Bandura Flashcards
1961 APFC
A - To see whether children would exhibit more aggressive behaviour when shown an aggressive model and vice versa. Also, whether sex of child or model made a difference
P - 72 children // 3-5 years // 1/3 saw no role model (control group) // 1/3 saw same-sex model // 1/3 saw opposite sex model // Children were in the Model Room, where they played w paints & stickers. Then saw an adult ‘role model’ enter and either ignore a 6ft Bobo Doll, or punch and hit the Bobo Doll with a plastic mallet. // Moved to an arousal room, before being told the toys were for ‘other children’ to put them in a similar state of frustration, before being moved to the Observation Room for 20 mins - contained aggressive & non-aggressive toys, experimenters observed Imitative (mallet use) and Non-Imitative (gun play, own phrases etc.) every 5 secs
F - Those who saw aggressive model showed much more aggression (25% for boys same sex model, 6% for girls same sex model) // Very little aggression from non-aggressive model group and even less for control group // Male role model had more of an impact in both aggression and calmness for each respective group.
C - Behaviour can be learned by imitation even if it hasn’t been reinforced. Boys showed far more aggression, Bandura linked this to culture Expectations, stating that even from a young age children learn what society expects them to behave like from TV or Family
1963a APFC
A - If children became more aggressive when exposed to an aggressive role-model in film, a less realistic cartoon or a live model
P - 96 Children // 3-5 years // Same procedure as original experiment apart from there was no non-aggressive model
F - No significant difference between live models or filmed/cartoon models. Aggression was half as much in control group.
C - No difference in aggression after being exposed to filmed, live or cartoon aggression // Exposure to aggression definitely not cathartic as it doubled when tested
1965 APFC
A -To see if children were more likely to imitate a role model who was being rewarded (Vicarious reinforcement) and less likely one who was being punished (Vicarious punishment)
P - 66 children // 3-5 years // Same as 1961, yet aggressive model “Rocky” was either rewarded w sweets, punished by being hit w newspaper or no consequences // Children went to Model Room for 10mins. Were then told they would get more juice and sticker books if they imitated Rocky
F - Model Reward Condition had same imitation as No Consequences Condition // V little aggression in Pnishment Condition // Aggression increased significantly after Positive Incentive
C - Children less likely to imitate behaviour they see being punished. No consequences condition shows that behaviour doesn’t have to be punished or rewarded for imitation to be present
GRAVE
G - Samples of all 3 studies were large (72, 96, 66) so anomalies would have less effect on results.
Ppts. all taken from Stanford Uni Nursery for kids of staff and students at one of Worlds best Unis, may not be representative of entire population.
Only tells us about imitation in kids, not adults
R - V Reliable as can be replicated (1961, 1963a, 1965) due to standardised procedure.
2 observers behind mirror means inter-rater reliability
A - 1961 applies to teaching and parenting. Kids will be less aggressive if not exposed to aggressive role models
1963a applies to argument for more TV censorship. Can cause aggression in children viewing
1965 applies to Media censorship. Film characters rewarded for violence (James Bond etc.), video game levelling up rewards violence
V - Lack validity as were in an unusual situation, role model exhibited unusual acts. Also Demand Characteristics (Ppts. doing things they expect researchers want them to) as a Bobo Doll is designed to be hit
E - Ethical Issues as exposure to aggression may have harmed Ppts. BPS (British Psychological Society) states Ppts. meant to leave study in same state they entered, which may not have happened here.
Presumptive Consent, no debrief
