BOBO DOLL

EXPERIMENT

10/8/12

10/8/12

AIM
The aim of Bandura's study was

to demonstrate that if children were passive witnesses to an aggressive display by an adult they would imitate this aggressive behavior when given the opportunity. to try and add credence to his belief that all human behavior was learned, through social imitation and copying, rather than inherited through genetic factors. Bandura hoped that the experiments would prove that aggression can be explained, at least in part, by social learning theory.

Introduction
The theory of social learning would state that behavior such as aggression is learned through observing and imitating others. Albert Bandura believed aggression reinforced by family members was the most prominent source of behavior modeling.

Subject of the experiment: Children witnessing a model aggressively attacking a plastic clown called the Bobo doll

Target Dimensions:

Bandura believed that aggression must explain three aspects: 1. First, how aggressive patterns of behavior are developed; 2. second, what provokes people to behave aggressively, and 3. third, what determines whether they are going to continue to resort to an aggressive behavior pattern on future occasions

Hypotheses

The researchers made the following 4 predictions regarding these aspects of the experiment: Subjects exposed to aggressive models will reproduce aggressive acts resembling those of the models
the observation of non-aggressive models will have a generalized inhibiting effect on the subject's subsequent behavior subjects will imitate the behavior of a same-sex model to a greater degree than a model of the opposite sex boys will be more predisposed than girls towards imitating aggression

Specifications:

Bandura tested 36 boys and 36 girls aged between 3-6 years. The role models were one male adult and one female adult. The method was a laboratory experiment. The design of the experiment has three major conditions; the control group, the group exposed to the aggressive model, and the group exposed to the passive model. The children who were exposed to the adult models were further sub divided by their gender, and by the gender of the model they were exposed to.

A summary of these groups is shown below: Control group - 24 subjects Eight experimental groups (each with 6 subjects) Aggressive and non- aggressive model condition - 24 subjects Aggressive Model Condition
6 boys with same sex model 6 boys with 6 girls with opposite sex same sex model model 6 girls with opposite sex model

Non-Aggressive Model Condition

6 boys with same sex model 6 boys with opposite sex model 6 girls with same sex model 6 girls with opposite sex model

Variables:
This complicated design therefore has three independent variables. The condition the children were exposed to, the gender of the role model and

the gender of the child.

10/8/12

Method:
The children were tested individually In stage one of the experiment children were brought to the experimental room The room was set out for play and the activities were chosen because they had been noted to have high interest for nursery school children. One corner was arranged as the child's play area, where there were toys for childrens interest To the opposite corner of the room where the model was to stand, there was a small table, chair, tinkertoy set, a mallet and a five foot inflatable Bobo doll.

 In the non-aggressive condition, the model ignored Bobo and assembled the tinker-toys in a quiet, gentle manner. In the aggressive condition the model began by assembling the tinker-toys, but after one minute turned to Bobo and was aggressive to the doll in a very stylized and distinctive way. An example of physical aggression was "raised the Bobo doll and pummeled it on the head with a mallet", An example of verbal aggression was, "Pow!" and "Sock him in the nose". After ten minutes the experimenter entered and took the child to a new room which the child was told was another games room.

 In stage two, the child was subjected to 'mild aggression arousal'. The child was taken to a room with relatively attractive toys. As soon as the child started to play with the toys the experimenter told the child that these were the experimenter's very best toys and she had decided that he cannot play with them and to reserve them for the other children.

10/8/12

Then the child was taken to the next room for stage three of the study where the child was told it could play with any of the toys in there. The experimenter stayed in the room "otherwise a number of children would either refuse to stay alone, or would leave before termination of the session" In this room there was a variety of both nonaggressive and aggressive toys.

The non-aggressive toys included a tea set, crayons, three bears and plastic farm animals.
The aggressive toys included a mallet and peg board, dart guns, and a 3 foot Bobo doll.

Response Measures
The child was kept in this room for 20 minutes during which time their behavior was observed by judges through a one-way mirror.

Observations were made at 5-second intervals therefore giving 240 response units for each child.

Response Measures
Three measures of imitation were obtained. The observers looked for responses from the child that were very similar to the display by the adult model. These were: 1. Imitation of physical aggression (for example, punching the doll in the nose) 2. Imitative verbal aggression (for example, repeating the phrases "Pow!" or "Sock him in the nose".

3. Imitative non-aggressive verbal responses (for example child repeats He keeps coming back for more)

POOR BOBO!!!

10/8/12

Bandura (1963) The Bobo" Doll Experiment

In the 1963, version kids watched films of adults beating on Bobo but each had different endings Film 1: Adult praised and rewarded with candy and soda by another adult who was heard saying, Youre a strong champion Film 2: Adult is scolded by another adult, Youre very bad or Hey there, you big bully, you quit picking on that clown

Main Findings
The main findings were:
1. The children in the aggressive model condition made more aggressive responses than the children in the non-aggressive model condition

2.
3.

Boys made more aggressive responses than girls;

The boys in the aggressive model conditions showed more aggressive responses if the model was male than if the model was female; The girls in the aggressive model conditions also showed more physical aggressive responses if the model was male but more verbal aggressive responses if the model was female

4.

5.
6.

Children exposed to un-aggressive model showed little imitative response

However, boys still did display aggressive behavior in the nonaggressive model

Main Findings
The results enabled the researchers to consider (a) Which children imitate the models, (b) Which models the children imitate (c) Whether the children showed a general increase in aggressive behavior or a specific imitation of the adult behaviors.

