GROUP 4

ALBERT
BANDURA
SOCIAL COGNITIVE
THEORY
OVERVIEW
Two important environmental forces in the triadic model :
chance encounters and fortuitous events.

Observational Learning
Model
Modeling
agentic perspective “Bobo doll” experiment,
external and internal factors
agency for learning
concept of efficacy
BIOGRAPHY
December 4, 1925 - died July 26, 2021, Stanford, California, U.S.
Due to Congestive heart failure
Youngest of six children born to parents of eastern European descent.
Mundane, a small town on the plains of northern Alberta
His father is a polish, and his mother is from ukraine
Graduated highschool in 1946, Graduated work at the University of
Bandura pursued a bachelor’s degree Iowa, where he received a master’s
at the University of British Columbia degree in psychology (1951) and a
and in 1949 graduated with the doctorate in clinical psychology
Bolocan Award in psychology, (1952). In 1953, he joined the faculty
annually awarded to the outstanding at Stanford University where, except
student in psychology for 1 year as Fellow at the Center for
Advanced Study in the Behavioral
Sciences, he has remained
BIOGRAPHY
in (1958), he collaborated with the late Richard H. Walters, his first doctoral student,
to publish a paper on aggressive delinquents.
(1959) published their book, Adolescent Aggression
In 1961 Bandura carried out his famous Bobo doll experiment
His most influential books are
Social Learning Theory (1977),
Social Foundations of Thought
and Action (1986), and Self-
Efficacy: The Exercise of Control
(1997).
Continue to gain awards (1972 - 2004)
Holds the David Starr Jordan
Professorship of Social Science in
Psychology at Stanford University.
TRIADIC RECIPROCAL CAUSATION
NOTE: Behavior, Personal Factors &
Environmental Factors are
INTERDEPENDENT

Self-Efficacy
 LEARNING
Humans are quite flexible and capable of learning a multitude of attitudes, skills,
and behaviors and that a good bit of those learnings are a result of vicarious
experiences.

MODELING OBSERVATIONAL
Modeling involves cognitive
processes and is not simply
mimicry or imitation. It is more
LEARNING
allows people to learn without performing any
than matching the actions of
behavior
another; it involves
symbolically representing
information and storing it for NOTE: There are Several factors
determine whether a person will
use at a future time.
learn from a model in any
particular situation.
 LEARNING
4 PROCESSES THAT GOVERN OBSERVATIONAL LEARNING Enactive Learning
ATTENTION REPRESENTATION Every response a person
makes is followed by
some consequence

BEHAVIORAL PRODUCTION MOTIVATION

NOTE: Bandura believes that new
behaviors are acquired through two
major kinds of learning: observational
learning and enactive learning.
HUMAN AGENCY
Bandura (2001) believes that people are self-regulating, proactive, self-reflective,
and self-organizing and that they have the power to influence their own actions
to produce desired consequences.

Human agency is not a thing but an active process of exploring, manipulating,

and influencing the environment in order to attain desired outcomes.

- We always have a choice.

- Saying that you do not have a choice is in itself a choice you made.
FOUR CORE FEATURES OF HUMAN AGENCY
1.Intentionality
-Intentionality refers to acts a person performs intentionally.
-“It is not simply an expectation or prediction of future actions but a proactive
commitment to bringing them about”.

2. Forethought
-to anticipate likely outcomes of their actions, and to select behaviors that will
produce desired outcomes and avoid undesirable ones.
FOUR CORE FEATURES OF HUMAN AGENCY
3. Self-reactiveness
-People not only make choices, but they monitor their progress toward fulfilling
those choices.

4. Self-reflectiveness
-People are examiners of their own functioning; they can think about and evaluate
their motivations, values, and the meanings of their life goals, and they can think
about the adequacy of their own thinking.

Self-efficacy: the belief that they are capable of performing actions that will
produce a desired effect.
SELF-EFFICACY
-How people act in a particular situation depends on the reciprocity of behavioral,
environmental, and cognitive conditions, especially those cognitive factors that
relate to their beliefs that they can or cannot execute the behavior necessary to
produce desired outcomes in any particular situation.

