SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY AND THE INFLUENCE OF

MODELING

A STUDY OF ALBERT BANDURA

BY JANE FRANCES DUGYON

AND

VICTORIA CASTILLO

ALBERT BANDURA

• BIOGRAPHY:

• BORN: DECEMBER 4, 1925 IN ALBERTA, CANADA.

• ATTENDED THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, AND GRADUATED IN THREE YEARS.

• WAS NOT AT FIRST INTERESTED IN PSYCHOLOGY AND STUMBLED UPON IT ALMOST BY CHANCE.

• ENTERED THE CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY GRADUATE PROGRAM AT THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA.

• JOINED THE FACULTY OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY IN 1953.

• WAS ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION (APA) IN 1974.

SOCIAL THEORY

• ONE CAN LEARN MORE QUICKLY AND EFFICIENTLY BY THE OBSERVATION OF BEHAVIOR ONLY.

OBSERVATIONAL LEARNING

• THE FOUR COMPONENTS

• ATTENTIONAL PROCESSES

• RETENTION PROCESSES

• MOTOR REPRODUCTION PROCESSES

• REINFORCEMENT AND MOTIVATIONAL PROCESSES.

ATTENTIONAL PROCESSES

• DETERMINANTS:

• ASSOCIATIONAL PATTERNS.

• ENGAGING CHARACTER.

• NATURE OF THE MODELED BEHAVIORS.

• SALIENCE AND COMPLEXITY.

RETENTION PROCESSES

• WHEN ONE REMEMBERS WHAT HE OBSERVES.

• DETERMINANTS:

• IMAGINAL

• THROUGH THE SENSES

• VERBAL

• MOST COGNITIVE PROCESSES THAT REGULATE BEHAVIOR ARE VERBAL.

• STIMULUS CONTIGUITY: ASSOCIATIONS AMONG STIMULI THAT OCCUR TOGETHER.

MOTOR REPRODUCTION PROCESS

• FROM OBSERVATION ONE CAN PICK UP PATTERNS

• THE ABILITY TO PICK UP ON PATTERNS DOES NOT MEAN ONE ACQUIRES ANY NEW PHYSICAL ABILITIES

MOTOR REPRODUCTION PROCESSES

• FROM OBSERVATION ONE CAN PICK UP PATTERNS.

• THE ABILITY TO PICK UP ON PATTERNS DOES NOT MEAN ONE ACQUIRES ANY NEW PHYSICAL ABILITIES.

REINFORCEMENT AND MOTIVATIONAL PROCESSES

• THE MORE POWERFUL AND ENGAGING THE MODEL IS, THE MORE ONE IS INFLUENCED TO IMITATE.

• TWO ELEMENTS:

• ACQUISITION

• GAINING NEW KNOWLEDGE BUT NOT READILY REPRODUCING IT.

• PERFORMANCE

• RULED BY REINFORCEMENT AND MOTIVATIONAL ELEMENTS.

• ONE IS LIKELY TO IMITATE IF GIVEN AN AWARD.

GENDER ROLES

• BOYS AND GIRLS GENERALLY TEND TO PERFORM ACTIONS THAT IS APPROPRIATE TO THEIR GENDER, BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN REINFORCED TO DO.

• BOYS AND GIRLS CAN STILL LEARN AND PICK UP SKILLS BY OBSERVING THE ACTIONS OF THE OPPOSITE GENDER.

CHILD DEVELOPMENT BY MODELING

USE OF THE EXTERNAL WORLD—ESPECIALLY MODELS—HELP INDUCE NEW IDEAS AND CONCEPTS FOR CHILDREN.

BOBO DOLL EXPERIMENT.

DEBBIE STERLING -- GOLDIE BLOX

INTRODUCING…

• IN THE YEAR 2013 A WOMAN BY THE NAME OF DEBBIE STERLING INVENTED A TOY, WHICH SHE CALLED GOLDIE BLOX.

• THIS TOY WAS INVENTED FOR THE SAKE OF INFLUENCING YOUNG GIRLS TO BECOME MORE INNOVATIVE AND TO STEER AWAY FROM THE STEREOTYPICAL NORMS.

