The Social Learning Theory - Article Example

THE SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY (Section) Due) THE SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY The Social learning theory was formulated by Robert Burgess in collaboration with Ronald Akers in the year 1966. The concept of this theory emerged from their interest to revise the Differential Association Theory that was developed by the famous Edwin Sutherland. The idea of relating deviant social modus operandi such as rape majorly emerged from Akers, while Burgess had highly concentrated on the aspect of relating other varying facets of life to this theory (Akers et al 1979). The concept of the Social Learning theory majorly emerge from a main assumption that; the processes involved in the learning activities may lead to behaviors considered deviant in nature or even conforming to various desired facets of human values (Akers et al 1979). This theory alludes that, the specific learning processes entails characteristically instrumental learning which is modified by activities like; imitation, rewards as well as punishments. Additionally, it recognizes the fact that learning activities occur in a certain process referred as a differential association (Akers et al 1979). That is, a person’s behavior is highly influenced by the kind of people he/she interacts with, specifically people who tends to be closer to him/her. Article Review (One) The first article, Social Learning Theory: The Continuing Development of a Perspective was written by Marvin Krohn. It recognizes the pertinence of the Social Learning Theory in the provision of comprehensive explanations to issues related with criminal activities. Fundamentally, it supports the existence of the Social Learning Theory and begins by providing background information concerning the pioneers who were responsible for the development of this theory. Specifically, this article identifies the efforts of Robert Burgess and Ronald Akers who were responsible for the development of the theory over three decades ago. Moreover, it adds that, the idea of the Social Learning Theory emerged from a modification of Differential Association Theory. The article provides a description of the theory and concurs that desired and undesirable human behaviors emerge from various learning processes that human experience on their daily lives. These learning processes are characterized by various crucial facets that facilitate the rate at which an individual acquire certain behaviors for instance; imitating other people’s daily activities, rewards as well as punitive measures that an individual may be exposed to. There are also four basic concepts that are recognized in the article to have emerged in the social learning theory; these concepts are critically discussed with the author giving ideas that support and others that refutes. The first concept that has been recognized to have emerged from the social learning theory is the differential association concept. Marvin in his criticism recognizes that Burgess and Akers formulated the Social Learning Theory; their main intention was to restate the Differential Association Theory but not to provide a substitute. However, he believes that the key component of the Social Learning Theory emerges from the corpus of the Differential Association Theory but asserts that: There is some form of ambiguity in describing the role played by the Differential Association Theory in the Social Learning Theory. Moreover, the article depicts that, Akers and Burgess did not give high considerations to the pertinent role played by the other three key concepts of Social Learning Theory. In order, to give more insight concerning some failures of Akers and Burgess in recognizing the importance of Differential Association in the Social Learning Theory, the article criticizes a study conducted by Akers and Burgess to depict social learning theory as well as the differential association in an exogenous dimension. Marvin argues that, the results of the study do not depict differential associations in a manner that provides explicit conclusions. In general conclusion, this article provides mixed support of the theory; in the introductory part of the article, the author provides a clear explanation of the Social Learning Theory and states instances where some components of the theory are applicable in real life. However, he later provides criticism on some parts of the theory that majorly arise from lack of clarity and accuracy. Review Article (Two) The Social Learning Theory and Partner Violence: A research Note is an article that was developed by collaboration between Christine Sellers, Kathryn Branch and John Cochran. The article attempts to describe the ways in which the crucial facets of the most commonly applied theoretical explanations of intrinsic partner conflicts; the Male Support Peer Theory and the Transmission Theory are generally covered in the wider concept of the Social Learning Theory. The introductory part of the article begins by providing explanations concerning various elements of Social Learning Theory. It identifies the pertinent features of social learning theory; they include differential reinforcement, imitations as well as differential association. The article further recognizes imitation, a component of the Social Learning Theory, to be conforming to some aspects of the Intergenerational Transmission Theory whereby: Certain individuals tend to engage in intimate partner conflicts after having observed others who initially practiced such kinds of partner violence. Christine and her partners in this article recognize that the Social Learning Theory is broad in the sense that, it facilitates the incorporation of a variety of definitions which ultimately widen the concept of deviant behaviors among human beings. Moreover, the Differential Association is recognized in the article as imperative in incorporating some aspects of the Male Peer Support Theory as well as Intergenerational