Social Cognitive Theory - Essay Example

 SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY Overview of the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT The Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) is a scion of Social Learning Theory (SLT) which traces its origins to the 1800s. But it was not until mid19th century that the theory gaining popularity within the behavioral and social psychology circles, through the efforts of a behavior scholar known as Albert Bandura. The SCT falls within the realm of behaviorism which is a group of theories that seeks to explain human behavior. The SCT sees human behavior as being a dynamic, triadic and reciprocal interaction of personal factors, and the environment. According to Social Cognitive theory, one’s behavior is heavily influenced by these three factors. Whereas the theory does support the behaviorist notion that the expected consequences regulates behavior, it nevertheless emphasizes that one’s behavior is mainly shaped by cognitive processes. Thus a behavior’s response consequences help in forming expectations of behavioral outcomes. It is therefore the ability to conceptualize such expectations which enables humans predict repercussions of their behavior, before engaging in such behavior. Additionally, the SCT holds the view that most behavior is acquired vicariously. The SCT’s focus on cognition implies that a human’s mind is an important factor that shapes one’s reality, discriminatingly encodes information, performs behavior based on prevailing expectations and values, and forces a particular structure on the actions it carries out. By feedback and reciprocity, an individual’s reality is constructed through the interaction between the environment and an individual’s own cognition. Further, one’s cognition does change with time through experience and maturation. Thus by gaining insights into the processes that are at play in an individual’s formation of reality, it becomes easier to understand, predict and change human behavior. Key Constructs of Social Cognitive Theory: Reciprocal Determinism: The Reciprocal Determinism construct is founded on the belief that humans have the ability to shape their fate, while at appreciating the fact that humans are not in ultimate control of their personal will. Individuals are not guided by inner forces and neither are they involuntarily shaped and guided by environment. Individuals therefore do actively contribute to their own behavior, motivation and development through a network of influences that interact in a reciprocating manner. In regard to this view, individuals are defined by five basic capabilities: vicarious, symbolizing, self-reflective, self regulatory and forethought. These are the capabilities that avails to all humans the cognitive means which they use to determine the behavior. i. Symbolizing Capability: According to SCT, many external factors do influence one’s behavior through the cognitive processes. It is however symbols which act as a mechanism for thought. By forming symbols, for example, words and images, humans do manage to give form, meaning and contiguity to their own experiences. Additionally, the ability to create symbols provides human with the capability to load information into their memory that would be utilized in guiding future behaviors. ii. Vicarious Capability: This refers to one’s capability to acquire behavior not just through direct experience but more importantly through observing others. Learning through observation enables humans to construct an idea on how a new behavior is acquired without acting it out. Such information is then coded and used in guiding future behavior. The key importance about vicarious learning is that it makes it possible for humans to build behavior patterns quickly, thereby by-passing the need for trial and error and fatal mistakes which are time consuming and costly. iii. Forethought Capability: The SCT posits that one’s behavior is purposive and guided by forethought. Forethought refers to one’s ability to motivate and control the person’s actions accordingly. Whereas the theory does indeed hold that stimuli determine the possibility of behavior through the predicted outcome, the stimulus is not directly associated to the response by contiguity. Rather the preceding experiences form the expectations of the consequences that will occur after performing the act, prior to the performance of the behavior in question. It is thus the expected outcome of behavior, rather than the actual outcomes, which determines the possibility that behavior will recur. iv. Self-Regulatory Capability: According to Bandura, self-regulatory systems gives meaning to external factors and provides a framework for appropriate action, enabling humans to exercise control over their feelings, thoughts, actions and motivations. Self regulation is thus a form of internal regulation mechanism which determines the type of behavior exhibited, as well as the self -imposed outcomes for the behavior. v. Self-Reflective Capability: Self-reflection enables humans to scrutinize their experiences, to explore their thought processes and change their thinking. Self efficacy is one of the