• WITH THIS INFLUENCE, STERLING HOPED TO ENCOURAGE YOUNG GIRLS TO BECOME ENGINEERS, AS SHE FELT THAT THE ENGINEER DOMAIN WAS DOMINATED MAINLY BY MALES.

THE QUESTION

BASED ON BANDURA’S OBSERVATIONAL LEARNING THEORY, WILL THE GOLDIE BLOX TOY HAVE AN INFLUENCE ON THE CAREER CHOICE OF CHILDREN RANGING FROM THIRD TO SIXTH GRADE? AND IS THE TOY MORE INFLUENTIAL ON GIRLS? WHO IT IS TARGETING?

HYPOTHESIS

BASED ON BANDURA’S MODEL OF OBSERVATIONAL LEARNING, WE HYPOTHESIZED THAT THE GROUPS OF CHILDREN EXPOSED TO THE TOY, THROUGH THE RESEARCHERS PRESENTATION OF THE TOY OR THEIR OWN PLAYING OF THE TOY, WOULD HAVE MORE CHILDREN WHO WOULD CONSIDER ENGINEERING AS A CAREER CHOICE.

RESEARCH AND DATA: GROUP 1: THIRD GRADE

• GROUP 1 WAS INTRODUCED TO THE TOY AND ITS INTENTION BY THE RESEARCHERS AND THEN GIVEN FIFTEEN MINUTES TO PLAY WITH THE TOY. AFTER THIS, THEY WERE ASKED TO LIST AT LEAST THREE CAREERS THEY WOULD WANT TO BE WHEN THEY GROW UP.

• THIRD GRADERS SHOWED GREAT INTEREST IN THE TOY AND ONE BOY SAID THAT EVEN THOUGH THE TOY WAS FOR GIRLS HE LIKED PLAYING WITH IT.

• OTHER THIRD GRADERS SAID THEY LIKED HOW THEY COULD MAKE THEIR OWN INVENTIONS WITH IT,

• 38% OF THIRD GRADERS SAID THAT THEY WOULD WANT TO BE ENGINEERS.

RESEARCH AND DATA: GROUP 2: FIFTH GRADE

• GROUP 2 WAS NOT INTRODUCED TO THE TOY AND ITS INTENTIONS AND WAS SIMPLY GIVEN 15 MINUTES TO PLAY WITH THE TOY.

• AFTER PLAYING WITH THE GOLDIE BLOX, THEY WERE ASKED TO LIST AT LEAST THREE CAREERS THEY WOULD WANT TO BE WHEN THEY GROW UP.

• WE ALSO ASKED WHETHER THEY THOUGHT THEY TOY HAD A PURPOSE AND FOUND THAT SOME CHILDREN ALREADY KNEW ABOUT THE TOY’S INTENTION TO INSPIRE ENGINEERING.

• FIFTH GRADERS SAID THE TOY INSPIRED THEM TO INVENT NEW THINGS.

• 25% OF FIFTH GRADERS SAID THAT THEY WOULD WANT TO BE ENGINEERS.

RESEARCH AND DATA: GROUP 3: SIXTH GRADE

• GROUP 3 WAS NOT TOLD ABOUT GOLDIE BLOX AT ALL NOR GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO PLAY WITH THEM.

• WE ASKED THE SIXTH GRADERS ABOUT WHAT CAREERS THEY WERE INTERESTED IN AND THEN HANDED THEM A LIST OF MANY CAREER CHOICES AND ASKED THEM TO CIRCLE THE ONES THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE

• 44% OF SIXTH GRADERS SAID THEY WOULD WANT TO BE ENGINEERS

• 2 OF THE 4 SIXTH GRADERS THAT SAID THEY WOULD WANT TO BE ENGINEERS WERE GIRLS

SELECTED DATA

GROUP NAME AGE/GRADE CAREER

I Male 1 9/3rd Engineer, artist, racer, creator, science man

I Male 1 9/3rd Newspaper, dancer, musician

I Female 2 9/3rd Doctor, nurse, engineer, teacher, veterinarian

II Female 2 10/5th Baker, zookeeper, rancher,

II Female 2 11/5th Engineer, interior designer, architect, fro-yo worker

II Male 1 11/5th Dentist, doctor, engineer, cashier, FBI agent.

