Social Cognitive Theory 01 Pg. 1 Social Cognitive Theory Of Learning “Of the m any cues that influence behavior, at any point in time, none is more com mon than the actions of others. ” (Bandura, 1986, p. 206) Historical Overview In the early 196 0’s, when many learning and instruction theories were being developed, Albert Bandura and his researchers recognized that many overlooked an important asp ect of learning, the ob servation of others. From this analysis began the social-cognitive theory. I. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES A.
Theories of Imitation · Imitation is an instinct — Observed actions elicit an instinctive drive to copy those actions. · Imitation is limited by development — Children imitate actions that fit with existing cognitive structures . · Imitation is conditioned — Behaviors are imitated and reinforced through shaping. Imitation becomes a generalized response class. · Imitation is instrumental behavior — Imitation becomes a secondary drive through repeated reinforcement of responses matching those of models. Imitation results in drive reduction. A.
Rotter’s Social Learning Theory · The social learning theory of Julian Rotter represents an integration of learning and p ersonality theories (P hares, 19 76 ). According to Rotter, individuals consider the likely conseq uences of their actions in a given situation and act b ased on their beliefs. · The theory is comprises four major variables: a. Behavior potential refers to the probability that an individual will act in a certain fashion relative to alternative behaviors. b. Expectancy is the individual’s belief concerning the likelihood that a particular reinforcement will occur as a consequence of a specific behavior. . Reinforcement value refers to how much the individual values a p articular outcome relative to other potential outcomes. d. The psychological situation implies that the context of behavior is important. The way in which the individual views the situation can affect both reinforcement value and exp ectancy. · This relationship is symbolized as follows: BP=E & RV A. Bandura’s Theory of Social Learning Social cognitive learning theory highlights the idea that much of human learning occurs in a social environment. By observing others, people acquire knowledge of rules, skills, strategies, beliefs, and attitudes.
Individuals also learn about the usefulness and approp riateness of behaviors by observing models and the conseq uences of modeled behaviors and they act in accordance with their b eliefs concerning the expected outcomes of actions. Social cognitive theory is a direct response to Behaviorism. Bandura began building his theory of social learning by identifying 3 areas of weakness of Behaviorism: a. the limited range of behaviors possible for research in a laboratory type setting b. the fact that these theories were unable to account for the acquisition of new resp onses to situations c. hat is dealt with only one type of learning, i. e. , direct learning, where the learner performs a response and experiences the consequences. (Bandura referred to this type of learning as insta ntaneou s match ing. Bandura referred to indirect learning as delayed matching where the learner observes reinforced behavior and later enacts the same type of behavior. Social Cognitive Theory 01 Pg. 2 I. Define: Social cognitive theory defines learning as an internal mental pro cess that ma y or ma y no t be reflected in immed iate behavioral change (Bandura, 1986).
Assumptions / Basic Principles 1. People learn by observing others: Modeling (3 types of modeling). Generally, cognitive modeling involves modeled demonstrations, together with verbal descriptions of the model’s thoughts and actions. 2. 3. 4. Learning is internal. Learning is goal-directed behavior. There are 3 types of reinforcers of behaviors: a. direct reinforcement — Direct reinforcement would be directly experienced by the learner. b. vicarious reinforcement — Vicarious reinforcement would be observed to be consequences of the behavior of the model. c. elf reinforcement — Self reinforcement would be feelings of satisfaction or displeasure for behavior gauged by personal performance standards. Self-regulated behavior is essential to the learning process. n Self-regulation of behavior is the process of one using one’s own thoughts and actions to achieve a goal. n Self-regulated learners identify goals and adopt and maintain their own strategies for reaching the goals. n Without self-regulation, people would not maintain behavior until it could reinforced. · ** Self-regulations is critical to understanding Soc.
Cog. theory because a lot of human behavior occurs without immediate reinforcement/punishment. Often, the consequences for behavior are to far down the road into the future to effect current behavior. A) 4 parts to Self-regulated behavior 1. Goal setting Critical to self-regulated behavior because they help to establish a purpose for one’s actions and provide a means of measuring one’s progress. Self-observation Once goals have been set, learners monitor themselves to determine their p rogress. Selfmonitoring behavior can be taught in a variety of ways. * Often used as a means of scaffolding. Self-assessment Teachers don’t necessarily have to be the only one’s doing assessment; students can be taught self-assessment skills. ** Time consuming — students need to make sure that their goals are specific and quantitative in nature (ex. running). Self-reinforcement We tend to feel good about the things we accomplish and regretful or guilty about the things we don’t accomplish. The point is that as individual’s become more self-regulated, they learn to reinforce and punish themselves.
Often, self-reinforcers and self-p unishers are one’s feelings — the most powerful form of self-reinforcement is the feeling of accomplishment after successfully setting and meeting challenging goals. II. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Reciprocal Causation/Determination Learning involves the interaction of several factors, such as behavior, environment, storing information in memory and personal factors (i. e. , beliefs & expectations: e. g. , relevant to ability). Such interactive effects are considered “mutually influencing” — usually referred to as reciprocal Social Cognitive Theory 01 causation / determ ination.
