1. Chapter 9: Social learning Theories
PSY 432: Personality Behavior & Learning Theories
Julian Rotter
( )
Albert Bandura
88 years old
Chapter 9: Social learning Theories
Walter Mischel
84 years old

2. Albert Bandura Biographical Background
Was born in in Alberta, Canada in 1925; youngest child, and only son, in a family of six
He received his bachelors degree in Psychology from the University of British Columbia in 1949
He went on to the University of Iowa, where he received his Ph.D. in 1952
It was there that he came under the influence of the behaviorist tradition and learning theory

3. Albert Bandura Biographical Background
During grad school, he would occasionally play golf with friends
Met wife in sand trap; Virginia Varns, who was a teacher at the College of Nursing
Married in 1952 and have two daughters
Bandura and children 
Albert Bandura: Biographical Sketch (n.d.)

4. Albert Bandura Biographical Background
In 1953, he started teaching at Stanford University
While there, he collaborated with his first graduate student, Richard Walters, resulting in their first book, Adolescent Aggression, in 1959
Bandura was president of the APA in 1973, and received the APA’s Award for Distinguished Scientific Contributions in 1980
In 2006, he received the Gold Medal Award for Life Achievement in the Science of Psychology
He continues to work at Stanford to this day

5. Social Cognitive Theory
Bandura does not consider himself a Social Learning Theorist, but prefers Social Cognitive Theory
Comprehensive theory that includes motivational and self regulatory mechanisms
Emphasizes the social origins of human thought process and behavior
Emphasizes cognitive influence on behavior, rather than conditioning influences from the environment

6. An agentic perspective
Bandura (2001)
Views people as agents (originators) of experience; not just reactive
Human agency
Intentionality
Enables us to behave with purpose
Forethought
Allows us to anticipate outcomes
Self-reactiveness
We can be motivated to regulate our actions
Self-reflectiveness
We can reflect on our thoughts and behaviors and make needed modifications

7. Triadic Reciprocal Causation Model
Bandura (1978)
Behavior is the result of interactions among personal characteristics, behavior, environmental factors
Learning results from interactions among three factors:
Personal characteristics
Behavioral patterns
Environmental stimuli

8. Triadic Reciprocal Causation Model
Personal Characteristics
Behavior
Environment

9. Triadic Reciprocal Causation Model
Bandura (1978)
Self-system
Cognitive structures that provide reference mechanisms
Self
A group of cognitive processes and structures by which people relate to the environment and that shape their behavior

10. Learning Through Observation
Learning that occurs by observing and imitating others (the person being observed is referred to as the model)
Bandura et al. (1977)
Major factors that influence modeling
Characteristics of the model
Influenced more by those who are similar to ourselves; simpler actions; aggressive actions
Attributes of the observer
Low self-esteem; dependent personality types; motivated individuals
Reward consequences associated with a behavior
Self-efficacy

11. Learning Through Observation
Process of Observational Learning
Attentional processes
More noticeable, more easily copied
Retention processes
Verbal; images
Motor production processes
Successful motor production requires cognitive organization of the response, monitoring of the response, and refinement of the response
Motivational processes
We must value the response

12. Learning Through Observation
Bandura, Ross, & Ross (1961)
Procedure
Phase 1
Pre-schoolers were divided into two groups and put into two separate rooms and allowed to play with "attractive" toys while “Bobo” an unattractive inflatable, adult-sized, egg-shaped balloon creature sat by itself at the far end of the rooms
Bobo 

13. Learning Through Observation
Bandura, Ross, & Ross (1961)
Phase 2
Group 1: While playing with the attractive toys the children witnessed adults enter the room and start beating the daylights out of the clown
Group 2: While playing with the attractive toys the children witnessed adults enter the room and play nicely with Bobo
Phase 3
Both groups brought into the same room
The attractive toys were taken away from each group

14. Learning Through Observation
Results
Experimental group: These kids modeled the behavior; Even added aggressive acts that had not been modeled
Bandura, Ross, & Ross (1961)

15. Learning Through Observation
Criticisms
Bobo doll is unrealistic set-up; no external validity
Bias towards the production of aggression

16. Types of Reinforcement in Observational Learning
Bandura (1977)
Extrinsic reinforcement
Intrinsic reinforcement
Vicarious reinforcement
Self-reinforcement

17. From Reinforcement to Self-regulation
Bandura (1991)
Posits that human behavior is motivated by self-regulation
Self-monitoring
Self-judgment
Affective self-reaction

18. Aggression, inhumane behavior, & moral disengagement
Bandura (1973)
Exposure to violence in media leads to aggressive acts by children
Aggressive filmed model just as effective as live model
Real clown just as effective as Bobo clown

19. Aggression, inhumane behavior, & moral disengagement
Modeling is apparent with copycat acts of aggression; dangerous behavior
Doomsday Flight 1966 TV movie is a classic example
The Program (1993 screen film) and Money Train (1995 screen film) are others
Click on picture for news report
Click on picture for video clip 

20. Modeling’s positive effect…
Friedrich & Stein (1972)
The Mister Rogers Study
Showed a preschool group Mister Rogers every weekday for four weeks
During the viewing period, children from less educated homes became more cooperative, helpful, and more likely to state their feelings

21. Sesame Street is doing its part…
Social Cognitive Theory applied here…
Maybe a new name?
Kudos to Cookie Monster and his friends
Cookie Monster making healthier choices