III Female 1 11/6thProfessional athlete, scientist, lawyer, mechanical engineer

III Male 1 12/6th Business owner, nuclear engineer

III Male 2 12/6th Train driver, professional athlete, middle school teacher

COMPARING THE DIFFERENT GROUPS

THE END RESULTS:THOUGH WE STARTED OFF BY PLAYING WITH THE GOLDIE BLOX TOY AND

EXPLAINING WHAT ENGINEERING IS WITH THE FIRST GROUP, WE FELT AS IF THERE WAS NOT MUCH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FIRST AND SECOND GROUP, TO WHICH WE DID NOT PROVIDE ANY SORT OF MODELING. THE CHILDREN OF BOTH GROUPS EXPRESSED ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT OF INTEREST IN THE TOY AND KNEW TO SOME EXTENT WHAT ENGINEERING IS.ONE THING TO NOTE IS THAT WHILE OBSERVING THE SECOND GROUP, SOME OF THE CHILDREN EXPRESSED THAT THEY DID NOT SEE THE POINT IN PLAYING WITH THE TOY AND THAT IT WAS JUST A FUN THING TO DO. WHEREAS WITH THE FIRST GROUP, MANY OF THE CHILDREN EXPRESSED EXCITEMENT IN BUILDING SOMETHING, EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE NOT SURE WHAT. THE THIRD GROUP DID NOT GET ANY INTERACTION WITH THE TOY, BUT MANY OF THE CHILDREN, INCLUDING THE GIRLS, EXPRESSED INTEREST IN ENGINEERING, OR AT LEAST IN THE IDEA OF BUILDING THINGS.

FLAWS AND LIMITATIONS• THERE WAS A LIMITED TIME THAT THE

CHILDREN GOT TO PLAY WITH THE TOYS.

• EACH GROUP HAD MORE GIRLS THAN BOYS.

• THE INDIVIDUAL GROUPS DID NOT VARY IN AGES BECAUSE THEY WERE DIVIDED BY GRADE LEVELS.

• EACH GROUP WAS A DIFFERENT SIZE.

• SOME OF THE CHILDREN IN GROUP 2 ALREADY KNEW THE INTENTION OF THE GOLDIE BLOX: TO ENCOURAGE INTEREST IN ENGINEERING

• WE DID NOT RECORD THE NUMBER OF BOYS AND GIRLS IN EACH CLASS

CONCLUSION

SOME OF OUR ASSUMPTIONS AND HYPOTHESES PROVED RIGHT AND SOME PROVED WRONG

BOTH BOYS AND GIRLS EXPRESSED INTEREST IN THE TOY, THEREFORE CONCLUDING THAT GOLDIE BLOX, THOUGH DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY FOR GIRLS, CAN BE APPLIED TO BOYS ALSO.

THE DIFFERENT TAKES ON MODELING BEFORE THE STUDENTS DID NOT EXACTLY GARNER WIDE DIFFERENCES, BUT THE CHILDREN STILL EXPRESSED INTEREST IN ENGINEERING REGARDLESS.

THE TOY SPARKED INTEREST IN ENGINEERING FOR BOTH GROUPS 1 AND 2 , BUT FOR GROUP 3 THE CHILDREN WERE LEFT TO COME UP WITH THEIR OWN IDEAS OF CAREERS THEY WANTED TO TAKE.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bandura, Albert. Social Learning Theory. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc. 1977.Bandura, Albert and Walters, Richard H. Social Learning and Personality Development. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. 1963.Crain, William. Theories of Development, Concepts and Applications. 5th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. 2004.Handbook of Personality. eds. Lawrence A. Pervin and Oliver P. John. 2nd ed. New York/London: The Guilford Press. 1999. Mussen, Paul Henry and Conger, John Janeway and Kagan, Jerome. Child Development and Personality. 4th ed. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers. 1974.