Social Learning Theory (Edexcel A-Level Psychology): Revision Notes

Social Learning Theory

Origins

Social learning theory (SLT) represents a departure from traditional learning theories such as classical and operant conditioning. Rather than explaining behaviour through simple stimulus-response associations or consequences, SLT proposes that learning occurs through observation and imitation of others. This approach is primarily associated with the work of Albert Bandura (born 1925).

The theory suggests that humans and animals acquire behaviours by watching others around them and subsequently copying or imitating what they observe. Individuals who are observed serve as models, and on a daily basis, these models provide examples of behaviour for children to observe and potentially replicate. The theory emphasises that learning is a social process that occurs within a social context, rather than purely through direct experience with environmental stimuli.

Similarly, children are surrounded by numerous potential models including parents, peers, teachers, and media figures who influence their behavioural development.

Key concepts

Role models

Role models are influential individuals in a person's life whom they are more likely to imitate. These may include parents, teachers, peers, or celebrities. The effectiveness of a role model depends on several factors:

• Observers are more likely to reproduce a model's behaviour if they can identify with the role model in some way
• Effective role models are typically the same sex as the observer
• Role models may be admired for having status or power within a social group

Behaviour is more likely to be copied if the observer witnesses the model's actions being reinforced in some way. For example, if a younger sibling watches their older sibling eating their lunch and receives praise for using cutlery properly, they are more inclined to copy this behaviour. Conversely, they are unlikely to imitate eating behaviour that has previously resulted in punishment, such as an older sibling eating with their mouth open.

Vicarious reinforcement

Vicarious reinforcement refers to learning through observing the consequences of another person's behaviour. Rather than experiencing reinforcement directly, individuals learn from witnessing the successes or failures of others. This process means learning from the experiences of role models, allowing individuals to adjust their behaviour based on observed outcomes without needing to experience those outcomes themselves.

Self-efficacy

Self-efficacy represents a person's belief in their own ability to succeed at a particular task or in a specific situation. Bandura argued that imitation of behaviour requires more than simply observing a role model and witnessing reinforcement. The final stage of reproduction depends not merely on external rewards, but on the individual's self-confidence and belief in their capability to perform the behaviour.

The four mediational processes

Bandura theorised that social learning would only occur if four specific criteria were met. These mediational processes bridge the gap between observation and actual performance of behaviour.

Attention

The first requirement for effective modelling (learning by imitating the behaviour of others) is attention. This represents a clear cognitive element that distinguishes SLT from simple stimulus-response theories, as it could result in behaviour being learned but not necessarily performed.

Attention must be directed towards the role model for learning to occur. Several factors influence whether attention will be paid:

• The distinctiveness of the behaviour being modelled
• Characteristics of the person observing
• The individual's level of arousal affects their attentiveness
• Children are more likely to attend to role models who are similar to themselves

Retention

Having focused on the modelled behaviour, the individual must then retain or store what they have observed. Imagery and language assist in retaining information over time. Humans store the behaviours they observe in the form of mental images or verbal descriptors, which can later be recalled when reproducing the behaviour.

This cognitive process of memory formation is essential for the behaviour to be performed at a later time, potentially in a different context from where it was originally observed.

Reproduction

The third criterion involves simply demonstrating the modelled behaviour – the reproduction of what has been observed. Bandura emphasised that factors such as the physical capabilities of the individual, as well as their self-observation of reproduction, affect whether the behaviour can be successfully shown.

Motivation

The final process refers to the incentive to perform the behaviour. If a reward is anticipated, individuals are more likely to reproduce the behaviour they have observed.

Intrinsic motivation refers to performing an activity where the satisfaction comes from the activity itself rather than from some external outcome. For example, a young boy may imitate his father's behaviour and feel good about the copied behaviour because it makes him feel more like his dad.

Extrinsic motivation refers to motivation driven by tangible outcomes or rewards rather than internal satisfaction. For instance, a sportsperson receiving a trophy or medal for their performance exemplifies extrinsic motivation.

