Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Personality & Individual Differences > Social Cognitive Theories > Flashcards

Social Cognitive Theories Flashcards

1
Q

LEARNING THEORY

A
  • rejects idea that beh = directed by inner motives/personality traits
  • instead suggests ALL beh = learned
  • individual beh/attitude difs towards situations (ie. parties) -> from dif learning experiences across dif situations people find themselves in
  • to understand difs we need to examine situation person is in then explore past experiences in similar situations
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

LEARNING THEORY: BASIC ASSUMPTIONS

A
  • all beh = learned via experience/environment interaction
  • personality (individual difs) arises from learning experiences received in environment aka. beh patterns shaped by experience
  • draws upon behaviourism/social psych traditions
  • concepts relating to perspectives include:
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

LEARNING THEORY: PERSPECTIVE CONCEPTS

A

MODELING
SOCIAL NORMS
REINFORCEMENT
SELF-EFFICACY
LOCUS OF CONTROL

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

BEHAVIOURISM: BASIC ASSUMPTIONS

A
  • personality = sum of actions NOT thoughts/feelings
  • classical/Pavlovian conditioning
  • instrumental/operant conditioning
  • learned associations = learning basis
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

JOHN B. WATSON (1878-1958)

A
  • classical/Pavlovian conditioning
  • stimulus-response theory
  • learned associations provide building blocks of beh/personality (not “inner personality”)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

B.F. SKINNER (1904-1990)

A
  • instrumental/operant conditioning
  • animal modelling approach (ignores human language/thinking/self-reflection capabilities)
  • people act on environment (E) -> beh (B) shaped via response beh provokes
  • personality results from interaction between operants/reinforcement schedules (beh responses)
  • radical behaviourism = no need to hypothesis about “unobservable”
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

EMOTIONAL CONDITIONING

A
  • neutral stimuli conditioned to bring about good/bad feelings aka. conditioned responses/emotional reactions
  • we start building personality this way; behaving/responding +/- to people/situations/surroundings
  • conditioning processes contributed importantly to human experience/development
  • BUT beh learning theories = too simplistic for human beh
  • also requires social learning/cognition integration
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

LEARNING THEORY: COGNITIVE PROCESSES

A

DOLLARD & MILLER (1950)
- 1st who allowed cognitive processing in LT
- 1st demonstrated observational learning played important learning role; role models observed/imitated
- integrated psychoanalytic concepts; allowed conscious/unconscious influences (inner drives) on motivation
- beh NOT just responding to environmental stimuli; also responds to inner stimuli ie. thoughts

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

COGNITIVE THEORIES OF PERSONALITY

A
  • place human thinking processes at personality/individual dif centre
  • you are who you are because of how you perceive the world ie:
    1. what you think/attend to/analyse/interpret/encode/retrieve
    2. mental organisation (ie. cognitive patterns)
    3. personality difs = info processing difs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

COGNITIVE APPROACH: ORIGINS

A
  • draws on:
    1. Freud’s consciousness levels
    2. phenomenological approach aka. all have dif subjective life experiences
    3. social-learning perspectives of Rotter/Mischel/Bandura (parallel development)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

GEORGE A. KELLY (1955)

A
  • 1st major theorist to adopt cognitive personality perspective
  • Personal Construct Theory = highlights uniquely human capacity to reflect on oneself/the world/future
  • focuses on specific cognitive processes via which people categorise/construct meaning from life events ie. repertory grid (still used) assesses individual’s constructs
  • personality = how people dif in how they read/perceive/interpret/conceptualise social world
  • personality/emotion/action individual difs = product of these
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

PERSONAL CONSTRUCT THEORY: COMPARISON

A
  • crucial dif between Kelley/other theories -> Kelley = acting motivation comes from future goals NOT past learning/experiences/innate drives
  • Kelley = cognitive personality theory/cognitive therapy foundation
  • Kelley = phenomenological (recognises subjective reality)/cognitive
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

PERSONAL CONSTRUCT THEORY

A
  • way of perceiving/construing/interpreting events
  • ideas/categories used by people to interpret world
  • some categories = universal (ie. tree)
  • others vary
  • bipolar paired-opposite dimensions (ie. good-bad/weak-strong)
  • some ^ important > others in reality framing
  • chronically accessible constructs; similar to personality trait theories where some = ^ influential on beh > others
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

WHERE DO PERSONAL CONSTRUCTS COME FROM?