For Bandura, it is through the observations of models that an individual’s perceptions and actions influence their cognitive development. Pg. 3 Ex. : You get a low score on an algeb ra test (environmental factor) which influences your b elief ( personal factor) about your ability to do algebra. Your belief, in turn, influences your behavior — in this case, it’s your study habits — and your behavior influences the environment — in this case, you got a tutor to help you study. 6. Indirect -vs- Direct Effects of Reinforcement & Punishment on Learning A.
Enactive learning Enactive learning involves learning from the consequences of one’s actions. Behaviors that result in successful consequences are retained; those that lead to failures are refined or discarded. B. Vicarious Experiences Occurs when people observe the consequences of another person’s actions and adjust their own behavior accordingly. Vicarious sources accelerate learning over what would be possible if people had to perform every behavior for learning to occur. Vicarious sources also save peop le from personally experiencing negative consequences. Two types: V icarious reinforcement & Vicarious Punishment.
C. Expectations. For behaviorist, punishment & reinforcement are direct causes of behavior; however, for social cognitive theorists, reinforcement and punishment cause individuals to form expectations about consequences that are likely to result from various behaviors. Ex. : If you study well and do well on a test, you expect to do well on a second test with a similar amount of study. If you see someone else being reinforced for a given behavior, you expect to reinforced for a similar behavior. **** ** Reinforcement and punishment only changes behavior when learners know what behaviors are being reinforced or punishment.
Implication for teachers: a) specifiy what behaviors will be reinforced so that students can adapt their behavior accordingly, & b) learners need feedback so that they can know what behaviors have resulted in desirable consequences. B. Cognitive Processing How we p rocess information when we experience the reinforcement/punishment directly vs indirectly can be q uite different. Intensity of reinforcement and punishment from an emotional perspective. E. Choice of Behavior We can choose how to respond to a given situation based on the consequences we see others experience. F.
Non-occurrence of Expected Consequences When we see the consequences experienced by others, we tend to expect similar consequences if we behave in a similar manner. However, similar behaviors don’t always result in similar consequences. Ex. : Leigh Scott Case Study = different outcomes for similar behaviors. Social Cognitive Theory 01 Pg. 4 I. Modeling Processes Modeling is a general term that refers to behavioral, cognitive, and affective changes deriving from observing one or more models. The characteristics of mo dels is an important factor in determining the degree to which the attention is p aid to the model by the learner. The resp onse of the learner to the modeling behavior is largely determined by three sets of factors: 1. ) the particular attrib utes of the model, such as relevance and credibility for the observer; 2. ) the prestige of the model, and 3. ) the satisfaction already present in the situation where the behavior is being modeled. · A second determinant of the models success is the nature of the ob server. Those with a p oor sense of self esteem and those w ho lack self confidence are more p rone to adop t the behavior of models. A. Types of M odels 1.
Direct Modeling n Simply attemp ting to imitate the model’s behavior. n Live models include family members, friends, work associates and others with whom the individual has direct contact. 1. Symbolic Modeling n Imitating b ehaviors displayed by characters in books, plays, movies, or television. n The symbolic model is a pictorial representation of behavior. . 1. Synthesized Modeling — Developing behaviors by combining portions of observed acts. Ex. : A child uses a chair to get up and open the cupboard door after seeing her brother use a chair to get a book from a shelf and seeing her mother open the cupboard door.
B. Functions of Modeling · Response facilitation — Social promp ts create motivational inducements for observers to model the actions (“going along with the crowd”). Models can strengthen existing behaviors. (ex. : standing ovation — we already know the behavior, but when we see others do it, we tend to follow suit). We can also learn behaviors that we didn’t know prior to observing models. · Inhibition/Disinhibition — Inhibitions are self-imposed restrictions on one’s own behaviors. Modeling can either strengthen or weaken one’s given inhibition(s).
Unlike facillitating an existing behavior, inhibitions involve socially unaccep table behaviors, such as b reaking classroom rules or general laws. (ex. : Los Angeles riots and looting; Pedestrians at a red light are more likely to obey or disregard the red light if they see others doing the same; Students are less likely to speak without permission if they see peers reprimanded for doing so. ). Modeled behaviors create expectations in observers that similar consequences will occur should they model the actions. · Observational learning–A key mechanism in observational learning is the information conveyed by models to bservers of ways to produce new b ehaviors. Subprocesses include attention, retention, production, and motivation. C. Cognitive Skill Learning · Ob servational learning expands the range and rate of learning. Two especially germane app lications of modeling to instruction are cognitive modeling and self-instructional training. · Cognitive modeling incorporates modeled explanation and demonstration with verbalization of the model’s thoughts and reasons for performing given actions. · Self-instructional training seeks to teach students how to regulate their own activities during learning. Five step procedure: a) Cognitive modeling, b) Overt guidance, c) Overt self-guidance, d) Faded overt self-guidance, Social Cognitive Theory 01 Pg. 5 D. Motor Skill Learning According to social cognitive theory the learning of motor skills involves constructing a mental model that provides the conceptual representation of the skill for response p roduction and serves as the standard for correcting responses subsequent to receiving feedback. The conceptual representation is formed by transforming observed sequences of behaviors into visual and symbolic codes to be cognitively rehearsed.