Context based - we can have self-efficacy in certain areas of our life and low on
others.
Different from outcome expectations - efficacy refers to people’s confidence that
they have the ability to perform certain behaviors, whereas an outcome
expectancy refers to one’s prediction of the likely consequences of that behavior.
WHAT CONTRIBUTES TO SELF-EFFICACY?
Personal efficacy is acquired, enhanced, or decreased through any one or combination
of four sources:

1.Mastery experiences
-The most influential sources of self-efficacy
-In general, successful performance raises efficacy expectancies; failure tends to lower
them.

2. Social modeling
-Our self-efficacy is raised when we observe the accomplishments of another person of
equal competence but is lowered when we see a peer fail.

When the other person is dissimilar to us, social modeling will have little effect on
our self-efficacy.
The effects of this vicarious experience may even last a lifetime.
3. Social persuasion
-The effects of this source are limited, but under proper conditions, persuasion from
others can raise or lower self-efficacy.

Exhortations or criticisms from a credible source have more efficacious power

than those from a noncredible person.
Bandura (1986) hypothesizes that the efficacious power of suggestion is directly
related to the perceived status and authority of the persuader.

4.Physical and Emotional States

-Strong emotion ordinarily lowers performance; when people experience intense
fear, acute anxiety, or high levels of stress, they are likely to have lower efficacy
expectancies.

Incidentally, for some situations, emotional arousal, if not too intense, is

associated with increased performance, so that moderate anxiety felt by that
actor on opening night may raise his efficacy expectancies.
OTHER MODES OF HUMAN AGENCY
Proxy Agency - involves indirect control over those social conditions that affect
everyday living.

-Bandura (2001) noted that “no one has the time, energy, and resources to master every
realm of everyday life. Successful functioning necessarily involves a blend of reliance on
proxy agency in some areas of functioning”.

Collective Efficacy - the confidence people have that their combined efforts will
bring about group accomplishments.
SELF-REGULATION
-When people have high levels of self-efficacy, are confident in their reliance on
proxies, and possess solid collective efficacy, they will have considerable capacity to
regulate their own behavior.

Reactive strategy - reactively attempt to reduce the discrepancies between

their accomplishments and their goal.
Proactive strategy - after they close those discrepancies, they proactively set
newer and higher goals for themselves.
EXTERNAL FACTORS IN SELF-REGULATION
-Environmental factors, interacting with personal influences, shape individual
standards for evaluation.

By precept, we learn from parents and teachers the value of honest and friendly
behavior; by direct experience, we learn to place more value on being warm and
dry than on being cold and wet; and through observing others, we evolve a
multitude of standards for evaluating self-performance.

-External factors influence self-regulation by providing the means for

reinforcement.

Intrinsic rewards are not always sufficient; we also need incentives that emanate
from external factors.
INTERNAL FACTORS IN SELF-REGULATION
1. Self-observation - We must be able to monitor our own performance, even
though the attention we give to it need not be complete or even accurate.

In achievement situations, such as painting pictures, playing games, or taking

examinations, we pay attention to the quality, quantity, speed, or originality of
our work.
In interpersonal situations, such as meeting new acquaintances or reporting on
events, we monitor the sociability or morality of our conduct
2. Judgmental Process - We must also evaluate our performance. This helps us
regulate our behavior through the process of cognitive mediation.

The judgmental process depends on personal standards, referential

performances, valuation of activity, and performance attribution.
Personal Standards allows us to evaluate our performances without comparing
them to the conduct of others.
We evaluate our performances by comparing them to a standard of reference.
The judgmental process is dependent on the overall value we place on an
activity.
Performance attribution is how we judge the causes of our behavior.
3. Self-reaction - People respond positively or negatively to their behaviors
depending on how these behaviors measure up to their personal standards.