A
  • experience BUT not determined by it
  • personal construct systems = freely chosen past experience interpretations NOT determined by past experience BUT can always change
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

PERSON-AS-SCIENTIST METAPHOR

A
  • scientists/laypersons = engaged in same task
  • both use constructs to predict/describe/explain events
  • dif experiences test personal constructs
  • explains why individual dif in beh
  • allows for flexibility/creativity in beh; individuals free at any time to take alternative interpretations/behs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

KELLEY: CRITICISM

A
  • complex cognitive processes emphasis ahead of its time
  • behaviourism dominated 1950s academic psych
  • Kelley anticipated subsequent contemporary cognitive psych developments
  • grand cognitive theories aka. Kelley no longer fashionable
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

CONTEMPORARY COGNITIVE APPROACHES

A
  • explains beh via schema/prototype concepts
  • schemas = general ways to view/make sense of world
  • self-schemas = cognitive structures about self
    KUIPER & ROGERS (1979)
  • asked if adjective describes themselves/experimenter
  • pps faster if describes themselves indicating well-defined self-construct/less defined experimenter schema
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

SOCIAL LEARNING/COGNITIVE THEORIES

A
  • view internal/cognitive processes/social events = important to learning/beh
  • personality = ALL learned tendencies incl. cognitive processes/social influences/observed beh
  • social-cognitive theories consider non-observable concepts (ie. thoughts/values/expectancies)
  • emphasise learning via observing others
  • behaviourism VS cognitivism = cognitivism hypothesises mental structures that influence how individual processes info
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

SOCIAL-COGNITIVE THEORY EVOLUTION

A
  • Kelley - 1st of its kind BUT not only cognitive
  • 1950s; behaviourists abandoned analyses; introduced cognitive constructs
  • learning accounting issue w/o direct reinforcement experience (ie. inability to completely explain language) -> cognitive SLT development
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

SOCIAL-COGNITIVE THEORY

A

BANDURA (2006)
- build on beh theories via emphasising how cognitive processes influence/are influenced by beh associations
- fundamentally human agency theory (how people play active part in own development)
- relates to Piaget’s developmental theory (personal actions assist development)
- rejects basic behaviourism tenets depicting organisms = controlled by environmental rewards/punishments
- emphasises social/observational learning/thinking abilities importance to motivate/direct actions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY (SLT)

A
  • builds on beh theories via emphasising learning via social reward/punishment including vicarious reinforcement/modeling
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORIES X SLT

A
  • BOTH include studies of:
    1. motivation
    2. emotion
    3. cognitions
    4. rule-based learning
    5. vicarious emotional arousal/reinforcement
    6. social-reinforcement (praise/approval/acceptance)
    7. self-reinforcement (internal states ie. self reward/punishment)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

SCT: RESEARCHERS

A
  • Bandura/Rotter developed social/observational learning concepts in personality theories
  • Bandura/Rotter/Kelly/Mischel worked together at various points; influenced each other/shared ideas
  • SLT builds directly on Rotter BUT some difs
24
Q

ROTTER: LOCUS OF CONTROL (LOC)

A
  • expectancy (LOC) = perceived prob that doing something -> attained goal
  • emphasises how subjective reward expectancies (future positive outcomes) can be ^ important beh determinants > reward itself
25
Q

BANDURA: SELF-EFFICACY

A
  • self-efficacy = perceived prob that you can achieve something in 1st place
  • individuals’ expectancies about own capabilities affect what they’ll attempt
  • goes beyond Rotter in emphasis on social learning nature
26
Q

JULIAN ROTTER (1916-2014)

A
  • psychological motivating factor = empirical law of effect aka. people motivated to seek out positive stimulation/reinforcement; avoid unpleasant stimulation
  • personality = interaction of individual w/his/her environment; cannot be seperate
27
Q

ROTTER’S SLT: EXPECTANCY VALUE THEORY

A
  • beh decisions driven not just by reinforcement presence/value but also beliefs/expectancies about likely outcome/beh reinforcement
  • key dif between classic behaviourism = classic view focuses on actual reward/punishments BUT Rotter focuses on beliefs ABOUT reward/punishment ->
  • beliefs shape beh even when inaccurate
  • beliefs about reality = ^ important beh guides > reality itself
28
Q

ROTTER’S SLT: EVT PREDICTIVE FORMULA

A
  • 3 main components:
    BP = RV x Expectancy
  • BP = engaging in particular beh prob in specific situation
  • RV = depends on subjective desirability of beh outcomes to prefs among possible available reinforcements
  • E = subjective estimate that given beh -> to particular outcome
  • expectancies = specific/generalised
29
Q

