What is Social Learning Theory?
SLT is often described as the ‘bridge’ between traditional learning theory (behaviorism) and the cognitive approach. This is because it focuses on how mental (cognitive) factors are involved in learning.
Unlike Skinner, Bandura (1977) believes humans are active information processors and think about the relationship between their behavior and its consequences.
Assumptions
Social learning theory, proposed by Albert Bandura, emphasizes the importance of observing, modeling, and imitating the behaviors, attitudes, and emotional reactions of others.
Social learning theory considers how both environmental and cognitive factors interact to influence human learning and behavior.
In social learning theory, Albert Bandura (1977) agrees with the behaviorist learning theories of classical conditioning and operant conditioning. However, he adds two important ideas:
- Mediating processes occur between stimuli & responses.
- Behavior is learned from the environment through the process of observational learning.
Mediational Processes
Observational learning could not occur unless cognitive processes were at work. These mental factors mediate (i.e., intervene) in the learning process to determine whether a new response is acquired.
Therefore, individuals do not automatically observe the behavior of a model and imitate it. There is some thought prior to imitation, and this consideration is called the mediational process.
This occurs between observing the behavior (stimulus) and imitating it or not (response).
There are four mediational processes proposed by Bandura (1969, 1971, 1977). Each of these components is crucial in determining whether or not imitation occurs upon exposure to a model:
1. Attention
Attentional processes are crucial because mere exposure to a model doesn’t ensure that observers will pay attention (Bandura, 1972).
The model must capture the observer’s interest, and the observer must deem the model’s behavior worth imitating. This decides if the behavior will be modeled.
The individual needs to pay attention to the behavior and its consequences and form a mental representation of the behavior.
For a behavior to be imitated, it has to grab our attention. We observe many behaviors on a daily basis, and many of these are not noteworthy. Attention is, therefore, extremely important in whether a behavior influences others to imitate it.
2. Retention
Bandura highlighted the retention process in imitation, where individuals symbolically store a model’s behavior in their minds.
For successful imitation, observers must save these behaviors in symbolic forms, actively organizing them into easily recalled templates (Bandura, 1972).
How well the behavior is remembered. The behavior may be noticed, but it is not always remembered, which obviously prevents imitation.
It is important, therefore, that a memory of the behavior is formed to be performed later by the observer.
Much of social learning is not immediate, so this process is especially vital in those cases. Even if the behavior is reproduced shortly after seeing it, there needs to be a memory to refer to.
3. Motor Reproduction
This is the ability to perform the behavior that the model has just demonstrated. We see much behavior daily that we would like to be able to imitate, but this is not always possible.
Our physical ability limits us, so even if we wish to reproduce the behavior, we sometimes cannot.
This influences our decisions whether to try and imitate it or not. Imagine the scenario of a 90-year-old lady who struggles to walk while watching Dancing on Ice.
She may appreciate that the skill is desirable, but she will not attempt to imitate it because she physically cannot do it.
Motor reproduction processes use internal symbolic images of observed behaviors to guide actions (Bandura, 1972). An observer internally replicates a behavior using these symbols as a reference, even if it’s not externally shown (Manz & Sims, 1981).
4. Motivation
Lastly, motivational and reinforcement processes refer to the perceived favorable or unfavorable consequences of mimicking the model’s actions that are likely to increase or decrease the likelihood of imitation.
The will to perform the behavior. The observer will consider the rewards and punishments that follow a behavior.
If the perceived rewards outweigh the perceived costs (if any), the observer will more likely imitate the behavior.
If the vicarious reinforcement is unimportant to the observer, they will not imitate the behavior.
What is Observational Learning?
Observational learning is a key aspect of social learning theory, where individuals learn and adopt behaviors by observing others.
This process often involves modeling after those who are similar, high-status, knowledgeable, rewarded, or nurturing figures in our lives.
Children observe the people around them behaving in various ways. This is illustrated during the famous Bobo doll experiment (Bandura, 1961).
What is a model?
Individuals that are observed are called models. In society, children are surrounded by many influential models, such as parents within the family, characters on children’s TV, friends within their peer group, and teachers at school.
These models provide examples of behavior to observe and imitate, e.g., masculine and feminine, pro and anti-social, etc.
Children pay attention to some of these people (models) and encode their behavior. At a later time, they may imitate (i.e., copy) the behavior they have observed.
They may do this regardless of whether the behavior is ‘gender appropriate’ or not, but there are several processes that make it more likely that a child will reproduce the behavior that society deems appropriate for its gender.
Albert Bandura, through his work on social learning theory, identified three primary models of observational learning:
-
Live Model: Observing an actual individual perform a behavior.
-
Verbal Instructional Model: Listening to detailed descriptions of behavior and then acting based on that description.
-
Symbolic Model: Learning through media, such as books, movies, television, or online media, where behaviors are demonstrated.
Through these models, individuals can vicariously learn by watching others without necessarily undergoing direct firsthand experiences.
