Social Learning Theory Aggression Psya3
Bandura (1963) Social Learning Theory (AO1 theory)
Albert Bandura, creator of social learning theory
Social learning theory was created by Bandura and Walters (1963) to explain aggression and the acquiring of new behaviour. They felt aggression could not be explained solely through the use of behaviourism and learning theory principles with only direct experience and reinforcement accounting for new behaviour. Another process was believed to be at work and Bandura’s Social learning theory was created to explain how behaviour may be learnt through the observation of other models. Social learning theory proposes that we learn how to display aggression in different forms, when to display it (the situations) and the targets to display it towards through the observation of other peoples behaviours.
Observation & Vicarious Reinforcement Through Social Learning (AO1 theory)
Bandura proposed observation of behaviour is the primary mode for children to learn aggression through role models which is then subsequently imitated. This was more likely to occur when children were able to identify in some form with the actual model. Through observation children also learn about the consequences of aggression and see whether there is positive reinforcement (through the model achieving what they wanted) or whether its punished. This is known as direct or vicarious reinforcement. Aggression is observed by children at home, at school and through the media and the consequences of the behaviour are also learnt. Over time the child would come to learn what is appropriate conduct but also what is effective in achieving what they wanted and then repeat the behaviour when they feel the rewards outweigh the possible costs.
Bandura summarised this in the following statement:
“Learning would be exceedingly laborious, not to mention hazardous, if people had to rely solely on the effects of their own actions to inform them what to do. Fortunately, most human behaviour is learned observationally through modelling: from observing others one forms an idea of how new behaviours are performed, and on later occasions this coded information serves as a guide for action”
Mental representation and production (AO1 theory)
Get A* Model Essay Answers For Psya3 Aggression
For Social learning to occur Bandura stated the child must be able to form a mental representation of the behaviour within their social environment and envisage the possible rewards and costs that can occur through its use. When opportunities arise that may fit in with the behaviours use and provided the perceived rewards of displaying the behaviour (aggressive or not) outweigh the perceived costs, the behaviour will be displayed. The individual must be capable of reproducing the observed behaviour themselves and possess the skills required to imitate it too. If aggression is successfully carried out and reinforced through achieving the desired goal, the children may gain confidence in its use increasing their self-efficacy. This would then result in them attaching greater value to using aggression in other situations to achieve desired outcomes. If children were unsuccessful in using aggression then they are likely to be less confident and have a lower sense of self-efficacy in using aggression in conflict situations. This may direct them into using other methods to solve problems encountered.
Social learning does not completely discount the role of biology influencing behaviour but rather see’s this as creating a potential for aggression and its actual expression is then learned through social learning and observed behaviour.
Key Social Learning Theory Studies For Aggression
Bandura et al (1961) conducted a study involving children who observed an adult model engaging in aggressive and non-aggressive behaviour towards a life sized inflatable bobo doll. The children were then tested to see whether their subsequent behaviour imitated aggression in the absence of the adult model.
- The children were a mixture of male and female children which ranged from 3 to 5 years old. They were split between two conditions which saw one exposed to an adult model behaving aggressively towards the bobo doll and the other group behaving non-aggressively.
- The aggression displayed in the aggressive condition involved striking the bobo doll with a mallet, kicking and even verbal aggression.
- Children were then “frustrated” intentionally by being shown attractive toys which they were not allowed to touch or play with before being taken to a room full of other toys which had the bobo doll in it.
- The children in the aggressive condition were seen to reproduce more physical and verbal aggression which imitated the adult model than the non-aggressive condition which saw almost no aggression displayed towards the bobo doll.
- One third of the children from the aggressive condition group replicated the same verbal aggression as displayed by the adult model while none of the non-aggressive condition children displayed any verbal aggression. Males (boys) were seen to imitate more physical aggression but the level of verbal aggression was similar between children in the aggressive condition.
This study highlighted how aggression could be learnt through observed behaviour and this occurred even without any reinforcements. This study however does not explain why the behaviour was imitated without reinforcements.
Is hitting a bobo doll the same as a human?
Bandura, Ross & Ross (1963) conducted another study to see if aggression could be learnt through media such as watching a film. A similar setup to the previous study was used except this time children observed a short film where a model was aggressive towards the bobo doll both physically and verbally. This time however there were 3 conditional groups:
- One group observed a model behave aggressively and then rewarded for this behaviour (reinforcement was given) through sweets, drinks and praise.
- Another condition saw the model behave aggressively but then be punished (told off) for this aggression towards the doll.
- The control condition saw no consequences for the aggressive behaviour.
After watching the video the children were again frustrated by being shown toys they could not play with before being let into a room where the bobo doll and other toys were present. The children were then offered a reward for imitating the models behaviour they had seen in the film clip.
- Prior to the reward the children who had observed the model be punished for their aggression towards the doll were seen to be least aggressive compared to the other two conditions. The group who saw the model rewarded as well as the control group who saw no reinforcement displayed similar levels of aggression.