Individual differences

Bandura's theory of social learning accounts for individual differences in behaviour through concepts such as self-efficacy and modelling. Self-efficacy relates to how an individual perceives their capabilities to succeed at a particular task and is therefore a purely individual concept. An individual will not attempt to copy a behaviour unless they feel they have the capabilities to do so successfully.

Bandura, Ross and Ross (1961) Bobo doll experiment

Aim

Albert Bandura, Dorothea Ross and Sheila Ross aimed to investigate whether exposure to aggression would influence behaviour. They hypothesised that:

• Children exposed to aggressive role models would imitate the aggression shown
• Children exposed to non-aggressive role models would not show such high levels of aggression
• There would be a gender difference, with boys expected to show more imitated aggressive behaviour than girls

Participants

The study involved 72 children from the Stanford University Nursery School: 36 boys and 36 girls with a mean age of 52 months. The children were divided into eight experimental groups (six in each) and a control group of 24 children.

Procedure

Half the children in the experimental groups observed an aggressive role model, whilst the other half observed a non-aggressive role model. Bandura then split the groups again so that half of the participants in both the non-aggressive and aggressive conditions saw a same-sex role model, whilst the other half saw a role model of the opposite sex. The control group did not experience the presence of a role model and their behaviour would simply be observed when the children were allowed to play with toys in the final condition.

Children were initially brought into a room and instructed on how to play with various implements such as potato prints and stickers to create a scene. Elsewhere in the room was another table with a construction set, a mallet and a Bobo doll. A Bobo doll is an inflatable plastic toy approximately three feet tall, painted to resemble a clown. The doll has a weight in the bottom so that when hit, it falls down and then immediately springs back up. The Bobo doll was a well-known television character at the time and was recognised as an object to be punched.

The children were individually brought into the room by the experimenter and soon after, a model was also brought into the room. The child was placed in one corner of the room and shown how to draw a picture. The model was taken to the opposite corner and seated at the table containing the toys. The experimenter then left the room. The child could only watch the model and overhear the experimenter instruct the model that it was 'their' play area, and the child had no access to it.

In the non-aggressive conditions, the model simply sat in the corner of the room playing quietly with the construction toys and ignoring the Bobo doll.

After a period of ten minutes, the child was taken to another room and given a selection of toys to play with. After two minutes, the child was told that the toys were not for them but for other children, and that the child could play with any toys that would be found in an adjoining room. This situation was designed to provoke mild aggression arousal in the children.

In the next room there was a range of toys categorised as aggressive and non-aggressive for the purposes of the experiment:

Aggressive	Non-aggressive
Bobo doll	Cars and trucks
Mallet with peg board	Tea set
Dart Guns (2)	Farm animal plastic models
'Tetherball'	Dolls (2)
	Crayons and paper
	Bears (3)

Participants spent 20 minutes in this room. The behaviour of the participant was observed through a one-way mirror using interval sampling (observing behaviour at regular time intervals).

Findings

The behaviours of the participants were scored according to three types of imitative behaviour that the children displayed:

1. Imitative verbal aggression – the participant repeated words or phrases that the model said (for example, 'hit him down', 'throw him in the air', 'pow', etc.)

2. Imitative non-aggressive verbal statements – the participant repeated non-aggressive statements said by the model (for example, 'he sure is a tough fella')

3. Imitative physical aggression – the participant re-enacted acts of physical aggression shown by the model (for example, sitting on the Bobo doll and punching the nose, kicking the Bobo doll)

Bandura also noted other categories of behaviour shown by the children:

• Mallet aggression – the participant used the mallet to hit other objects, not just the Bobo doll
• Acts of non-imitative physical or verbal aggression – statements or actions of aggression that were not originally modelled to the children, such as aggression towards other objects other than the Bobo doll, or statements such as 'shoot the Bobo' or 'knock over people'
• Aggressive gun play – the participant aimed the gun at imaginary objects around the room and 'shoots'

Observations of any behaviour that constituted non-aggressive behaviour (sitting quietly, not playing with objects at all) were also recorded.