Influences on Observational Learning
Based on Bandura’s research, several factors enhance the likelihood of a behavior being imitated. We are more prone to imitate behaviors when the following conditions apply:
Attentional Processes
1. Similarity of the Model
We are more likely to model our behaviors after individuals who are similar to us. This is because we are more likely to identify with these individuals, making their behaviors seem more relevant and attainable.
This can include similarity in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, or even shared interests and values (e.g., Lockwood & Kunda, 1997; Marx & Ko, 2012).
2. Identification with the Model
Identification occurs with another person (the model) and involves taking on (or adopting) observed behaviors, values, beliefs, and attitudes of the person you identify with.
The motivation to identify with a particular model is that they have a quality that the individual would like to possess.
The more an individual identifies with the model (for instance, because they are similar or aspire to be like the model), the more likely they are to imitate their behavior.
This relates to an attachment to specific models that possess qualities seen as rewarding. Children will have several models with whom they identify. These may be people in their immediate world, such as parents or older siblings, or they could be fantasy characters or people in the media.
Identification differs from imitation as it may involve adopting several behaviors, whereas imitation usually involves copying a single behavior.
Motivational Processes
3. Rewarded Behaviors
Individuals who see that a model is rewarded for their behaviors are likelier to imitate them, while behavior resulting in negative outcomes is less likely to be copied.
This is known as vicarious reinforcement. For instance, if a student sees that another student gets praised by the teacher for asking questions, they are likelier to ask questions themselves.
The way role models achieve success impacts their effectiveness. People benefit more from role models whose success is due to factors they can control, like effort, rather than uncontrollable factors like innate talent (Weiner, 1979, 1985).
Studies showed girls performed better in math when their role model’s success was linked to effort. In contrast, if the success was attributed to natural talent, their performance declined compared to boys (Bàges, Verniers, & Martinot, 2016).
4. Status of the Model
We are likelier to imitate individuals who hold high-status positions, such as leaders, celebrities, or successful people in our field of interest.
High-status individuals are often admired and seen as role models, so their behaviors are likelier to be seen as desirable and worth imitating.
People are also more likely to imitate experts or knowledgeable individuals in a certain area. These individuals’ behaviors are seen as effective and efficient ways of achieving goals in that area.
5. Reinforcement and punishment
The people around the child will respond to the behavior it imitates with either reinforcement or punishment. If a child imitates a model’s behavior and the consequences are rewarding, the child will likely continue performing the behavior.
If a parent sees a little girl consoling her teddy bear and says, “what a kind girl you are,” this is rewarding for the child and makes it more likely that she will repeat the behavior. Her behavior has been positively reinforced (i.e., strengthened).
Reinforcement can be external or internal and can be positive or negative. If a child wants approval from parents or peers, verbal approval is an external reinforcement, but feeling happy about being approved of is an internal reinforcement. A child will behave in a way that it believes will earn approval because it desires approval.
Positive (or negative) reinforcement will have little impact if the external reinforcement does not match an individual’s needs. Reinforcement can be positive or negative, but the important factor is that it will usually change a person’s behavior.
Examples
Education
-
Sense of Belonging: Exposure to positive role models in education enhances a sense of belonging, especially for groups subjected to negative stereotypes like women and racial minorities in STEM (Dasgupta, 2011; Rosenthal et al., 2013).
For instance, women who read about successful female physicians in male-dominated careers felt a stronger connection to their own paths (Rosenthal et al., 2013).
-
Self-Efficacy: Self-efficacy, the belief in one’s abilities, greatly influences whether a person will imitate an observed behavior.
Women in calculus classes reported higher self-efficacy and participation when taught by female professors compared to male professors (Stout et al., 2011).
The women’s identification with their female professors significantly predicted this increased belief in their own abilities.
-
Increased Achievement: Students who read about the challenges overcome by famous scientists performed better than those who read only about their achievements (Lin-Siegler et al., 2016). Observing perseverance fosters personal performance.
- Perceived attainability: Role models’ successes should be achievable. If aspirants believe they can attain similar success, they’re more motivated.
For example, college freshmen were more motivated by successful seniors than fourth-year students were, likely because the freshmen felt they had more time to achieve similar success (Lockwood & Kunda, 1997).
- Perceived similarity: An effective role model is someone others see as similar or relatable. This perceived similarity, whether through shared group membership, experiences, or interests, boosts motivation.
For example, women were more interested in computer science when interacting with relatable models, like a casually dressed and socially skilled computer scientist, than with stereotypical ones (Cheryan et al., 2011).
Media Violence
- Children observe violent behavior in media and tend to mimic or imitate it. This imitation occurs through social learning processes and is likely mediated by “mirror neurons” that activate when actions are observed or performed (Huesmann, 2005).
- Extensive observation of violence can bias children’s world schemas toward attributing hostility or negative intentions to others’ actions. These hostile attributions increase the likelihood of behaving aggressively (Huesmann & Kirwil, 2007).
- Children acquire social scripts for behaviors they observe around them, including in the media. Once learned, these scripts can automatically control social behavior. Exposure to media violence provides aggressive scripts.
