Social Cognitive Theory

What is soical cognitive thoery?

Social cognitive thoery proposes that behaviour is modelled by other members of the group and aquired through observation. Imitation a behaviour is based on the consequences of a behavior.

Key terms

Behavior can be reinforced in three ways: it can be direct reinforcement, where the performed behavior is rewarded, it can be Vicarious, where someone is seen as being rewarded or punished. It can also be internal, like feeling proud.

Self-efficacy is also a factor that affects the display of behavior. It is the individual's belief in their capacity to execute behaviors.

How does social cognitive theory explain behaviour?

Social cognitive thoery explains behaviour aquisition as a result of both social and cognitive factors. shaped not only by direct expereince, but also through observation and the consequence.

What studies to use?

Bandura et al 1961 and Konijn et al 2007

Aim, method, results of Bandura et al 1961

Aim: investigate if children would imitate aggression modeled by an adult, and if it was more likely with same-sex models.

Method:

• A lab experiment was conducted with 36 girls and 36 boys from an American nursery, aged 3 -7 years.

• Each child was taken into a room where they observed an adult model behaving aggressively or non-aggresively, or not present (control condition) for 10minutes. The adult model could be of the same sex or of the opposite sex.

• In the aggressive model, the model physically and verbally attacked a Bobo Doll.

• Then the children were placed in another room with toys, including the Bobo Doll, where thier behavior was observed for 20minutes.

Result:

• Those exposed to agression displayed aggressive behavior. Those in non-aggressive conditions showed less aggressive behavior than controls. Children were also more influenced by same-sex models. Girls oriented towards verbal agression, while boys, towards physical.

Aim, method, and result of Konijn et al 2007

Aim: to investigate the effect of videogames on agression levels and whether they increased when teens identified with the character.

Method:

• 112 dutch adolecent boys ith low education ability were randomly assigned to play a video game where the charcters are wither violent or non-violent, and realistic or unrealistic.

• After playing, they took part in a reaction time task against an opponent.

• they could noise blast the opponent as a measurement of agression.

• they were told that high level oirse can cause permanent hearing damage.

• levels of identification with the character was also measured.

Result:

• those who played violent games showed highier levels of aggression, and aggression was strongest when teh characters were realistic and particiants identified strongly with the character.

But

• Both studies used controlled laboratory experiments to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between observation and imitation. Though this isolates variables, it has low ecological validity. 

  • Children may not have been learning aggression, but simply following demand characteristics. It demonstrates short-term performance rather than long-term acquisition of a behavior. Aggression only exists in this vacuum. Results reflect compliance.

  • Children ages 3-5 and adolescent boys were the participants in both studies, reflecting an SCT within developmental stages rather than a lifelong mechanism for behavior acquisition. 

• Does SCT really teach new behavior or simply allow a behavior that already exists?

  • Children within the control group of Bandura’s experiment also displayed aggression. This suggests that aggression may be preexisting. The environment simply provided a safe space for aggression without consequences. Study maybe measuring self-control rather than social cognitive learning. 

• SCT is environmentally deterministic, making the environment the primary architect of behavior. 

  • Bandura shows a gender gap; boys more physical aggresion and girls more verbal. Konijn focuses only on adolescent boys. This doesn’t explain the biological component affecting responses to stimuli like hormones, and perhaps evolutionary behaviors mistaken for those passed down by gatekeepers.