Bandura (1961)

Question 1

what did people previously believe about the effects of children seeing adult behaviour

Answer 1

that they wouldnt immediately imitate the adult, they would have to see something multiple times to copy the actions

Question 2

describe the general aim of banduras study

Answer 2

he wanted to see if given the opportunity would children imitate aggressive bahaviours in different environments and if the original person who displayed this behaviour wasnt present

Question 3

describe hypothesis one

Answer 3

‘Subjects exposed to aggressive models would reproduce aggressive acts resembling their models’

Question 4

describe hypothesis two

Answer 4

‘observation of non aggressive models would have a generalised inhibiting effect on the subjects subsequent behaviour’

Question 5

describe hypothesis three

Answer 5

subjects would ‘imitate the behaviour of same-sex models to a greater degree than a model of the opposite sex’

Question 6

describe hypothesis four

Answer 6

‘boys should be more pre-disposed than girls toward imitating aggression’

Question 7

describe how hypothesis one and two were upheld

Answer 7

boys who saw the aggressive mofrl had a mean number of imitative physical acts of 25.8, boys who had observed the non-aggressive model had a mean number of aggressive physical acts of 1.5. this same pattern occurred with the girls

Question 8

describe how hypothesis three was upheld/disproved

Answer 8

this hypothesis is correct for the boys but not the girls. if the boys observed the aggressive male model they had a higher mean number of physical aggressive acts of 25.8 rather than one of 12.4 after observing an aggressive female model. however, for verbal aggression with an aggressive female model the girls had a mean number of imitative verbal aggressive acts of 13.7 but only a mean of 2.5 after observing the male model

Question 9

describe how hypothesis four was upheld

Answer 9

the highest mean number of imitative physical aggressive acts for boys was 25.8 whereas for girls it was a lesser 13.7

Question 10

describe the sample (5)

Answer 10

• 72 children
• enrolled at Stanford university nursery
• age range 37-69 months
• mean age 52 months
• equal number of boys and girls

Question 11

what sampling technique was used

Answer 11

opportunity

Question 12

how was the sampling opportunity

Answer 12

researchers used children who were present in the nursery on the day of testing

Question 13

name the independent variables of the study

Answer 13

• model behaviour
• sex of model
• sex of child

Question 14

name the model conditions

Answer 14

• aggressive male model
• aggressive female model
• non-aggressive male model
• non-aggressive female model
• no model (control)

Question 15

name an advantage of the matched participant design

Answer 15

able to stop prior levels of aggression from influencing the results

Question 16

name a disadvanatge of the matched participant design

Answer 16

very time consuming and sometimes not possible to find everyone a match

Question 17

name three comments made by the children

Answer 17

‘that aint no way for a lady to behave’
‘that girl was just acting like a man’
‘hes a good fighter like daddy’

Question 18

define matched participants design

Answer 18

each participant is paired with another participant with a shared characteristic before being put into different groups for the experiment

Question 19

what four criteria were the children matched on in the matched participant design

Answer 19

they were matched on physical aggression, verbal aggression, aggression inhibition and aggression towards inanimate objects

Question 20

describe the ‘pre-test’

Answer 20

two observers, the nursery teacher and the experimenter observed the children. each type of aggression was measured on a 5-point scale for each child, the observers made judgements on these.

Question 21

what was the inter-rater reliability in the pre-test

Answer 21

0.89

Question 22

how many children were there in each condition

Answer 22

24

Question 23

how long was stage 1

Answer 23

10 minutes

Question 24

describe stage one (aggressive model condition)

Answer 24

• each child taken individually to a room
• child taken to a table and given toys such potato printing and stickers to play with
  -adult model sat on another table with tinker toys, a bobo doll and a mallet
• model played with tinker toys for one minute then turned to the bobo doll and.. ‘the model laid bobo on its side, sat on it and punched it repeatedly in the nose. the model picked up the mallet and struck the doll in the head. following the mallet aggression, the model tossed the doll up in the air aggressively and kicked it about the room. this sequence of physically aggressive acts was repeated approximately three times’

Question 25

describe stage one (non-aggressive model condition)

Answer 25

each child taken individually to a room
- child taken to a table and given toys such potato printing and stickers to play with
-adult model sat on another table with tinker toys, a bobo doll and a mallet
- the adult model played with the tinker toys and ignored the bobo doll

Question 26

how long was stage 2

Answer 26

2 minutes

Question 27

describe stage 2

Answer 27

children taken to a smaller room filled with attractive toys such as a fire engine, jet plane, train, cable car, spinning top and a doll set and pram. they played with these for two minutes where they were then told by the experimenter that these were their best toys and had to be saved for other children. they were told that there were other toys in the next room that they could play with

Question 28

describe stage 1 (control condition)

Answer 28

‘the control group had no prior exposure to the adult models’

Question 29

how long was stage 3

Answer 29

20 minutes

Question 30

describe stage 3

Answer 30

• all 72 children taken back to the main experiment room one-by-one
• observed by male model through a one-way mirror
• record made every 5 seconds of the behaviour shown by the child (time sampling)

Question 31

name the three behaviours recorded in stage 3

Answer 31

• imitative behaviour of physical or verbal aggression
• partially imitative behaviour (imitating the model but not exactly)
• novel aggressive behaviour (showing aggression in a different way to the model)

Question 32

how was inter-rater reliability determined in stage 3

Answer 32

half the children were observed and scored independently by a second observer. records from both observers were consistent- a high inter-rater reliability

Question 33

why was it necessary for the aggressive model to have distinct aggressive acts

Answer 33

to ensure the child would be imitating the model and not just acting in their usual manner

Question 34

what did bandura conclude about how children learn aggressive behaviour

Answer 34

through observation and imitation

Question 35

how does this study link to the behaviourist perspective

Answer 35

links to social learning ideas, how people learn through the observation and imitation of others

Question 36

name 6 strengths of the study

Answer 36

• sample had both boys and girls (representative of both sides)
• external reliability - large sample size of 72 children. sample large enough to establish consistent effects
• internal reliability- procedure controlled
• inter-rater reliability - observers agreed in pre-test and stage 3
• matched participants design made the groups fair (accuracy, validity)
• opportunity sampling used so quick, cheap and easy to gather participants

Question 37

name 6 weaknesses of the study

Answer 37

• only 6 children per condition (not large enough to establish consistent effects)
• children upset after stage 2 (breaks ‘protection from harm’)
• no debriefing after the study- children could’ve ;eft with aggressive behaviour
• parents didnt give consent for their childs participation
• (low ecological validity) scenario not very realistic
• children all from same place (sample very similar)