- Once the reward was introduced however all three groups performed the same level of aggressive behaviours highlighting that the aggression had been learnt irrespective of reinforcement.
- Reinforcement is not needed for learning behaviour and observation appears to be enough for this. For behaviour to be imitated however there needs to be an expectation of reinforcement (or reward) for it to be displayed.
Strengths And Weaknesses Of Social Learning Theory
- The fact that the children imitated aggressive behaviour matching that of the models showed that learning of aggression had taken place from the models supporting social learning as an explanation for acquiring aggressive acts. This is a major strength as it explains how behaviour may be learnt in the absence of any direct reinforcement which traditional learning theories could not fully account for. Vicarious learning can account for the absence of any reinforcement which suggests the explanation has validity.
- Another major strength for social learning theory is that it can account for differences in aggressive and non-aggressive behaviour both between and within each individual. People learn that aggression is rewarded in some situations and not others and context-dependent learning takes place which explains differences within individuals. Social learning theory may also account for differences in aggression between cultures. The Kung San tribe of the kalahari desert are seen to have extremely low levels of aggression and violence among their people. Social learning can explain through their child rearing practices as they have been observed to not reinforce any aggressive behaviours in children instead opting to distract them. Also aggression is frowned upon in the culture further and with an absence of any role model for people to learn it, this may explain the low levels of aggression which is inline with social learning theory predictions.
- Social learning theory is a more holistic approach which allows for biology and cognitive explanations to also have a role. Previous learning theory principles have been argued to be reductionist due to portraying humans as simple stimulus response machines however social learning theory helps explain the cognitive element more which is inline with the complexity of human thinking.
- The studies into social learning theory lack ecological validity as they were conducted in an artificial laboratory where it is difficult to generalise the findings into real world situations. We cannot say for certain that the social learning effect that occurs in a laboratory could apply to the real world.
- The study could also be argued to lack external validity due to the setup as it involved punching a bobo doll which is not real and we cannot say for certain children may behave similarly towards real people who can respond back. Also the study only included children from one specific nursery so we cannot generalise the explanation to the wider population as the behaviour may be indicative of that group of children only. This tells us very little about how adults would behave from observing aggressive acts.
- Demand characteristics may have also been possible as some children reported feeling like they were expected to behave aggressively towards the bobo doll. Therefore the aggression observed may only be short-term and limited to the laboratory environment.
- The fact that the children were frustrated raises ethical concerns as they are deliberately subjected to behaviour that caused distress and could psychologically harm them. There is also ethical concerns around psychological well being as promoting aggression could be argued to be ethically wrong as they may recreate this aggression in other forms or see this as a viable way to deal with problems in the future.
- The study and social learning explanation could be argued to lack internal validity as measuring how a child behaves towards a bobo doll is nothing like a real person and this may not be a valid measure of aggression. Some children were overheard saying “thats the doll we have to hit” suggesting researcher bias may have influenced the children to behave aggressively also further undermining the study.
To cite this article: Social Learning Theory:
Loopa Psychology – http://www.loopa.co.uk/social-learning-theory-aggression-psya3/
Since 2012 I've helped literally thousands of students achieve some amazing grades for A level Psychology and get into their chosen universities - Even schools across the UK now use my resources. If you're studying Psychology why not Follow me on Twitter, LIKE my Facebook page or subscribe to my YouTube channel and get tons of free resources and updates and see just how well you can do too.
Outline and evaluate two social psychological theories of aggression. (25 marks)
One theory to explain aggression is deindividuation. This process is where an individuals self-perception is lowered by being in a large group of people, and having a greater sense of anonymity. This lowered self-perception results in a lesser concern of evaluation by others, so behaviour can become very out of character, and anti-social. Deindividuation can become heightened, the more anonymity there is (for example wearing a uniform), or whilst in an altered state of consciousness (being under the influence of drugs or alcohol).
Zimbardo (1969) conducted a study on female undergraduates.They were put in groups of four, and were required to give electric shocks to 'aid learning'. Half of the participants wore lab coats, and hoods that hit their faces, and were never referred to by name. They were sat in separate cubicles. In the other condition, they wore large name tags, were introduce to each other by name, and were also able to see each other when seated at the shock machines. Those in the deindividuation condition shocked the 'learner' for twice as long as the identifiable participants. This suggests that when the person has anonymity to hide behind, they have a decreased concern for evaluation by others, resulting in more anti-social behaviour.
However, this only supports the fact that deindividuation produces only anti-social behaviour. Deindividuation can also promote pro-social behaviour, when prosocial environmental cues are present. It is also criticised by the fact that not all large crowds are aggressive- they don't have to produce out of character behaviour at all, anti-social or prosocial- they could produce neutral behaviour.
A supporting study was conducted by Robert Watson (1973) who looked at warriors from 23 different societies, and observed how much a warrior changed his appearance prior to going to war, and the levels of aggression with which the warriors tortured and mutilated…