People set standards for performance that, when met, tend to regulate
behavior by such self-produced rewards as pride and self.
When people fail to meet their standards, their behavior is followed by self-
dissatisfaction or self-criticism.
SELF REGULATION THROUGH
MORAL AGENCY
People also regulate their actions through moral standards of conduct.
Bandura (1999a) sees moral agency as having two aspects: (1) doing no
harm to people and (2) proactively helping people.
Selective Activation- Bandura (2002a) insists that moral precepts predict
moral behavior only when those precepts are converted to action. In other
words, self-regulatory influences are not automatic but operate only if they
are activated.
Disengagement of Internal Control- By justifying the morality of their
actions, they can separate or disengage themselves from the consequences
of their behavior.
Selective activation and disengagement of internal control allow people
with the same moral standards to behave quite differently, just as they
permit the same person to behave differently in different situations
In the previous illustration the various mechanisms through which self-
control is disengaged or selectively activated.
First, people can redefine or reconstruct the nature of the behavior itself
by such techniques as morally justifying it, making advantageous
comparisons, or euphemistically labeling their actions.
Second, they can minimize, ignore, or distort the detrimental
consequences of their behavior.
Third, they can blame or dehumanize the victim.
Fourth, they can displace or diffuse responsibility for their behavior by
obscuring the relationship between their actions and the effects of those
actions.
REDEFINE BEHAVIOR
With redefinition of behavior- people justify otherwise reprehensible actions by
a cognitive restructuring that allows them to minimize or escape responsibility.
They can relieve themselves of responsibility for their behavior by at least three
techniques.
The first is moral justification, in which otherwise culpable behavior is made to
seem defensible or even noble.
A second method of reducing responsibility through redefining wrongful
behavior is to make advantageous or palliative comparisons between that
behavior and the even greater atrocities committed by others.
A third technique in redefining behavior is the use of euphemistic labels. It is
using different language in the attempt to reduce the moral salience of a
potential transgression.
DISREGARD OR DISTORT THE
CONSEQUENCES OF BEHAVIOR
A second method of avoiding responsibility involves distorting or obscuring the
relationship between the behavior and its detrimental consequences.
Bandura (1986, 1999a) recognized at least three techniques of distorting or
obscuring the detrimental consequences of one’s actions.
First, people can minimize the consequences of their behavior.
Second, people can disregard or ignore the consequences of their actions, as
when they do not see firsthand the harmful effects of their behavior.
The third and final, people can distort or misconstrue the consequences of
their actions.
DEHUMANIZED OR BLAME THE
VICTIMS
Third, people can obscure responsibility for their actions by either
dehumanizing their victims or attributing blame to them.
When victims are not dehumanized, they are sometimes blamed for the
perpetrator’s culpable conduct. A rapist may blame his victim for his crime, citing
her provocative dress or behavior.
DISPLACE OR DIFFUSE RESPONSIBILITY
The fourth method of dissociating actions from their consequences is to displace
or diffuse responsibility.
With displacement, people minimize the consequences of their actions by
placing responsibility on an outside source.
A related procedure is to diffuse responsibility—to spread it so thin that no one
person is responsible.
DYSFUNCTIONAL BEHAVIOR
Bandura’s concept of triadic reciprocal causation assumes that behavior is
learned as a result of a mutual interaction of (1) the person, including cognition
and neurophysiological processes; (2) the environment, including
interpersonal relations and socioeconomic conditions; and (3) behavioral
factors, including previous experiences with reinforcement.
Dysfunctional behavior is no exception. Bandura’s concept of dysfunctional
behavior lends itself most readily to depressive reactions, phobias, and aggressive
behaviors.
DEPRESSION
High personal standards and goals can lead to achievement and self-satisfaction.
However, when people set their goals too high, they are likely to fail. Failure
frequently leads to depression, and depressed people often undervalue their own
accomplishments. It can cause misery, feelings of worthlessness, lack of
purposefulness, and pervasive depression.
First, during self-observation, people can misjudge their own performance or
distort their memory of past accomplishments.
Second, depressed people are likely to make faulty judgments. They set their
standards unrealistically high so that any personal accomplishment will be
judged as a failure.
Finally, the self-reactions of depressed individuals are quite different from
those of nondepressed persons.
PHOBIAS
Phobias- Phobias are fears that are strong enough and pervasive enough to
have severe debilitating effects on one’s daily life. Phobias and fears are learned
by direct contact, inappropriate generalization, and especially by observational
experiences.
Bandura (1986) credits television and other news media for generating many
of our fears.
Once established, phobias are maintained by consequent determinants: that
is, the negative reinforcement the phobic person receives for avoiding the
fear producing situation.
AGRESSION
Aggressive behaviors- when carried to extremes, can also be dysfunctional. It is
acquired through observation of others, direct experiences with positive and
negative reinforcements, training, or instruction, and bizarre beliefs.
Once established, people continue to aggress for at least five reasons: (1) They
enjoy inflicting injury on the victim (positive reinforcement); (2) they avoid or
counter the aversive consequences of aggression by others (negative
reinforcement); (3) they receive injury or harm for not behaving aggressively
(punishment); (4) they live up to their personal standards of conduct by their
aggressive behavior (self-reinforcement); and (5) they observe others
receiving rewards for aggressive acts or punishment for nonaggressive
behavior.
THERAPY
According to Bandura, deviant behaviors are initiated on the basis of social
cognitive learning principles, and they are maintained because, in some ways,
they continue to serve a purpose.
The ultimate goal of social cognitive therapy is self-regulation (Bandura, 1986). To
achieve this end, the therapist introduces strategies designed to induce specific
behavioral changes, to generalize those changes to other situations, and to
maintain those changes by preventing relapse.
The first step in successful therapy is to instigate some change in behavior.
Bandura (1986) has suggested several basic treatment approaches. The first
includes overt or vicarious modeling.
A third procedure, called enactive mastery, requires patients to perform those
behaviors that previously produced incapacitating fears.
Bandura has demonstrated that each of these strategies can be effective and
that they are most powerful when used in combination with one another.
Cognitive Mediation- a common mechanism found in each of these approaches
RELATED RESEARCH
“Self Efficacy and Diabetes” by William Saco et al.
Prediction: the higher level of self-efficacy patients felt, the more likely people would
be to adhere to their disease management plan and therefore the better the
patients would feel.

