The Social Learning Theory of Bandura Essay

Essay Topic: Essay, Learning, Learning theory, Social, Theory,

Paper type: Learning,

Words: 1679 | Published: 11.21.19 | Views: 722 | Download now

The Social Learning Theory of Bandura emphasises the importance of observing and modelling the behaviours, thinking and psychological reactions of others. The Social Learning Theory explains human behaviour in terms of continuous reciprocal interaction between cognitive, behavioural, an environmental influences, indicating that behavior can be learned at the cognitive level through observing different people’s activities. (Blackburn, 1993) This shows that people are capable of imagining themselves in similar scenarios, and of incurring similar final results. Once the actions is learned it may be strong or penalized by the outcomes it generates.

Remember: This is just a sample from a fellow student. Your time is important. Let us write you an essay from scratch

Get essay help

Bandura activated to several from the essential ideas of the Operant Conditioning Theory: reinforcement, treatment, and inspiration. (Ewen, 1980) Each of these ideas can be used to make clear Paul’s initial and prolonged criminal activities. Based on Cultural Learning Theory, criminal actions is maintained through a complex schedule of reinforcement and punishment through the entire life of the individual. The support for criminal behaviour originates from both internal and external sources.

Encouragement can be in the form of tangible advantages stemming from the criminal activity itself such as an cost of money, or perhaps from a social perspective like an increase in peer position. (Blackburn, 1993; Hollin, 1989) Due to Paul’s dysfunctional childhood and strong negative affects in his your life he discovered himself tempted by criminal activities in the early teenagers. He was sent to a boy’s home if he was just fourteen for thieving, and has been in and out of juvenile and mature institutions from the time. In relation to the Social Learning Theory, Paul was enthusiastic by direct external encouragement, by the touchable and interpersonal status benefits.

Due to his upbringing and lack of parental discipline these Paul believed these advantages easily outweighed the consequences on this criminal activities. The time Paul served in juvenile institutions did not suppress him via criminal actions, instead completely the opposite effect. Contact with other people who have favourable criminal tricks and awareness leads to an individual learning comparable modes of action. (Hollin, 1989) The theory does not indicate that these individuals are necessarily connected with crime or criminal actions; they only have to express good attitudes towards crime. (Hollin, 1989) Yet , while Paul was in juvenile institutions he did increase other bad guys which did strengthen the likelihood of him continuous in his legal behaviour.

Bandura also thought that there were another aspect to inspiration, he named it self-reinforcement. (Ewen, 1980) Self-reinforcement identifies ones’ perception of pleasure, or because meeting of standards in ones’ very own behaviour. (Ewen, 1980) Paul’s belief that he was a criminal was reinforced while in these juvenile institutions. He was happy to be a part of this number of criminals and he continuing to act criminally to some degree in order to remain an integral part of the group and as to keep up a sense of satisfaction and cultural identity. A report in which small children were shown adults reaching a character referred to as “Bobo Doll” was carried out in order to prove that observation can be described as primary sort of learning.

In one film, the adults assaulted Bobo, and another they were friendly to it. 1 group of children were shown one film another group shown the other. The adults bitten Bobo within a distinctive method, they utilized a hammer as a tool in some instances and others put the doll in the air and shouted “Pow, Boom! “. As a result of this kind of violent type of the film, the researchers claimed that if the children repeated these kinds of behaviour, that they learnt that rather than that being acted out automatically. Later in 1965, Bandura completed the same research, but revealed the adults who behaved aggressively possibly being reprimanded or paid for their activities.

Those children, who had viewed the adults rewarded, and others who had found the adult neither rewarded nor punished, behaved more aggressively than patients who had viewed the adults receive a form of punishment. This suggests that your children who had viewed the adults being reprimanded simply wasn’t able to remember how the adults acquired behaved. Nevertheless , when Bandura rewarded each of the children intended for imitating the behaviour with the adults, this was shown not to be the case.

Thus, all three groups of children had identical levels of learning from observation, but individuals who had seen the adults punished did not emulate the behaviour. The prevalent aspect that is stressed in Bandura’s theory is the fact observation may be the process of interest. He says that the specific notices a thing in the environment (retention), the consumer remembers the fact that was noticed (reproduction), the individual creates an action this is a copy of what was discovered (motivation) and the environment provides a consequence that changes the probability the behaviour will be emitted again (reinforcement and punishment).