An important point in the social cognitive theory is that the learners behavior is guided by cognitive processes rather than formed or shaped by reinforced practice. Four component parts are responsible for the learning and performance acquisition. These are: V. 4 Basic Elements Involved in Learning from Models 1. Attention: Observer characteristics perceptual /cognitive capacities arousal level past performance Event characteristics relevance affective valence com plexity functional value model’s characteristics intrinsic rewards 1.
Retention: Observer characteristics cognitive skills Event characteristics cognitive organization cognitive rehearsal 1. Motor Reproduction (physically capable): Observer characteristics physical capabilities sub skill mastery Event characteristics selection & organization of responses feedback 1. Motivation — To Soc. Cog. Theorists, reinforcers motivate behavior. : Observer characteristics incentive preference social bias internal standards Event characteristics external reinforcement self-reinforcement vivacious reinforcement · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·
Social Cognitive Theory 01 VI. The Self-regulatory System and Self-Efficacy A. In Bandura’s later work he introduces two other asp ects to his Social Learning Theory. These are his work on the self-regulatory system and self-efficacy. In the area of self-regulatory system/selfevaluative behaviors he said that this system is based upon cognitive subprocesses that: perceive, evaluate and regulate behavior. Pg. 6 · · · · · · · A. These processes are based upon the standards for one’s behavior and capabilities of cognitive structures that provide referents for behavior and its outcom es.
These standards are based upon one’s: self observation, self judgment self response self evaluations A. The third area of Dr. Bandura’s work deals with the area of ones perception of one’s self-efficacy in dealing with a situation. Perceived self-efficacy is the belief that one can execute behavior to produce outcom e. It influences behavior in three ways: choice of behavior quality of individual performance persistence · · · Dr. Bandura’s definition of aptitude, itself, illustrates the importance he places on self-efficacy in his learning theory.
He says that the concept of ab ility is not a fixed attribute in our repertoire, rather it is a genera tive capab ility which cognitive, motivational, emotional and b ehavioral skills must be org anized an d effectively orchestrated to serve diverse purposes Self-efficacy is the conviction that one can successfully accomplish the behavior required to produce a particular outcome. It is a judgment about how well one can organize and implement effective strategies in a situation that may include novel and often stressful elements. A.
Self-efficacy-activated processes are b ased on four areas: cognitive motivtional emotional selective People with weak belief in their self-efficacy shy away from difficult tasks (personal threats) have low aspirations and weak commitment to the goals they choose maintain a self diagnostic focus (rather than how to perform) dwell on personal deficiencies, obstacles & adverse outcomes attribute failures to deficient capabilities slacken their efforts or give up quickly in face of difficulty slow to recover their sense of efficacy after failures or setbacks prone to stress & dep ression · · · · · · · · · · · Social Cognitive Theory 01 People with strong belief in their efficacy set challenging goals & sustain strong commitments to their goals approach difficult tasks as challenges rather than as threats maintain a task diagnostic focus attribute failures to insufficient effort heighten effort in face of difficulties quickly recover their sense of efficacy after failure or setback display low vulnerability to stress & depression Pg. 7 · · · · · · · · · ·
Perceived self-efficacy is visible in schools as it sets up a cue in the intellectual process: student beliefs in their ow n self-efficacy individual teachers perceived self-efficacy in their ability to perform effectively with their difficult students staffs perceived efficacy that their schools can perform The sources of perceived self-efficacy are: performance / accomplishments vicarious experience social persuasion physiological state The 3 types of cognitive motivators around which theories have b een b uilt: cognized goals outcome expectancies retrospective reasoning about perceived causes of success & failure · · · · · · II Self-efficacy’s Affect on Behavior 1. 2. 3. Choice of behavior Effort & persistence Learning & Achievement Sugg ested Readings: 4. Bandura, A. (197 7). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, N. J. : Prentice-Hall, p. 22. 5. Bigge, Morris L. and S. Samuel Shermis (1992 ). Learning Theories For Teachers. Harper-Collins Pub. Inc. p. 160 . 6. Deci, Edward L. , Luc G. Pelletier, Richard M. Ryan and Robert J. Vallerand (1991). Motivation and Education: The Self-D etermination Persp ective. E ducational Psychologist, 2 6(3& 4), pp 325-346. . Gredler, M argaret E. (19 92 ). Theory Into Practice. Learning and Instruction, p. 3 07. 8. Klein, Stephen B. (19 91 ). Principles and Applications. Learning. McGraw-Hill, Inc. p. 204. 9. Tudge, Jonathan R. H. and Paul A. Winterhoff (1993). Vygotsky, Piaget and Bandura: Perspectives on the Relations Between the S ocial World and Cognitive D evelop ment. Human D evelop ment, 36, pp 61-81. 10. Rafferty, Cathleen (1993 Summer) Processional Self-Efficacy: Preparing Teachers for Professional Develop ment Schools. Contemporary Education, 64 (4) p. 226.