Deviations From the Behavior of the Model

They also recorded three aggressive behaviours that were not imitations of the adult model. These were all aggressive behaviours which were not carried out by the model. 1. Punches Bobo 2. Non-imitative physical and verbal aggression 3. Aggressive gun play

Social Learning Theory

Explains the learning within a social context via observation and imitation Also known as Observational learning Major components involved in observational learning
Attention Retention Reproduction Motivation Self-efficacy

Major Components
Attention
Based on the theory, if you want to learn something you have to pay attention. Likewise, anything that puts a damper on attention is going to decrease learning. For example, In the Bobo doll experiment, the children must witness the Bobo doll being verbally or physically abused by live models and filmed models attentively. Likewise, if you are sleepy, groggy, drugged, sick, nervous, etc you will learn less.

Major Components
Retention
After paying attention, you must remember or recall whatever you have learned, heard, seen or experienced. You must have that mental picture of the model in your mind so you can easily recall what you have learned from it. In the Bobo doll experiment, the children imitated the aggression they witnessed in the video. They aggressively hit the Bobo doll because it was coded and store in their memory.

Major Components
Reproduction
The observer must be able to reproduce the models behavior. The observer must learn and posses the physical capabilities of the modeled behavior. For example: Some people can watch Olympic ice skaters all day long, yet not be able to reproduce their jumps, because they cant ice skate at all! On the other hand, if they could skate, their performance would in fact improve if they watch skaters who are better than they are Once a behavior is learned through attention and retention, the observer must posses the physical capabilities to produce the aggressive act. In bobo doll experiment, the children had the physical capabilities of hitting and pummeling the doll to the ground.

Major Components
Motivation
None of this will be possible if you lack the drive or motivation to imitate the model. Motivation is more likely in the form of reinforcements or rewards i.e. you are not going to do anything until you have some reason or reward for doing it (reinforcement theory) In this case if a child imitates a models behavior and the consequences are rewarding, the child is likely to continue performing the behavior and makes it more likely that she will repeat the behavior if some reward is being offered.

Major Components
Self-Efficacy Self efficacy is basically learners self confidence towards learning. The observer is more likely to engage in certain behaviors when he believe he is capable of implementing those behaviors successfully.

E.g. children like doing things which adults tell them they cannot do believing they can do them i.e. having confidence in themselves.

 Treating video as instructions:

The children treated the video shown to them as an instruction manual and thus forth conducted it as it is thus killing the essence of the experiment.

Selection bias:
Subjects were all from the nursery of Stanford University and that meant uppermiddle class whites because only they could were able to afford putting their children in a nurseries so that constituted an extremely non diverse group of subjects.

Unclear history of subjects:

The ethnicities of the subjects were never documented and sweeping statements were made when explaining the aggression and violence trait among subgroups and lower socioeconomic communities.

 Ambiguous temporal sequence:

As the data of the real life aggression and control group conditions came from the 1961 study parallel ongoing events including the mental maturation of the subjects could have been confused with the observations and results of the 1963 study.

Ignores individuals biological state:

It does no account for the uniqueness of an individuals DNA, brain development and learning differences.

Ethical and moral implication:

The subjects were manipulated to respond in an aggressive manner as they were taunted and were not allowed to play with the toys and thus this incited agitation and dissatisfaction. Hence, they were , in a way trained to be aggressive.

Developmental Anatomy:
The underdeveloped frontal lobe of children below the age of 8 causes them to be unable to separate reality from fantasy. They are also sometimes unable to distinguish dreams from reality.

 Studies proving opposite results:

Some other research which examine the similar topic e.g. Feshbach and R.D. Singer study conclude that television actually decreases the amount of aggression in children because they were able to transmit all their feelings and thoughts of aggression into the movie.

Ecological invalidity:
The situation involves the child and an adult model, which is a very limited social situation. Also the model and the child are strangers. This, of course, is quite unlike 'normal' modeling which often takes place within the family.

Snap shot study:

The demonstrations are measured almost immediately. With such snap shot studies we cannot discover if such a single exposure can have long-term effects.

Interpretation:
The behavior towards the Bobo doll was interpreted as aggression. Perhaps the children interpreted their own behavior as play.

Replacing the Bobo Doll with a live clown:

The bobo doll was replaced with a living clown. Children were exposed to an adult female showing aggressive behavior towards the clown. The children imitated that behavior in a separate room.

Friedrich and Stein (1972)s The Mister Rogers:

A group of preschoolers watched Mister Rogers every weekday for four consecutive weeks.

Children from lower socioeconomic communities were easier to handle and more open about their feelings.

Loye, Gorney & Steele (1977):

Conducted variation of the Bobo Doll Experiment using 183 married males aged between 20 to 70 years old. Participants were made to watch one of five TV programs for 20 hours a week. People who viewed violent programs displayed aggression and hurtful demeanor Participants who viewed pro-social programs were more passive

Black and Bevans research (1992)

Participants were made to fill questionnaires before entering a cinema to watch a violent or a peaceful film Pre-movie mental state determined the choice of movie for the participants Violent films aggravated the already aggressive behavior of some participants

Application
Nature Nurture debate Geo News example Learning environment created by employers Positive learning rewards, motivation, attention, high self efficacy Negative impact of hostile working conditions Can use the affect of the TV in advertisement as well as maximizing positive images of hard work or images aligned with the mission/vision of the organization which keeps the workers motivated and positive