Studied by 5 people
Aim 1
To investigate whether a child would learn aggression by observing a model, and would then reproduce this behavior in the absence of a model (imitative learning)
Aim 2
To investigate whether the sex of the role model made a difference to what was learned and initiated.
Hypotheses
Observed aggressive behaviour will be imitated.
Observed non-aggressive behaviour will be imitated.
Children are more likely to copy a same-sex model.
Boys will be more likely to copy aggression than girls.
Sample
72 children (36 F, 36 M) -- opportunity sample
Age range of the sample
37 to 69 months old (Mean age 52 months)
Where were samples from?
The Stanford University Nursery
Research method
lab w/controlled environment
Research design
matched pairs (groups of 3 rather than just 2s) -- each child only participated in one level of the IV
learners matched w/2 others with the same aggression to make groups of 3
IVs
Model type (aggressive, non-aggressive, no model)
Model gender (same gender as the learner viewing it, or different?)
Learner gender
DV
The learning displayed by the child -- measured through controlled observations
imitative learning
Learning a new behaviour through observing a role model, and imitating it later, without the model.
How were the IVs set up?
Before the experiment, children were observed in their nursery by the experimenter and a teacher who knew them well
51 learners were observed and rated by both observers on a 5-point scale in 4 categories.
What was the 5-point scale based on?
Physical aggression
Verbal aggression
Aggression towards inanimate objects
Anxiety/aggressive inhibition (wanted to be aggressive but didn’t due to anxiety)
The inter-rater reliability when setting up the IV was..
r = .89
Strong positive correlation -- researchers accurately measured aggressive traits
However, it was a subjective measure of aggression because the teacher could’ve had bias against a child to make their score more aggressive
How were the 72 students divided into 3 groups?
24 students (12 M and 12 F)
One member of each group watched a model behaving non-aggressively with…
a bobo doll (non-aggression group)
One member of each group was in the control group (non-model). They played with…
a wooden-model kit (Tinkertoy) for 10 minutes (control group)
The procedure started with..
all learners being deliberately annoyed. (Aggression Arousal)
Aggression Arousal procedures:
The child was brought to a room
It contained toys (for the children) - like a doll and car
They were told they could play with them
As soon as they did begin to play/get involved (usually 2 mins), the experimenter stopped them
The children were told that they were her very best toys
Why did experimenters annoy the learners?
To see if watching aggressive behavior might calm learners down (cleansing)
To encourage potential aggression in the non-aggressive group, to show evidence of learning from the non-aggressive model
What happened after learners were annoyed?
They were moved to the observation room.
What happened in the observation room?
The experimenter took a child to their play area, where the learner was taken to a table and chair. They were shown to make potato prints and sticker pictures -- previously identified as interesting for children.
What was in the opposite corner of the observation room?
Another table and chair, a Tinkertoy, a mallet, and a 152 cm Bobo doll. (In conditions w/a model this is where they were located)
What happened to the model in the observation room?
When the child began playing, the experimenter took the model to the opposite corner
The experimenter explained that the toys were for the model to play with
The model was seated at their own table
How long did each model condition last?
10 minutes
What happened in the aggression group?
The model played with the Tinkertoy set for 1 minute, then punched, kicked, and hit the doll with a mallet. This sequence was performed 3 times within 9 minutes.
Aggressive comments made by the aggressive model (imitative verbal aggression)
“Kick him”
“Pow”
“Sock him”
Non-aggressive comments made by the aggressive model (Imitative non-aggressive verbal)
“He sure is a tough fella”
“He keeps coming back for more”
What happened in the non-aggressive group?
The model assembled the Tinkertoy for the duration and ignored the doll.
What happened in the control group?
There wasn’t any model at all.
What models did children in both model groups see?
A 50-50 split of models by gender (e.g. 1/2 boy saw a male model)
After 10 minutes…
the subject was taken to separate experimental room
In the separate experimental room…
the experimenter stayed in the room, working quietly at his desk w/o engaging with the child
How long were learners observed in the separate experimental room?
For 20 minutes from a 1-way mirror
Aggressive toys in separate experimental room:
3ft Bobo doll, a mallet and peg board, two dart guns, and a tether ball with a face hung to the ceiling.
