Social Learning Theory

Jayne Peterson

Mark Hawkes

EPSY 302

11/18/10

Everybody has a different learning style. There are many different theoretical perspectives about learning. The general learning theories include: behaviorism, social learning theory, information processing theory, constructivism, and sociocultural theory (Ormrod, 2006, p. 19). I believe that out of all of these theories, students learn the best by utilizing the social learning theory. Albert Bandura is a prominent theorist of the social learning theory. The social learning theory (or the social/cognitive learning theory) can be defined simply as students learning by observing others. Bandura describes social learning as humans learning to satisfy their needs, wishes, and desires by observing the outcomes of behaviors and events – the observations lead to expectations about what will happen in the future, and also to the expressing of emotions (“Bandura & apos: STheory” 2006). Social learning is accomplished in many ways. Social learning includes vicarious learning, modeling, and eventually self-regulation.

One of the best ways to explain social learning theory is to review the bobo doll experiment. The bobo doll experiment is my favorite classical study. This experiment was conducted by Albert Bandura himself, along with Dorrie and Sheila Ross. The bobo doll can be envisioned as an inflatable punching bag with a fun design, in this case a clown. The point of the study was to see how children responded to models either being aggressive to the bobo doll (being mean), or showing non-aggressive behavior (being nice). Bandura studied preschool-aged children through a two-way mirror. The children were split into control groups, half of the children observed aggressive behavior, and the other half observed non-aggressive behavior. This experiment goes much more in-depth, with multiple variations for each study within the bobo doll experiment.

What Bandura noticed was the children exposed to the violent and mean behavior towards the bobo dolls imitated the actions of their observations. The children did not know they were being watched, they simply were playing by themselves - in the manors that were modeled to them. In the opposite group, the children exposed to the non-aggressive behavior towards the bobo dolls, the preschoolers imitated their observations, and continued playing nicely and non-aggressively. Bandura and his partners in the bobo doll experiment revealed that modeling is not just a response to imitation, but by observing others, individuals can generate new behavioral patterns that can go far beyond what the individual has observed (Artino, 2007, p. 9).

The bobo doll experiment is an example of vicarious learning. Vicarious learning takes place in schools all the time. A simple analogy would be students going to the restroom. If Johnny watches Bobby just get up and walk to the classroom door, he will observe the teacher make Bobby go back to his desk and wait until the bell rings. Jill then raises her hand and asks the teacher to use the restroom. Jill is then allowed to go because she asked for permission. Johnny will repeat the actions of Jill because, by doing what Jill did, he will receive the desired reinforcement, the ability to go to the restroom. This was learned by vicarious reinforcement. Vicarious reinforcement means that the observer will more than likely imitate a behavior because of the positive reinforcement that the peer was given for the behavior. Bobby’s behavior resulted in punishment, so nobody (including Johnny) wants to imitate Bobby. This is known as vicarious punishment, which means that the observer will likely not imitate a behavior because they witnessed a peer receiving punishment for the behavior. The students in the class have learned the appropriate way to leave class through vicarious learning.

Modeling is a related aspect of vicarious learning. There are two types of models: live and symbolic. Family members, teachers, and coaches are all examples of live models that observers may look up to. Michael Jordan is a popular symbolic model, because of his basketball success. Other people might look up to Miley Cyrus because of her young talent; both celebrities have succeeded beyond expectations, and observers are influenced by them. Whether the model is live or symbolic, they will have at least one of the following characteristics: competence, prestige and power, “gender-appropriate” behavior, or behavior relevant to one’s own situation (Ormrod, 2006, p. 64). For a model to be considered competent, the observer must believe that the model is really good at what they do. If a learner believes that the model has prestige or power, they will be drawn to them. “Gender-appropriate” behavior can be described as the model sharing the gender behavior that is similar to the observer’s gender identity. Additionally, an observer looks to a model that shares a relevant situation with them, whether it is positive or negative. Another key element to modeling is response facilitation and inhibition. The consequences of observational learning will all have different response effects. The four different consequences include: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, presentation punishment, and removal punishment. For example, if a student is ridiculed by classmates for asking a “stupid” question during a lecture, that student is more likely to stop asking questions in class. This is an example of presentation punishment, because the learner found that asking a question was an undesirable experience, so the response decreased with the stimulus.

I have witnessed this “observational learning” myself, by babysitting in my church’s nursery. This nursery owns big blocks that can be stacked on top of another, making big skyscrapers or walls to a pretend house. My first group of young children played house or nice games with these blocks all morning, until one boy came in and modeled a different game to the children. This boy was just a little bit older, but much more aggressive. After the kids built a big wall for the pretend house, this boy kicked the whole wall down, causing the blocks to fly all across the room. All the children that were playing house with those blocks were upset at first, but then wanted to kick the wall down for themselves! Now, everyone built the wall as fast as they could – just for each child to take their turn kicking the wall down. This brings me to believe that children can’t help but to learn through observing. All it might take is one hard kick to change the whole scheme of a game.

Both vicarious learning and modeled learning have common elements. These four elements are: attention, memory (or retention), imitation (or motor reproduction), and motivation. A person needs to pay attention in order to learn. The person then needs to remember what they have observed. That person then needs to be physically and/or mentally capable of imitating the observed action or behavior. Lastly, the person needs to be motivated to imitate the observation.

Motivation will come from oneself. Motivation eventually transitions into the final stage of the social learning theory, self-regulation. Self-regulation is defined as the “process of taking control of one’s own learning and behavior” (Ormrod, 2006, p. G-4). As a person matures, they become less dependent on vicarious learning and modeling, and they become more self-regulated. After a person is to the self-regulation stage of motivation, self-efficacy is the “belief that one is capable of executing certain behaviors or reaching certain goals” (Ormrod, 2006, p. 194). Once a person gets to this stage, they will have a high confidence level and will be at a more comfortable level within themselves to start and finish new tasks. Some use self-efficacy to describe others on whether or not they have a high self-efficacy or a low self-efficacy. The same person can have both forms of self-efficacy. For example, I may have low self-efficacy for something I am skeptical about, like I wouldn’t want to ice skate on thin ice. Usually, self-efficacy is situational specific.

There are many aspects to the Social Learning Theory, and many questions and concerns on the subject. What if there is no agent of learning (or someone who knows and can teach the learner new things) present? Observational learning is very good, but it does not lead to the eventual outcome we all want every learner to achieve, to become the agents of their own learning. I believe the process of research and discovery helps people learn new things and in new ways, but it is apparent that the Social Learning Theory has some limitations.

In conclusion, I believe that all of the other learning theories offer many great perspectives on learning, but I think that social learning teaches the best. Learning through others can really benefit learners. From the day we are born to the day we die, social learning is always relevant to our learning. Vicarious learning, modeling, and self-regulation are all important factors of being a teacher. When I am a teacher, I will focus on being the best role model I can be. One of my greatest responsibilities that I will have as a teacher is to be a positive and influencing model to my students, while aiding them to attain self-regulation.

References

Artino, A. (2007). Bandura, Ross, and Ross: Observational Learning and the Bobo Doll. ERIC database. http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED499095.pdf (15 Nov. 2010).

Bandura & apos:STheory (2006). Elsevier's Dictionary of Psychological Theories. http://www.credoreference.com/entry/estpsyctheory/bandura_s_theory (15 Nov. 2010).

Ormrod, J.E. (2006). Essentials of Educational Psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.