	Aggressive adult role model	Non-aggressive adult role model	Control group
	Female model	Male model	Female model
Female child	5.5	7.2	2.5
Male child	12.4	25.8	0.2

Table: Mean number of imitative physical aggressive acts (physical and verbal aggression copied from the adult model)

	Aggressive adult role model	Non-aggressive adult role model	Control group
	Female model	Male model	Female model
Female child	21.3	8.4	7.2
Male child	16.2	36.7	26.1

Table: Mean number of non-imitative aggressive acts (physical and verbal aggression directed at targets other than the Bobo doll)

Unsurprisingly, participants in the aggressive model condition tended to display considerably more aggressive acts – both physical and verbal. This was quantitatively established as mean scores from participants in the aggressive condition compared to those in the non-aggressive and control conditions varied considerably.

Key observations from the data included:

• Partial imitation of the model's behaviour, as illustrated by the use of the mallet, was substantially different between conditions. Sitting on the Bobo doll was considerably more common in the aggressive condition compared to the non-aggressive and control conditions
• Participants in the aggressive condition were more likely to display non-imitative aggression
• The original assumption that boys would be more aggressive than girls was only partially confirmed. Boys showed more imitative physical aggression (including acts of aggression, more aggressive play and use of aggressive language) following exposure to a male model than girls. Females exposed to a female role model showed more imitation of verbal aggression and non-imitative aggression than the boys
• Bandura noted that when examining the results for non-aggressive and control conditions, the male model had a greater effect over the behaviour of the participants than the female model
• Girls spent more time playing with dolls, the tea set and engaging in colouring activities. Boys spent more time with guns. Importantly, those participants in non-aggressive conditions, whether male or female, spent double the amount of time sitting quietly in the room not interacting with play equipment at all

Evaluation: Strengths

Bandura's study has undoubtedly made a substantial contribution to our understanding of how children learn to acquire behaviours through observing those around them. Bandura received an Association of Psychological Science (APS) lifetime achievement award and was named in the top five most eminent 20th-century psychologists by the Review of General Psychology.

Bandura's laboratory experiment has an acceptable level of ecological validity. Unlike some laboratory studies that use entirely artificial settings, this research took place in a nursery school environment, bringing some ecological validity to the research. The Bobo doll was a recognisable television character, which children would have encountered in their everyday lives.

Evaluation: Weaknesses

However, Bandura's study has attracted numerous criticisms, particularly concerning its research methodology.

Secondly, the internal validity of the experiment is questionable. The Bobo doll was an object specifically designed to be punched. Bandura reported that some children made comments before the study such as 'Ok mum there is the doll we have to hit'. This casts serious doubt on the overall validity of behaviour shown by the children and questions whether it was 'observational learning' that truly caused the behaviour change in the study. These demand characteristics weaken the integrity of the study.

Moreover, it could be argued that the aggressive behaviours displayed by the children were a result of obedience rather than genuine learning. The children copied the adult because they interpreted their behaviour as instructions; the children were therefore simply trying to please adults as this was the behaviour expected of them.

Finally, Wortman, Loftus and Weaver (1998) argue that the study by Bandura was unethical and morally problematic. They suggest that the participants were 'manipulated' to respond in an aggressive way. They argue that the children were 'trained to be aggressive' as a result of the methods employed in the study. For example, the agitation and dissatisfaction experienced through the taunts given and the fact that they were not allowed to play with certain toys may have contributed to their aggressive responses.

Bandura (1965) Bobo doll experiment with vicarious reinforcement

Aim

Unlike the original Bobo doll study, in this variation Albert Bandura arranged for children to watch a televised model exhibit novel verbal and physically aggressive behaviour to investigate whether children would be more aggressive when they viewed a model rewarded for their aggression. The study aimed to investigate the role of vicarious reinforcement.