Theory as in: Persons tend to acquire some violent characters from the people they associate with; these characters are later extended to their partners. Consequently, the differential reinforcement is comprehensively discussed in the article; however, authors identify some forms of inconsistency in the article which emerge from the fact: The Differential reinforcement alludes to the tendency in which individual relate to more rewarding behaviors than those that may incur negative implications. This is in contrast to the Male Peer Support and the Intergenerational Theories. A more comprehensive conclusion is provided in the last paragraphs of the article that indicates how the Social Learning Theory integrates other pertinent theories that have been applied in the study of the intimate partner conflicts. At the same time limitations of the social learning theory is also provided in these last paragraphs which indicates that; the Social Learning Theory has not provided accurate explanations concerning the occurrence of intimate partner conflicts. In order to provide more explanations on the limitation of the social learning theory, the article provides two case studies that were conducted by Christine Seller and her colleagues as well as Akers and his colleagues. These studies indicated that the social learning model depicted a greater variation of the violence ascribed to gender issues; the weakness of this model is that it did not mediate the resultant gender effects. Furthermore, the article describes the methodology that was applied in collecting data in the case study which was self-determinism. In general perspective, this article provides mixed explanation concerning the Social Learning Theory and its applications in regard to other theories used to explicit the nature of conflicts that may occur between partners. Review Article (Three) The third article, the Social Learning and Deviant Behaviors: A specific Test of General Theory was written by Ronald and his Colleagues. It focuses on a test conducted upon the deviant behavior, an aspect of the social learning theory. The test is conducted upon adolescent with drug and alcohol consumption behaviors. This article provides a stronger support for the Social Learning Theory with most arguments applied in the study based on different variables such as: Imitation, differential reinforcements, differential associations and definitions. These variables accounted for various percentages of the variances that were applies in the study they include; 32% percentage alcohol use, 39% marijuana use, 55% and 68% respectively. The article also indicates that the social description of deviant behaviors has undergone tremendous changes in the last decades to the current theoretical dimensions that extend towards societal reactions and descriptions of deviance as well as crimes. Moreover, it describes examples of theories that have been applied by contemporary classical criminologists such as the Deterrence Theory which has undergone some limited changes (Krohn 1999). This theory is based on predicted or actual certainty, the level of damage as well as celerity that may result from legal actions taken against offenders/criminals. Another imperative theory recognized in the article to have played a major role in the study of deviant behaviors is the Control Theory. It provides a general explanation concerning deviant behaviors in a manner that focuses on informal social modifications that emanate from the bonds existing between individuals and related institutions (Krohn 1999). This article also provides the methodology applied in the study conducted by Ronald and other theorists; specifically, this methodology is self reports questionnaires. Matters of reliability and validity are also discussed in the article; reliability and validity issues ascribed to the use self report questionnaires are based on past studies that have successfully applied this methodology. The article indicates that, dependent variables such as use of marijuana, abstinence and alcohol consumption were applied t facilitate the study, while, independent variables included; differential reinforcements, definitions, differential associations as well as imitations. This article provides a conclusive support for the theory in relation to its application on the study of deviant behavior; it provides recognition of the important role played by the social learning theory in study the occurrence of deviant behaviors among youths. References Akers, R., Krohn, M., & Lanza-Kaduce, L. (1979). Social Learning and Deviant Behaviors: A Specific Test of General Theory. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 635-655. Bigge, M. L. (1982). Learning theories for teachers (4th ed.). New York: Harper & Row. Dunn, E. S. (1971). Economic and social development; a process of social learning. Baltimore: Published for Resources for the Future, by Johns Hopkins Press. Krohn, M. (1999). Social Learning Theory: The Continuing Development of a Perspective. University of Texas, Dallas: Sage Publications. Schneider, L. (1976). Classical theories of social change. Morristown, N.J.: General Learning Press. Sellers, C., Cochran, J., & Branch, K. (2005). Social Learning Theory and Partner Violence: A Research Note. Florida, USA: Routedge. University of South Alabama. (n.d.). University of South Alabama Homepage. Retrieved December 3, 2012, from http://www.southalabama.edu Psychology Articles for Students. (n.d.). Simply Psychology - Articles for Students. Retrieved December 3, 2012, from http://www.simplypsychology.org Basics Steps of Research. (n.d.). Scientific Method - Basics Steps of Research. Retrieved December 3, 2012, from http://explorable.com Tou, J. T. (1964). Modern Control Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill. Bubnicki, Z. (2005). Modern Control Theory. Berlin: Springer. Innovative Learning. (n.d.). Innovative Learning. Retrieved December 3, 2012, from http://www.innovativelearning.com Read More