Bandura experiment (classic study)

Question 1

Background of this study

Answer 1

Previous research showed children would imitate a role model’s behaviour when present which was the common belief
Social learning theory

Question 2

How does this study link to behaviourism?

Answer 2

Because of the belief that children behave due to interactions w the environment. Eg observe role model and then imitate them (social learning theory)

Question 3

Aim of study

Answer 3

To see whether children imitated behaviour of an adult role model, when they are not present in a controlled way
And factors would affect imitation
By measuring aggression toward bobo doll

Question 4

What factors of the role model might affect children’s imitation of them?

Answer 4

Their gender, if they are of the same gender of the child
Or if the role model is displaying gender stereotypical behaviour

Question 5

4 hypotheses

Answer 5

Seeing aggressive behaviour of role model causes imitation of similar acts
Observing non aggressive behaviour of role model inhibits child’s aggression
Children imitates same sex role model more
Boys show more aggression

Question 6

Sample

Answer 6

72 children aged 3-5
36 girls
36 boys

Question 7

Where did the study occur?

Answer 7

At Stanford university’s nursery

Question 8

Sample method

Answer 8

Opportunity sample of using the 72 children who happened to be present at university nursery

Question 9

Which experimental design was used?

Answer 9

Matched participant design

Question 10

How was the study matched participant design?

Answer 10

Because it included a pre test on the children’s base level of aggression to control this and ensure each condition had both aggressive and non aggressive children

Question 11

How was the pre testing carried out?

Answer 11

Nursery teacher and experimenter observed children and ranked them on different types of aggression with a total score
1 from trio was aggressive
1 from trio was non aggressive
1 was middle to spread out base aggression levels to control participant variables

Question 12

How was the pretesting used to determine the conditions of experiment?

Answer 12

1 from trio saw aggressive model
1 saw non aggressive mode
1 saw no model (control)

Question 13

Strength of pre testing

Answer 13

Inter rather reliability of 0.89

Question 14

Conditions within aggressive model condition

Answer 14

6 boys saw male model
6 girls saw male model
6 boys saw female model
6 girls saw female model
All models were aggressive

Question 15

Conditions within no model condition

Answer 15

12 girls
And 12 boys

Question 16

Conditions within non aggressive model condition

Answer 16

6 boys saw male model
6 girls saw male model
6 boys saw female model
6 girls saw female model
All whom were non aggressive

Question 17

What was the physical aggression like for boys who saw an aggressive male model?

Answer 17

25.8 displayed physical aggression

Question 18

What was the physical aggression like for girls who saw an aggressive male model?

Answer 18

7.2 displayed physical aggression

Question 19

What was physical aggression like for boys who saw non aggressive male model?

Answer 19

1.5 displayed physical aggression

Question 20

What was physical aggression like for girls who saw non aggressive male model?

Answer 20

0.0
No display of physical aggression

Question 21

Control group aggression between girls and boys

Answer 21

1.2 girls displayed physical aggression compared to 2 boys

Question 22

Stage 1 of procedure

Answer 22

Children in each room individually and played with toys. Dependent on the condition of role model (or no role model) they’d observe this for 10 mins

Question 23

What would the aggressive role model do?

Answer 23

Had a standardised procedure of aggressive acts eg:
Hit bobo with mallet
Throw in air
Repeatedly punch it

Question 24

What would non aggressive model do?

Answer 24

Quietly play with tinker toys and ignore bobo doll

Question 25

Stage 2 of procedure

Answer 25

Mild aggression arousal, where children were taken into room with high interest toys but then forbidden to play with them after 2 mins

Question 26

Why did researchers want to cause aggression arousal?

Answer 26

So any if the aggression learnt from model would be shown
Or if despite going through this, children who saw non aggression model inhibited aggression, would confirm the models influence

Question 27

Stage 3

Answer 27

Children were allowed into a different room with toys + bobo doll and observed by people in a 2 way mirror to see if they imitated aggression at bobo doll

Question 28

What were the possible aggressive toys?