Non-aggressive toys in separate experimental room:
Tea set, crayons w/paper, a ball, dolls, and cars + trucks
Each learner’s behavior was recorded every…
5 seconds (240 response units each)
Imitation of physical aggression
Hitting Bobo with a mallet
Sitting on the Bobo doll and punching the Bobo doll
Kicking the Bobo doll
Tossing the Bobo doll into the air
Partial imitation
Mallet aggression -- other objects than Bobo
Sitting on the doll
Aggressive gun play
Shooting darts/aiming the gun and firing imaginary shots
Non-imitative physical and verbal aggression
Physically aggressive acts not directed at the Bobo doll
Hostile verbal remarks that weren’t made by the model
e.g. “Cut him” & “Shoot the Bobo”
Observers also watched for:
non-aggressive play & sitting quietly w/o playing
Who scored the children’s behaviors?
One male scored all the children’s behaviors except for conditions when he was a model
A second observer rated children’s behaviors for half of the children
inter-rater reliability: 0.9
Quantitative results:
Boys who witnessed an aggressive male model had the highest imitative aggression score (of 25.8)
Girls scored higher on verbal aggression than boys
Boys scored higher on physical aggression than girls
Children exposed to same sex model imitated them more than opposite sex model
Girls were more verbally aggressive with a female aggressive model compared to the boys
Both genders imitated physical aggression more from male models
Aggressive group results:
Children in this group were more likely to show aggressive behavior than other groups
They imitated more partial-imitative aggression
Aggressive gun play result:
Males showed more aggressive gun play than females.
Non-aggressive group results:
Less likely to exhibit mallet aggression, non-imitative physical aggression and verbal aggression
Children in these groups were more likely to play with small dolls than other groups -- spent more time sitting quietly
Conclusions:
Children will imitate aggressive behaviour even when a model is no longer present
Children are more likely to imitate aggression observed from a same-sex model
Children who observe/witness aggressive behaviour are more likely to imitate that behaviour
Bandura was highly standardized because…
All children watched the same model for the same duration
Were offered the same toys to play with
Observation period = 5 second intervals
Raise validity
Lab experiment = strength because…
It was possible to control extraneous variables.
e.g. all children were put into a similar, annoyed mental state by preventing them to play with fun toys
Why were demand characteristics low?
Children were unaware they were being watched through a 1-way mirror -- increases validity
High inter-rater reliability is a strength in this study because..
It meant there was accurate data collection and differences observed in aggressive behavior was likely due to modeling
Why are these results unable to be generalised?
Sample consists of:
children (inapplicable to other age groups)
middle class to high income individuals (won’t apply to other social classes)
each experimental condition was a small sample (6 kids)
Could possibly result in bias
Why is a longitudinal study better?
The study didn’t examine long-term impact of modeling
Children may have imitated behavior due to..
Social desirability and they might’ve thought they had to imitate the model
Research only measured..
What the children did; it would’ve been useful to know about inner emotions of the children (more qualitative data)
Real-world applicability
The study showed that aggression can be observed and imitated, so TV networks might want to either censor the content of TV programmes.
The study showed children imitate same-sex models so it might be useful in schools; Women can teach girls/men can teach boys to behave/learn more effectively.
Ethics
Confidentiality = maintained; All we know is that they were children from a nursery at Stanford University
Protection from physical harm = broken; The children could have injured themselves when they were playing/hitting/being aggressive with toys
Protection from psychological harm = broken; The children could have left the study with a different perception of aggression so their way of thinking had been changed before leaving the study.
Right to withdraw = broken; In the experimental room the experimenter remained with the child so they could not leave the room, so it was broken.
Deception = broken due to 1-way mirror
Children didn't have the opportunity to consent nor were they debriefed
Nature v. Nurture
Nature:
Boys imitated more aggressive behaviour than girls because they have more hormone testosterone.
Nurture:
Children copied aggression they’d seen
Individual v. Situational
Individual:
Individual factors explain why the acquisition of behaviours differs between boys and girls, and it may be because they are differently rewarded for sex-typed behaviours.
Situational:
The situational influence of models had led children to imitate aggressive behaviour.
Supports the learning approach because…
Boys were more likely to imitate physical aggression from a male model. This supports the idea of SLT as the boys paid attention to the role model/imitated them/the behaviour.
Psychology being investigated:
Social learning in the context of aggression
People pay attention to the behaviour of a role model
They then retain that information in their memory
They will then imitate/reproduce the behaviour if they feel capable
If they witnessed the model get rewarded (vicarious) then they are more likely to repeat/try to repeat
The imitation is seen as more probable if the role model is of the same sex (as the observer)
Lacked mundane realism because…
Ppts watched an adult model play with toys which isn’t an everyday activity
Lab = low ecological validity
Children were purposely frustrated → not like real life
How were children allocated to a condition?
Using the aggression ratings given by the teacher/experimenter. Then, they were matched in groups.
Note 
Flashcard (35)