key aspects of self reflection. Self efficacy enables people to construct perceptions about their capabilities and dispositions that eventually control their behavior by influencing what one attempts to achieve and the degree of commitment they one is willing to expend in performance. Meaningful Defining Moment In my the early years of learning, my school used to have a school milk programme where pupils would each be issued a packet of milk thrice a week, in order to keep ourselves away from candies during break time. Thus, on milk days, shortly before the bell went off to announce break time, the store keeper would show up in every class where he would take the total number in attendance and thereafter beckon a few of us to follow him to his store. Shortly afterwards those picked for the store man’s errand would limp back in class, their shoulders sagging from the weight of milk crates. The milk came in rectangular tetra packs. Having exhausted the contents in the tetra packs, the boys would rip open the upper side of their empty packets and slide them up their fists. Now, the empty milk packets would become spurring gloves. Subsequently, lockers would be pushed to the wall to create enough room for a “boxing ring” right in the middle of the class. Here, with so many watching and a few keeping an eye on any approaching teacher, a series of boxing matches would be held. Among the best pairs featured on the ring every milk day were Joshua and Mark. With this kind of treat on the cards, milk days quickly became my favorite school days, until one unforgettable Friday when Joshua and Mark stepped on the ‘ring’. This day surrounded by the entire class, the two went about their regular ritual of punching, dodging, and waiting for that opportunity to serve a knock out punch. On and on they spurred. And the more they fought the angrier they got, and the harder they hit each other. Then it happened; Mark threw a hard and fast which caught Joshua squarely on the mouth. Blood flew through the air as Joshua went down. His head facing downwards, Joshua opened his mouth to reveal a bloody tongue, half of it (tongue) dangling downwards and only attached to his mouth by just a few threads of flesh. It was the last day I ever relished the thought of trading blows with anyone. Application of Social-Cognitive Constructs, Perceptual Distortions, and Reciprocal Determinisms. Reciprocal determinism is one of the key social cognitive constructs which applies to my defining moment. According to reciprocal determinism, individuals are defined by five basic capabilities: vicarious, symbolizing, self-reflective, self regulatory and forethought. These are the capabilities that avails to all humans the cognitive means which they use to determine a behavior. Vicarious Capability: this refers to one’s capability to acquire behavior mainly by observing others. By observing Joshua get injured, I learned to engage in non violent hobbies and acts. Self-Regulatory Capability: having witnessed the repercussions of punch throwing I am now keen to exercise self control knowing fully well that engaging in such acts could have serious repercussions on my health. Forethought capability: This posits that, it is the expected outcome of behavior, rather than the actual outcome, which determines the possibility that a behavior will recur. In this case, it is the fear of loosing my tongue rather than the actual loss of my tongue which makes me refrain from throwing punches at anyone. Conclusion Social cognitive theory is established on the premise, humans learn by observing what fellow humans do or may not do. And whereas the proponents of this theory are in agreement that there is a considerable degree of development created by learned behavior exhibited in the surrounding within which one is brought up, they also hold that an individual is equally critical in influencing his or her moral development. Humans learn behavior by observing fellow humans; within the surrounding; behavior and cognition all as key factors in determining development. These factors are non static. They are rather reciprocal. For instance, any behavior observed can alter an individual’s manner of thinking. Similarly, one’s surrounding may determine later behavior, the same way that a parent’s way of thinking will influence the environment within which their children are brought up. References Akers, R.L. (1989). Social learning theory and alcohol behavior among the elderly. Sociological Quarterly. Akers, R.L. (2006). A longitudinal test of social learning theory: Adolescent smoking. Journal of Drug Issues. Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of moral thought and action. Handbook of Moral Behavior and Development. Bandura, A, & Jourden, F.J. (1991). Self-regulatory mechanisms governing social comparison effects on complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Crosbie-Brunett, M, & Lewis, E.A. (2005). Theoretical contributions from social and cognitive behavioral psychology. Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods: A Contextual Approach. Jones, J.W. (1989). Personality and epistemology: Cognitive social learning theory as a philosophy of science. Read More