EVT: SPECIFIC EXPECTANCY

A
  • beliefs based on past experiences/reinforcement history
  • belief that certain beh -> specific outcome
  • high/low expectancy
30
Q

EVT: GENERALISED EXPECTANCIES (LOC)

A
  • we rely on generalised expectancies in novel situations
  • general beliefs about whether anything we can do (from available beh repertoire) = likely to make dif
  • ^ generalised expectancies = ^ LOC
  • low generalised expectancies = low LOC
  • BUT expectancy = subjective prob; irrational/unrealistic expectancies = common pathology source
31
Q

INTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL

A
  • people feel in control of lives
  • empowered to change things
  • believe that outcomes/reinforcers depend largely on own efforts
  • “I can make it happen”
32
Q

EXTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL

A
  • people feel helpless/powerless to change things
  • dependent on others
  • ^ expectancy personal effort will make little dif to outcomes
  • “If it happens, it happens”
33
Q

EXPECTANCIES: SPECIFIC VS GENERALISED

A
  • beh = goal-directed; future outcomes/reinforcements anticipated based on expectancies
  • expectancies = subjective/may not align w/objective prob/w/subjective expectancies of others
  • Rotter distinguished specific VS generalised; highlighted dif applicable situations
  • entering unfamiliar situations = generalised expectancies concerning outcomes; refined into specific expectancies on actual experience basis
  • repeated encounters w/unfamiliar situation series generalise/form future beh basis in new situations
34
Q

LOCUS OF CONTROL

A
  • relatively stable over time BUT can change
  • internality ^ w/age/life experience; becomes stable middle age onwards
    COLLINS (1974)
  • changes w/context ie. might have internal LOC w/relationships BUT external w/overall life
    DE MANN ET AL (1992)
  • warm supportive parenting supports internal LOC in kids
35
Q

EXTERNAL LOC: CORRELATES

A
  • ^ external LOC correlates positively w/:
    1. depression
    2. mental health problems
    3. suicide ideation/attempts (in Chinese adolescents)
36
Q

INTERNAL LOC: CORRELATES

A
  • ^ internal LOC correlates positively w/:
    1. better life quality in people suffering from chronic physical health issues ie:
  • epilepsy
  • diabetes
  • migraines
37
Q

KESAVAYUTH ET AL (2022)

A
  • life satisfaction/mental health explained by direct/indirect LOC effects
  • direct effect = positive; indicates individuals w/internal LOC = ^ life satisfaction/mental health
  • physical activity/social interaction = 2 pathways linking internal LOC to ^ well-being levels
38
Q

MORI ET AL (2022)

A
  • ^ external LOC significantly + associated w/impaired physical/mental health post lifestyle habits/change adjustment post pandemic
39
Q

BANDURA: SOCIAL-COGNITIVE THEORY

A
  • Rotter = little to say about how expectancies/values/beh choices acquired other than via learning
  • Bandura added to concept via explicit SCT theory
  • big step from behaviourist tradition; 1st fully cognitive social learning theory
  • stressed imitation role in social learning; emphasised:
    1. cognitive processes > reinforcement
    2. observation > direct experience
    3. self-regulation > environmental control
40
Q

SCT: RECIPROCAL DETERMINISM

A
  • drives beh; people influenced by environmental forces BUT also choose how to beh
  • people select situations -> shaped by them
  • individual/environment/mental structures mediating them interact complexly to determine individual behs
  • unlike animals people use symbols/forethought (planning) as future action guides
  • imagining possible outcomes/calculating prob > simple reward/punishment maze for people
41
Q

RECIPROCAL DETERMINISM INTERACTING FACTORS

A

PERSON FACTORS (P)
- cognitive abilities
- beliefs/attitudes
- physical characteristics
BEH FACTORS
- verbal/motor responses
- social interactions
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
- physical surroundings
- family/friends
- other social influences

42
Q

SCT: OBSERVATIONAL/VICARIOUS LEARNING

A
  • ie. Bobo doll experiment
  • watching/imitating others aka. modelling
  • not just passive info but active learning process
  • observers make judgements
  • constructs symbolic representations of observed beh
  • beh DOESN’T need to be performed by observer to be learned
43
Q

THE BOBO DOLL STUDY

A

BANDURA (1965)
- nursery kids watched adult on TV perform 4 novel/aggressive acts to plastic doll
- either rewarded/punished/ignored
- all kids performed beh if asked
- BUT reward condition = ^ likely to beh aggressively alone
- aka. vicarious conditioning

