boys played significantly more with guns and less with tea set, dolls and colouring.

20. Conclusions
Subjects exposed to aggressive models did reproduce aggressive acts resembling those of their models.
Observation of non-aggressive models did inhibit aggressive behaviour.
Subjects did generally imitate the behaviour of same-sex model more than model of opposite sex. However, both boys and girls imitated male model’s aggression more than female model’s aggression.
Boys did display more physical aggression than girls.

21. Controls Adults One male and one female served the role of model.
One experimenter conducted the study of 72 children.
Toys
All toys in stage 3 were arranged in a fixed order.
Observation
Inter-rater reliability of observers was checked by correlation.
There was a one-way mirror.
Blind condition: observers didn’t know the condition the child was in (apart from male model in cases where he was model).