Participants

The study involved 33 male and 33 female participants from Stanford University Nursery School, who were randomly allocated to one of three conditions (11 boys and 11 girls in each).

Procedure

The three experimental conditions were:

1. Model rewarded for aggressive behaviour
2. Model punished for aggressive behaviour
3. No consequences (control)

The children followed a researcher into a room. They were informed that before they could proceed to a 'surprise playroom' they would have to wait whilst the experimenter dealt with some business. While waiting, they might want to watch some television. The television was showing a programme approximately five minutes long in which a model exhibited aggressive behaviour. Depending on the condition, the model was rewarded, punished, or (in the control group) there was no response at all to their aggression.

In the closing scene of the programme, the model was either rewarded or punished (or nothing happened in the control condition).

Model rewarded condition: A second adult approached the model with a soft drink and some sweets. The adult then stated to the model that he was 'a strong champion' and that the aggressive behaviour was seen as deserving 'considerable treats'. Whilst the model was consuming the sweets and drinking the soft drink, the second adult made further comments that positively reinforced the aggressive behaviour.

Model punished condition: The second adult was observed walking towards the model shaking his finger disapprovingly, stating 'hey there, you big bully. You quit picking on that clown. I won't tolerate it'. As the model drew back from the second adult, he tripped and fell. The second adult sat on the model and hit him with a rolled-up newspaper, reminding him of how poor his aggressive behaviour was. The model then fled, cowering, and the second adult said 'if I catch you doing that again, you big bully, I'll give you a hard spanking. You quit acting that way'.

No consequence (control) condition: The same film was shown as in the previous two conditions. However, the closing scene of this film included no form of reinforcement.

Following exposure to the closing scene, the child participant was taken to another room containing a Bobo doll, a mallet, three balls, a peg board, dart guns, some plastic farm animals and a dolls' house with dolls and furniture. For a total of ten minutes the children were observed in this room, with behaviour being recorded every five seconds. Two observers recorded observations, but neither had any knowledge of which condition the children were assigned to.

Findings

Bandura's results showed that children were more likely to imitate aggressive behaviour if the model was positively rewarded. Bandura's original belief that boys would perform more imitated responses than girls was also supported.

Evaluation

The criticisms levied at Bandura's earlier study can also be applied here. Bandura himself acknowledged that mere exposure to a model does not provide sufficient conditions for observational learning to occur.

Moreover, the way in which the stimuli were presented to the observers may affect the degree to which they imitate the behaviour. A lengthy or complex sequence of observation could mean that children only attend to part of it. Furthermore, younger children are more likely to imitate physical aggression than verbal aggression because, given their age, they have more capacity to imitate motor actions than verbal actions.

Wider issues and debates

The nature-nurture debate

All learning theories assume that behaviour is determined by the environment in which we live, providing stimuli to which we respond. The environments we have been in throughout our past have conditioned us to respond to stimuli in a particular way. Learning theorists generally disregard internal mental processes when explaining behaviour, as it is considered insufficient to identify which stimuli elicit which responses.

Learning theorists also believe that individuals are born with a limited number of innate reflexes (stimulus-response links that do not require learning). Complex behaviours are therefore the result of learning through interaction with the environment rather than biological inheritance.

Social learning theory evidently ignores such factors and other biological influences on behaviour. Although social learning theory appears on the surface to be less deterministic than the other learning theories, the approach generally does not acknowledge the influence of free will. Whilst cognitive and motivational factors may appear to offer freedom of choice in behaviour, it should be emphasised that an individual's motivation is the product of prior learning and that therefore the choice over their actions is not truly free. This approach can be accused of reductionism by breaking down highly complex behaviours to merely observational learning.

Media violence and behaviour

The effect of violent media on behaviour has been a hotly debated topic since the 1950s. In recent years, considerable psychological research has focused on the links between violent behaviour and video games. Many media reports of mass shootings have questioned whether the perpetrator's actions were a result of playing a violent shooting game.

Remember!