Results:
High Self-efficacy is associated with:
Low levels of depression
Better adherence to treatment plans
Lower BMI
Reduced severity of Diabetes symptoms
RELATED RESEARCH
Moral Disengagement and Bullying

Meta analysis by Gini, Pozzoli, and Bussey on 2014 in relation to Bandura's predictor of moral
disengagement and bullying in school-aged children and adolescents have shown that:

Overall levels of moral disengagement and aggressive behavior are often higher in boys
than girls but the relationship between moral disengagement and bullying style behavior
is the same for both genders.

the higher children and teens score on MDS or Moral Disengagement Scale, the more they
behave abusively. They also studied how bullying can be carried out not by just Individuals.
but can also be by peer, which is called Collective Moral Disengagement.
RELATED RESEARCH
Moral Disengagement and Bullying
They also studied how bullying can be carried out not by just Individuals. but can
also be by peer, which is called Collective Moral Disengagement.

Gini et al. (2015) suggest that children who step up to defend victims of bullies are
able to resist the collective pressure to be passive and accept or even justify the
bullying behavior.

Thornberg and Jungert (2013), found that individuals who scored high on moral
disengagement went beyond passive bystanding and were more likely to praise or
encourage bullies. however, bystanders who had high feelings of self-efficacy were
more likely to step in and come to the aid of the victim
RELATED RESEARCH
Social Cognitive Theory “Goes Global”
Albert Bandura collaborated with Population Media Center to present a serial
drama with the aim to apply his theory on social cognitive to convey the global
challenges such as population growth. These mass media productions have been
shown to improve viewers' perceived efficacy to determine family size , the use of
contraceptives, and promotes the status of women in family, social and educational
life. this collaborative work is an influential illustration of how personality theory can
build or help in creating a solution to global social problems.
CRITIQUE OF BANDURA
Generates Research: Very High
Falsifiability: High
Organizes Data: High
Internally Consistent: High
Parsimony: High
CONCEPT OF HUMANITY
Optimistic than Pessimistic
Emphasizes more on Social Influence than Biological
High on Freedom versus Determinism
Moderate on Causality or Teleology
Emphasizes more on Conscious over Unconscious
Moderate on Uniqueness vs Similarity
THANK YOU!