- Normative beliefs about acceptable social behaviors crystallize as children mature. These beliefs act as filters limiting inappropriate behaviors. Observing violence in media can influence which behaviors children see as normative or acceptable.
- Repeated exposure to media violence can lead to desensitization – the diminishing of emotional responses to violence. This makes it easier for children to think about and plan aggressive acts without negative affect.
- Playing violent video games allows for enactive learning of aggression, as players actively participate and are rewarded for violent actions in the game. This should strengthen the learning of aggression beyond passive media observation.
Social Learning Theory Evaluation
The social learning approach takes thought processes into account and acknowledges the role that they play in deciding if a behavior is to be imitated or not.
As such, SLT provides a more comprehensive explanation of human learning by recognizing the role of mediational processes.
For example, Social Learning Theory can explain many more complex social behaviors (such as gender roles and moral behavior) than models of learning based on simple reinforcement.
Lack of Clarity about Cognitive Processes
Some critics argue that social learning theory does not fully explain the cognitive processes involved in learning or how they interact with environmental and individual factors.
However, although it can explain some quite complex behavior, it cannot adequately account for how we develop a range of behavior, including thoughts and feelings.
We have a lot of cognitive control over our behavior, and just because we have had experiences of violence does not mean we have to reproduce such behavior.
For this reason, Bandura modified his theory and, in 1986, renamed his Social Learning Theory, Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), as a better description of how we learn from our social experiences.
Overemphasis on Observation
Critics suggest that the theory might overstate the role of observational learning while undervaluing other forms of learning, such as operant conditioning or individual exploration and discovery.
Some criticisms of social learning theory arise from their commitment to the environment as the chief influence on behavior.
Describing behavior solely in terms of either nature or nurture is limiting, and attempts to do this underestimate the complexity of human behavior.
It is more likely that behavior is due to an interaction between nature (biology) and nurture (environment).
Finally, observational learning does not happen in isolation. Each individual brings their unique personal characteristics, prior experiences, and current circumstances to the learning process.
These factors can all influence what is learned, how it is interpreted, and whether and when it is acted upon.
Difficulty in Predicting Behavior
Social learning theory provides a valuable framework for understanding how learning occurs. However, predicting behavior in real-world contexts can be challenging, given the many potential models and reinforcements in a person’s environment.
The complexity of predicting behavior based on the social learning theory stems from the number of potential influencing factors in a person’s environment.
In real-world contexts, an individual is exposed to countless potential role models across various settings, including family, friends, teachers, and media figures.
Moreover, these models’ behaviors are often rewarded or punished inconsistently, further complicating the learning process.
Neglect of Biological Factors
Social learning theory has been critiqued for not adequately addressing biological factors, such as genetic predispositions, which can also impact behavior.
Social learning theory is not a full explanation for all behavior. This is particularly the case when there is no apparent role model in the person’s life to imitate for a given behavior.
The discovery of mirror neurons has lent biological support to the social learning theory. Although research is in its infancy, the recent discovery of “mirror neurons” in primates may constitute a neurological basis for imitation.
These are neurons that fire if the animal does something itself and if it observes the action being done by another.
Freud vs. Bandura
Freud’s psychoanalytic theory and Bandura’s social learning theory both acknowledge the importance of identification, but their perspectives differ significantly.
While both theories acknowledge the importance of identification, they conceptualize it differently and have distinct views on human behavior, learning, and the potential for change.
-
Focus: Freud’s theory focuses heavily on the unconscious mind, instinctual drives, and early childhood experiences.
On the other hand, Bandura’s social learning theory emphasizes learning through observation and modeling, taking into account cognitive and environmental factors.
-
Identification: Freud’s concept of identification in the Oedipus complex involves a child identifying with the same-sex parent and internalizing their characteristics.
This process is driven by psychosexual development and often results in the development of gender roles. In contrast, social learning theory sees identification as a more flexible process.
Regardless of age, individuals can identify with and learn from anyone around them, not necessarily limited to parents or same-sex individuals.
-
Determinism vs. Agency: Freud’s theory leans toward psychic determinism, suggesting that unconscious desires largely shape our behaviors and feelings.
Social learning theory, while acknowledging the influence of environment, also stresses personal agency – our capacity to influence our own behavior and the environment in a purposeful, goal-directed way.
-
Change: In Freudian theory, personality is largely formed by age 5, making change difficult. Social learning theory suggests that because learning is a lifelong process, individuals can change their behaviors and attitudes throughout life.
Future Research
The motor reproduction process, where observers externally mimic modeled behaviors based on their internalized symbols, is also significant but less explored.
Most research showcases role model successes instead of the actionable steps taken to achieve them (Bandura, 1972).
Detailed behavioral scripts, outlining step-by-step actions, are crucial for observational learning but are often overlooked.
Current role model studies in education don’t emphasize the observer’s cognitive and motivational processes as much as Bandura did, indicating a research gap that needs bridging.
FAQs