44
Q

THE BOBO DOLL STUDY: CRUCIAL

A
  • observed reinforcement of adults beh influenced child’s performance of beh BUT not child’s learning of beh as all kids could repeat it if asked
  • we perform some vicariously learned beh but not others because of:
    1. expectations about performance consequences
    2. expectations learnt via observing outcomes
45
Q

SCT: SELF-REGULATION

A
  • if we choose not to perform actions despite opportunities to do so since we observed negative consequences = entails self-regulation
  • most beh performed in external reinforcements/punishments absence so most daily actions = controlled by self-regulation
46
Q

SCT: INTERNAL SELF-REGULATION PROCESSES

A

SELF-PRAISE
SELF-CRITICISM
SELF-EVALUATION
SELF-PERSUASION
SELF-EFFICACY
- most powerful of self-regulatory processes

47
Q

SCT: SELF-EFFICACY

A
  • self-regulation example; performing certain beh -> desired outcome
  • efficacy expectation = belief extent that someone’s actions can -> certain outcome (aka. is it in my power to do this?)
  • outcome expectation = belief extent that one’s actions WILL bring certain outcome (aka. is it likely to happen?
  • AKA. dif between believing that something CAN happen (outcome expectation) VS believing you can MAKE it happen (efficacy expectation)
48
Q

SELF-EFFICACY: SUCCESS

A

BANDURA (1977)
- ^ self-efficacy significantly ^ success likelihood
- self-efficacy influences:
1. if task is attempted
2. how much effort is put in
3. persistence pursuit despite obstacles
SEGAN ET AL (2006)
- factors affecting smoking relapse in cessation programme; low self-efficacy = significant relapse predictor
- low self-efficacy can -> “learned helplessness”

49
Q

MEASURE OF GENERAL SELF-EFFICACY

A

SCHWARZER & MATTHIAS
- 1-4 scale (not true-exactly me)
1. Solves difficult issues w/hard work.
2. Gets what they want despite opposition.
3. Easy to stick to aims/goals.
4. Confident in unexpected events.
5. Resourceful in unforseen situations.
6. Solves most issues w/effort.
7. Calm in difficult situations; uses coping abilities.
8. Finds several solutions.
9. Can find solution when in trouble.
10. Handles whatever comes their way.

50
Q

SELF-EFFICACY: EVALUATION

A

BANDURA (2007)
- debated if stable personality trait
- critical of global self-efficacy measurement attempts; few confident in all life areas so SE best measured w/specific tasks (ie. quite smoking)
- research = better predictive outcome power
- can be modified via various methods

51
Q

SELF-EFFICACY: MODIFICATION METHODS

A

PRACTICING
- performance of tasks causing concern
SEEING
- vicarious experience
- seeing others succeed
SHADOWING
- participant modelling
- shadowing someone successful

52
Q

WALTER MISCHEL (1973)

A
  • Kelly/Rotter protégé; Bandura’s colleague
  • challenged traditional psychometric/psychodynamic approaches
  • embraced SLC as viable alternative to traditional viewpoints; emphasised subjective situations meaning importance
  • broadened conceptualisation of personality to include dif constructs
53
Q

LEARNING/COGNITIVE PERSPECTIVES: STRENGTHS

A
  • rely on mental constructs when explaining human beh in contrast w/behaviourism (ie. thinking/cognitive processes/social learning)
  • SCT provided systematic research framework
  • concepts clearly defined/tested; considerable evidence found
  • environment importance emphasis
  • useful for explaining some emotional reactions ie. phobias
  • important therapeutic applications in CBT
54
Q

LEARNING/COGNITIVE PERSPECTIVES: LIMITATIONS

A
  • not yet unified systematic theory
  • overlooks biology; important challenge to relate socio-cognitive structure development to bio qualities contributing to individual difs
    -lots of lab research; applicability issue
  • focus on few important variables (ie. aggressive beh/LOC/self-efficacy); plays down richness
  • not wholly comprehensive; personhood/subjective qualities (human experience) = missing
  • too mechanistic; can’t account for ^ human motivations/free will (we aren’t computers)
55
Q

MODERN RELEVANCE

A

HAGGER & HAMILTON (2022)
- social cognition theories may assist in predicting COVID-19 preventive behs
- may inform development of interventions to promote this beh
- augmenting theories w/new constructs (ie. moral norms/anticipated regret)/processes (ie. automatic processes/multiple action phases) provide ^ comprehensive prediction
- future research should adopt experimental/longitudinal designs

Personality & Individual Differences (17 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions