Analysis and Application of Social Cognitive Theory - Book Report/Review Example

Social Cognitive Theory 2008 Social Cognitive Theory The process of learning is the core element of human development. The essence of learning is that a learner undergoes gradual process of transformation as a result of past experience; the primary goal of this change is to facilitate the process of adjusting to the surrounding circumstances: "Learning is a process whereby individual animals, human and others, are able to acquire knowledge or skills that equip them to cope better with the environment" (Littleton, Toates, & Braisby 2002: 167). The process of learning is traditionally believed to be one of the most challenging areas of research within the psychological science. Representatives of different paradigms such as behaviourism, cognitive psychology, psychoanalysis, and other perspectives demonstrate variety of views regarding the nature of learning. Learning as conditioning, learning as the formation and alteration of symbolic structures, learning as the adjustment of weights in a neural net - these are only a few of the existing models designed to explain how people acquire and maintain certain behavioural models. The Social Cognitive Theory, which stemmed from the learning theory of N.E. Miller and J. Dollard and was expanded on and theorised by Albert Bandura in the 1960s represents one of the most prominent and balanced accounts of learning and behaviour proposed up to date. Similarly to other prominent representatives of the behaviourist stance, Bandura rejected existence of any independent personality that might be held responsible for shaping human behaviour. However, Bandura also did not deprive human being of the possibility to regulate his behaviour: he believed that each individual has a set of persuasions that assess the circumstances and regulate behaviour depending on the results of assessment (Frager & Fadiman 2000). Bandura's concept relies on the assumption that human being is shaped by the process of learning the essence of which is acquisition of various behavioural patterns. The most important property of human nature is cognition that helps utilise such complex skills as abstract thinking, apply difficult symbolic forms of communication such as language, cognize the external world, and determine behaviour depending upon different circumstances. The latter reflects the key difference between Bandura's theory and the classic postulate of traditional behaviourism: presence of those 'circumstances' implies that constant reinforcement of certain behavioural patterns may not necessarily result in absolute acquisition of certain models of behaviour even when the reinforcer is available. Bandura termed this phenomenon 'plasticity of consciousness' (Bandura 1977). Bandura's theory implies that behaviour of human being is neither determined by solely inward causes (like instincts, desires) nor by environmental influences but by the dynamic interaction between these two types. However, it will be a mistake to believe that Bandura views behaviour as absolutely passive object of influence. According to his theory, humans may choose behavioural pattern depending on the circumstances. This essential ability helps predict possible reactions of the environment which also includes other human beings. In this case the behaviour itself influences the surrounding circumstances. Based on these assumptions Bandura developed one of the core concepts his social cognitive theory is based upon: reciprocal determinism (Bandura 1978). Figure 1: The visual model of reciprocal determinism Source: Bandura 1986, p. 23 This simple scheme demonstrates the essence of reciprocal determinism: B is behaviour, P is properties of personality, and E is environmental influence. Therefore, human behaviour is the result of interaction between three components, namely personal or inward peculiarities and cognitions, exterior causes, and behaviour itself. Each component within this model is in direct relationship with each of the other two, but neither of them can be addressed as absolutely dominant: "behaviour, cognitive, and other personal factors, and environmental influences all operate interactively as determinants of each other" (Bandura 1986, p.23). Importance of each element may change depending on the situation. Although Bandura is in line with the traditional behaviourist tradition in his refusal to acknowledge existence of 'personality' he does believe that one of the three components that affect human behaviour comes close to being defined as 'personality: inward peculiarities the main part of which is cognition (Bandura 1978). In his numerous publications, Bandura described two types of learning: enactive and observational. The former type had been described earlier by the brightest representative of traditional behavioural school Burrhus Frederic Skinner in a series of experiments involving pigeons and rats (Skinner 1950). This type of learning is primitive, and can be found in lower animals: it directly depends upon positive or negative reinforcement. Bandura questioned the point of view that this type of learning plays an important role in shaping behaviour of human being: he reasonably believed that human behaviour is too complex to be shaped in such primitive way; conscious conceptualization is necessary for reinforcement to have results (Bandura 1986). Bandura also proposed the concept of observational learning which he claimed could be observed exclusively in human beings to reflect the key difference in learning patterns between human beings and animals. Observations allow human being learn without any involvement into the situation of learning. This assumption openly contradicts the traditional behaviourist notion that only direct learning is an effective method of knowledge acquisition. In his famous series of experiments children were shown a stranger beating a doll. After that the children tried to imitate abusive handling of the doll, and the same effect was observed even when they watched a violent model of behaviour on video (Bandura, Ross & Ross 1961). According to the social cognitive theory in general and the concept of observational learning in particular reinforcement was not necessarily a prerequisite of specific behavioural models. Bandura believes that individuals may acquire patterns of behaviour based solely upon observation of other people who receive reinforcement. This specific type of learning saves people the trouble of performing countless number of operations and accelerates the process of human development (Bandura 1986). In fact, social cognitive theory proposed by Bandura relies almost exclusively on the observational type of learning. Although Albert Bandura gives serious consideration to the environmental influences in his theory, he can hardly be referred to as pure behaviourist: the social cognitive theory stands apart amongst the rest of doctrines explaining human behaviour. Bandura maintained that personality is shaped by group of determinants: the behaviour, the individual properties, with cognition playing the main part, and the environmental influence within the system of dynamic relationships. In accord with this theory people can learn even observing behaviour or reaction of other people (Frager & Fadiman 2000). Thus, the social cognitive theory focuses upon human ability for thinking and cognition, giving much less attention to the environmental factors if compared to Skinner for instance. One more feature that sets Bandura's theory apart from the classic behaviourist models is indirect reinforcement and, of course, observational learning. At the same time, Bandura also relies heavily upon the basic principles of behaviourism thus admitting the role of environmental influences in shaping human behaviour. Each major theory or model that has been proposed up to date to explain the process of learning and clarify the origins of human behaviour has certain strengths and limitations. Thus, psychoanalytic theories tend to neglect the positive potential of human nature focusing almost exclusively on the hidden sexual drives and motives as determinants of human behaviour. Humanistic theories offer the proper way of thinking and lifestyle for people to feel happy rather than provide a scientific, research-oriented and reliable explanation of human behaviour. Cognitive theories tend to pay insufficient attention to the environmental determinant focusing on the processes that occur inside human brain. Behaviourism also fails to provide a well-balanced account of human behaviour and personality by ignoring mental processes and events. Behavioural view of learning has been sharply criticised for extreme biologisation and primitivisation of human behaviour (Glassman & Hadad 2000). Thus, majority of Skinner's classic experiments involved rats and pigeons though the results were used to explain and predict behaviour of human beings. Bandura's social cognitive model distinctly differs from the theories of human functioning that exaggerate the role that environmental influences play in learning and shaping of human behaviour. The most illustrative example of this difference can be drawn from the comparison between Bandura's theory and behaviourist models that demonstrate only slight interest in self-processes while focusing solely on the external stimuli. For Bandura, such dismissal of inner processes is not acceptable. On the contrary, his theory postulates that in order to effectively understand the relationship between human behaviour and the environmental factors one must understand how these factors are processed and interpreted inside the mind. For Bandura (1986), "a theory that denies that thoughts can regulate actions does not lend itself readily to the explanation of complex human behaviour" (p. 15). Similarly, Bandura's views stand in clear contrast with the models that overly focus on the role of inner factors in human development and learning. Although Bandura acknowledges the strong influence of internal process in human adaptation and change, he clearly rejects the notion that human behaviour is the product of only these processes that evolved over millennia of evolution. Instead, his social cognitive theory stresses the importance of a bidirectional relationship between external factors and the process of human development which involves development of the inner structures, "evolution of consciousness, thought, language, and symbolic communication" (Bussey & Bandura 1999: p. 683). Such attempt to establish balance between the external influences and individual inner processes makes Bandura's theory one of the most relevant models with more predictive power than less balanced accounts of human behaviour and learning. References Bandura, A., Ross, D., and Ross, S.A. 1961, "Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models", Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology No. 63, pp. 575-582. Bandura, A. 1977, Social-learning theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bandura, A. 1978, 'The self system in reciprocal determinism', American Psychologist Vol. 33, pp. 344-358. Bandura, A. 1986, Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs. Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. 1999, 'Social cognitive theory of gender development and differentiation', Psychology Review Vol. 106, pp. 676-713. Frager, R., & Fadiman, J. 2000, Personality and Personal Growth, Longman. Glassman, W., & Hadad, M. 2000, Approaches to Psychology, 3rd edition, Open University Press: Chapter 3. Littleton, K., F. Toates, & N. Braisby 2002, "Chapter 3: Three Approaches to Learning", in Miell, D., A. Phoenix & K. Thomas (Eds), Mapping Psychology, The Open University. Skinner, B. F. 1950, "Are Theories of Learning Necessary" Psychological Review Vol. 57, No. 4, pp. 193-216. Read More