22. SpongeBob may cause preschoolers to act “hurried”
Lillard & Peterson (2011)
Frantic pace can cause preschoolers to act “frantically”
Bad news for SpongeBob and friends 

23. Aggression, inhumane behavior, & moral disengagement
Bandura (1986)
Moral Disengagement
The process of convincing oneself that ethical standards do not apply to them in a particular context
The process seems to permit individuals and institutions to take part in violence and other inhumane activities
Their behavior is justified or exonerated
Rationalization, minimizing, displacement, etc. are used to help in this respect

24. Self-Efficacy
Bandura (1977)
The belief that we can perform an action successfully
A judgment of personal capacity

25. Psychotherapy & behavior Modification
Modeling has been used to reduce fears in children and adults
Increase self-efficacy

26. Bandura’s Theory Strengths Strong emphasis on experimental research
Clinical application; using modeling as a form of psychotherapy
Blend of internal and external variables add holistic value to his ideas; allows for analysis of a wide range of behaviors
Appreciated that his experiments were based on philosophical assumptions; yet he avoided elevating his empirical conclusions into philosophical ones
Not guilty of overextending his findings

27. Bandura’s Theory Weaknesses Ethical issues of using aggressive models
In order to develop self-regulation and self-efficacy in the classroom, there must be enough time to create a sense of mastery in each subject
Unfortunately, that time may not always be available
Unconscious mind not considered

28. Julian Rotter Biographical Background Born in Brooklyn in 1916
In high school, he became familiar with the writings of Freud and Adler
Undergrad: Majored in chemistry at Brooklyn College
Got MA at University of Iowa
In 1941, received a PhD in clinical psychology from Indiana University
Published Social Learning and Clinical Psychology in 1954
Moved to the University of Connecticut in and remained there after retirement
Died in 2014

29. Internal vs. External Control of reinforcement
Rotter's devised the most famous scale for measuring generalized expectancies (1966)
Internal-External Control Scale (I-E Scale)
Attempts to measure our locus of control
The degree to which people perceive a causal relationship between their own efforts and environmental consequences

30. Locus of Control Gender
Males tend to be more internal than females when it comes to personal successes
Rotter attributed this to cultural norms that emphasize aggressive behavior in males and submissive behavior in females
However, he predicted that as societal structures change, this difference will be minimized

31. Locus of Control
Age
As people get older, they tend to become more internal
This may be due to the fact that as children, individuals do not have much control over their lives
Additionally, people higher up in organizational structures tend to be more internal

32. Locus of Control Moderation is best
Rotter felt that an extreme belief in either internal or external locus of control is unrealistic and unhealthy

33. Predicting Behavior
Rotter suggested four variables that must be analyzed in order to make accurate predictions in any specific situation
Behavior potential
Expectancy
Reinforcement value
Psychological situation

34. Predicting Specific Behaviors
Behavior Potential
Behavior potential is the possibility that a particular response will occur at a given time and place in relation to its likely reinforcement
Expectancy
People's expectancy in any given situation is their confidence that a particular reinforcement will follow a specific behavior in a specific situation or situations
Expectancies can be either general or specific, and the overall likelihood of success is a function of both generalized and specific expectancies

35. Predicting Specific Behaviors
Reinforcement Value
Reinforcement value is a person's preference for any particular reinforcement over other reinforcements if all are equally likely to occur
Psychological Situation
The psychological situation is that part of the external and internal world to which a person is responding
Behavior is a function of the interaction of people with their meaningful environment

36. Walter Mischel Biographical Background
Mischel was born in 1930 in Vienna, Austria, fleeing with his family to the United States after the Nazi occupation in 1938
He grew up in Brooklyn, New York and studied under George Kelly and Julian Rotter at Ohio State University, where he received his Ph.D. in clinical psychology in 1956
Mischel taught at the University of Colorado from 1956 to 1958, at Harvard University from 1958 to 1962, and at Stanford University from 1962 to 1983
Since 1983, Mischel has been in the Department of Psychology at Columbia University

37. Behavioral Specificity
Mischel (1968)
Posits that individual behavior is influenced by the specific situation
We behave consistently in the same manner in different situations only to the extent that these situations lead to similar consequences and have similar meaning for the person
Traits can be helpful in describing behavior, they should not be seen as the sole determinants of behavior

38. A Cognitive-Affective Personality System
Mischel & Shoda (1995)
Mischel does not believe that inconsistencies in behavior are due solely to the situation; he recognizes that inconsistent behaviors reflect stable patterns of variation within a person
People's pattern of variability is their behavioral signature, or their unique and stable pattern of behaving differently in different situations

39. A Cognitive-Affective Personality System
Mischel & Shoda (1995)
The personality dispositions that a person values very highly or those that are integral to his or her goals in life will influence his or her behavior more markedly than other dispositions
The situation won’t affect behavior if its dealing with an important disposition

40. Credits Some slides prepared with the help of the following websites:
cepd pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/.../social%20cognition.pptx
‎psycdweeb.weebly.com/uploads/3/5/2/0/ /albert_bandura.ppt ‎
rinaldipsych.synthasite.com/.../feist7e_ppt_ch17_Rotter_Mischel.ppt‎
faculty.caldwell.edu/Jpedoto/Big%20Five-trait%20Controversy%202.ppt ‎