Consequently , Paul’s discovered criminal attributes were sturdy by watching his father’s and brother’s criminal actions and the continuous repetition of this behaviour allowed Paul to scaffold longer lasting criminal inclinations. Criminality is actually a function of individual socialization, how people have been inspired by their encounters or human relationships with relatives, peer organizations, teachers, expert figures and also other agents of socialisation. Consequently , Paul’s immediate family had a substantial impact on his conduct. Paul originated in a unable to start family environment.

He would not have a male expert figure in his father great father was often lack of from the family house, serving his many penitentiary sentences. Additionally, when his father was home he drank intensely and was regularly violent towards his wife plus the children. Paul and his brothers and sisters grew up in a family where discipline was non-existent or grossly extreme and did not have to be able to learn what behaviour was tolerable and what was totally inappropriate.

Paul learnt criminal characteristics such as violent and aggressive conduct through seeing his daddy and how this behaviour was reinforced and repeated simply by his old brothers. Paul’s mother experienced limited intellectual and social resources which resulted in a bad education on her children, which usually later on a new substantial impact on their career chances. Paul was born into a life of poverty, this individual grew up within a lower course neighbourhood using a criminal subculture or legal way of your life was common. Paul was exposed to felony subcultures in which criminal actions was just a social deviance and was influenced at this time was of living.

You will find two primary issues which Paul uses to warrant his preliminary actions. Paul justifies his actions through higher guidelines; believing that stealing coming from a commercial manufacturing plant is not wrong because they are insured. He also is convinced that having been also subject to legalities which usually increased his sentence. In the event that he fully commited the same criminal offenses on a private home, instead of a commercial manufacturing plant, he would have obtained a shorter sentence.

The other is being a victim of peer pressure or social mindset. Social mindset involves the behaviour of the individual when within a group. One such relationship is the Conformity Effect which will explains that behaviour can be dictated by simply social provides; Paul priding himself that he is not a ‘dog’ (he does not tell on others). Also, there exists a tendency intended for an individual to take on group rules even if that they contradict their particular values.

Paul stated that he had simply no intention of committing the act before heading to the community pub, unfortunately he subject to peer pressure or perhaps ‘conformity’ when he ran in old jail friends. (Study Asch, 1995) However , there exists some optimism Paul, it will be possible to coach a person making use of the Social Learning Theory to eliminate or reduce certain behaviors. The process is lengthy as well as the success rate is dependant on factors that differentiate individually for each person. When using the Social Learning Unit the subject must progress through the modelling method. Firstly, Focus – through the observation of positive behaviours and reactions that curiosity the individual and captures their undivided focus.

Secondly, Retention – Paul must be able to remember, or store the brand new information. Additionally, Reproduction – through modeling the desired actions and coaching, Paul must be capable to demonstrate the new skill or perhaps behaviour. The next step is Motivation – Paul need to have a motivating motivation for learning or changing his behaviour; and then finally Self-regulation – which involves changing the unwanted behaviour, Paul must do it yourself observe and judge his own actions. (Boeree, 2003) Using this theory as a comparison model it is very possible to coach Paul to reduce or eradicate his felony urges, he does feel ashamed of him self for assigning criminal serves and the occurrence of his family may be the paramount root motivation.

Bandura’s Social Learning Theory looks at the way a person acts is dependant on the way the personal, behavioural, observational and environmental factors interact and how they impact the learning process. Paul’s characteristics have been generally instigated through observation of his family members, his peers and his cultural environments. Referrals: Asch, S i9000. E. (1966). Opinions and social pressure.

In A. L. Hare, At the. F. Borgatta and R. F. Bo?tes (eds. ), Small teams: Studies in social discussion, (pp. 318-324). New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Blackburn, L. (1993).

The psychology of criminal carry out: Theory, study and practice. Toronto: John Wiley & Sons. Boeree, G. C. (1998). Persona theories, Albert Bandura 1925 – present. [Article on-line]; readily available from

Internet Seen 2nd October 2004. Clark, R. A. and Delia, J. G. (1976). The introduction of functional influential skills in childhood and early age of puberty. Child Expansion, Volume 47, pp. 1008-1014.

Ewen, L. (1980). An introduction to hypotheses of individuality. New York: Academics Press. Hollin, C. (1989). Psychology and crime: An intro to criminological psychology. New York: Routledge.

Related posts

Save your time and get your research paper!

Get My Essay