(abby) learning theories 3 - banduras study Flashcards
what are the 3 studies you need to know by Bandura and ross
- 1961- aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- 1963- real life vs film aggression (not for prog)
- 1965- modelled aggression is rewarded or punished (not for prog)
what are the 4 hypothesis tested in study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- children exposed to aggressive role models would imitate the modelled aggression
- observation of non-aggressive models would inhibit aggressive behaviour
- children would imitate the behaviour of same sex models more than model of the opposite sex
- boys would display more aggression than girls
what is the aim of study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- to see whether aggressive behaviour could be acquired through observation of aggressive models
what is the method and design of study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- method is lab experiment
- design is matched pairs
- matched on their aggression levels which were identified by a female experimenter and the children’s nursery school teacher
- children rated on a 5 point aggression scale
what is the procedure for study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- 72 children from the Stanford university nursery were studies, 36 boys and 36 girls with mean age of 52 months
- divided into 3 conditions 12b+12g witnessed aggressive role model, 12b+12g witnessed non-aggressive role model, 12b+12g witnessed no role model
- each group was further sub-divided, within each group half of the p’s saw the same sex model and half saw opposite sex model
what are the 3 stages called and how long do they last in study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- stage 1-> modelling stage (10mins)
- stage 2-> mild aggression arousal (2 mins)
- stage 3-> test for delayed imitation (20 mins)
what happens in the modelling stage of study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- experimenter led p into first room , chikd was sat at table and encouraged to play with a tinker toy set and potato prints
- model was escorted to opposite side o room and told that the toys were for him/her to play with
- aggressive condition-> model played with tinker toy set but after a minute acted aggressively towards bobo doll, aggressive acts were deliberately stylised so imitation would be clear, aggressive acts repeated 3 times in 10 mins
- non-aggressive-> procedure was same apart from when seated the model played with tinker toys quietly and ignored bobo doll, experimenter collected child after 10 mins
what were some of the physically aggressive acts in study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- laid bobo doll on side, sat on it and punched it on nose
- raised bobo doll up and hit on head with mallet
- threw bobo doll in air and kicked around room
what were some of the verbally aggressive responses in study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- ‘kick him’
- ’ hit him down’
what happens in mild aggression arousal stage of study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- taken to room 2 filled with attractive toys like a jet fighter plane
- child was allowed to play with them for 2 mins then experimenter stopped child and said ‘ these are my very best toys, i dont just let anyone play with them, i have decided to keep them for other children, but you can play with the toys in the other room’
- this made sure there emotional level were the same before the next stage
what happens in the test for delayed imitation in study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- each child including control group take into room 3
- room contained aggressive toys like toy gun, bobo doll, mallet
- had non aggressive toys like crayons and a tea set
- experimenter worked discreetly on opposite corner of room
- 2 observers viewed the behaviour through a 1 way mirror at 5 second intervals
what were the 4 results from study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- participants in aggressive condition showed more aggressive behaviour than those in non-aggressive condition
- p’s in non-aggressive condition showed no significant difference in aggressive behaviour to the control group who saw no model
- sex of the model impacted on the p’s, children would be more likely to copy same-sex model than opposite sex model
- boys imitated more aggressive acts than girls, especially with same sex model
what were the conclusions for bandura study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- if a child is exposed to an aggressive model it is likely that they would imitate their behaviour
- study suggests that not all behaviour is learnt through punishment and reinforcement like skinner suggested
what are the strengths when evaluating study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- reliability
- internal validity
- applications
what are the weaknesses when evaluating study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- generalisability
- ecological validity
- ethics
how is generalisability a weakness when evaluating study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- sample may be biased as its not representative of target population
- all children take from Stanford university nursery so likely to be from university academics family
- tend to be middle- class indicating a bias
- children are all 3-5 years old so may not generalise to older people
how is reliability a strength when evaluating study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- standardised procedures used making research more replicable
- e.g in arousal stage exact same phrase from experimenter was used and same toys used
- results of the 2 observers used to record the behaviour in test for delayed imitation had high inter-rater reliability (0.9)
how are the applications a strength when evaluating study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- aided the development of policies that effectively censor what children can watch e.g certification of movies
how is ecological validity a weakness when evaluating study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- completed in a lab setting, artificial environment may have made the behaviour seem less natural
- e.g bobo doll is an unusual object to the children and all 3 rooms had very controlled settings which may not be a realistic reflection of kids life
- has implications on how useful the research finding are, potentially limiting real world applications
how is the internal validity a weakness when evaluating study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- use of bobo doll
- children may have thought they were supposed to hit it and the adult was giving them instructions,
- these demand characteristics may mean behaviour differences may be see in the children
how is internal validity a strength when evaluating study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- lab setting meaning lots of control for extraneous variables
- e,g children’s aggression levels prior to the experiment were controlled by the p’s being matched with a child with a similar aggression rating
- this control allows for cause and effect links
how are ethics a weakness when evaluating study 1 1961 aggressive role model vs non aggressive role model
- not clear how consent was granted and if the parents knew exactly what would happen to their children
- p’s were not protected from harm as they ere trained to be aggressive and not known how long the effects would last for