Answer 28

Dart guns
Ball hanging from the ceiling
Mallet

Question 29

What did the researchers aim to observe in stage 3?

Answer 29

Imitative physical/verbal aggression of model
Partial imitative aggression
New type of aggression not imitative
No aggression (inhibition)

Question 30

What were the timings for observation in stage 3?

Answer 30

Observe for 20 mins and record behaviour every 5 seconds
= 240 total reports

Question 31

Conclusion and result for imitative aggression

Answer 31

Children who saw model were more likely to show aggression
Mean no. of boys who imitated physical aggression = 38.2 in aggressive condition compared to 1.7 imitation in non aggressive condition

Question 32

Results and conclusion based on imitation of same sex model

Answer 32

Mean number of boys who displayed physical aggression was 25.8 seeing aggressive male model compared to 12.4 in aggressive female model
= more likely to imitate same sex

Question 33

Conclusion and results for boys having higher aggression compared to girls

Answer 33

Total mean number of physical aggression for boys was 41.9 compared to girls with 16.4 for girls

Question 34

Conclusion and results for gender roles affecting the model

Answer 34

Physical aggression: in male model condition it was higher for both girls and boys compared to female model
Imitation more likely based on what’s stereotypically associated w genders
Shown by qualitative data

Question 35

Qualitative data after seeing aggressive female model

Answer 35

‘That girl was just acting like a man’
‘That ain’t no way for a lady to behave’

Question 36

Qualitative data after seeing aggressive make model

Answer 36

‘He’s a good fighter like daddy’
‘He beat up bobo. I want to sock like [him]’

Question 37

What was controlled in this experiment?

Answer 37

Same actions and phrases of aggressive model
Time spent in each room
Same location
Same aggression arousal stage
Same male or female model
Same layout and type of toys

Question 38

Why was the actions of the aggressive model against the bobo doll standardised?

Answer 38

Because children were being observed, wanted to ensure children were acting aggressively because they were imitating these specific actions

Question 39

Reliability strengths

Answer 39

Replicable because actions were standardised
Standardised for all participants

Question 40

Weaknesses of reliability

Answer 40

Per condition, the sample is not large enough to prove a consistent effect across target population (6 per condition)

Question 41

Strengths of sample method

Answer 41

Opportunity = quick and convenient for researcher

Question 42

Weaknesses or sample method

Answer 42

Biased sample because only gathered from Stanford Uni so doesn’t represent whole demographic

Question 43

Strengths of population validity

Answer 43

Occurred in a University which is more likely to have diversity in terms of cultural backgrounds
Mix of genders

Question 44

Weaknesses of population validity

Answer 44

Uses children from Stanford Uni nursery suggesting they are of upper class so doesn’t not represent lower classes

Question 45

Strengths of ecological validity

Answer 45

Children used to playing with toys in a nursery = represents real life

Question 46

Weaknesses of ecological validity

Answer 46

Not a normal event to be alone in a room with a stranger who starts beating up a bobo doll = not as realistic

Question 47

Strengths of construct validity

Answer 47

Controlled variables to ensure extraneous variables didn’t affect DV and were measured instead
Matched Ps design = controlled P variables
Specific model actions to ensure Ps were actually imitating model
Weren’t aware of study so acted naturally

Question 48

Strengths (ethnocentrism) in this study

Answer 48

From a University nursery so may have more diversity in cultures

Question 49

Weaknesses (ethnocentrism) in the study

Answer 49

Only gathered from Stanford Uni, other cultures outside of the USA (even Stanford) may act differently

Question 50

Weaknesses of construct validity

Answer 50

No test was followed up to see if learned behaviour had long term affects so may not be accurate in a measure of long term impact witnessing aggression has on children

Question 51

Strengths of ethics

Answer 51

Informed consent = teachers consented on their behalf

Question 52

Weaknesses of ethics

Answer 52

Deception = children weren’t told the aim of the study
Harm = mild aggressive arousal may knock childrens self confidence if told they’re not special enough for toys