Social Learning Theory and Aggression

Question 1

Direct and indirect learning

Answer 1

• Bandura acknowledged that aggression can be learned directly, through mechanisms of operant conditioning involving positive and negative reinforcement and punishment.
• So, a child who angrily snatches a toy off another child will learn that aggressive behaviour is rewarding.
• This direct reinforcement makes it more likely that the child will behave aggressively again in a similar situation.
• However, Bandura also realised that aggressive behaviour often cannot be explained by such direct forms of learning, especially in humans.
• So, he argued that an indirect mechanism - observational learning - accounts for social learning of most aggressive behaviours.

Question 2

Observational learning and vicarious reinforcement

Answer 2

• Children (and adults to some extent) acquire specific aggressive behaviours through observing aggressive models, such as siblings, parents, peers.
• In this way, the child has learned about aggressive behaviour, but this does not mean that they will behave aggressively themselves.
• As well as observing the behaviour of models, children also observe the consequences of their behaviour.
• If the model’s aggressive behaviour is rewarded (or at least not punished), then the child learns that aggression can be effective in getting what they want.
• This is known as vicarious reinforcement, and it makes it more likely that the observing child will imitate the model’s aggressive behaviour.
• There is a parallel form of indirect learning called vicarious punishment. If a model’s use of aggression to achieve a goal is punished, an observing child is less likely to imitate that specific behaviour.

Question 3

Cognitive conditions for learning

Answer 3

• Bandura identified four cognitive conditions needed for social learning:
• Attention - a basic cognitive requirement is that the observer must pay attention to the model’s aggressive actions.
• Retention - the observer also needs to be able to remember the model’s aggressive actions, to form a symbolic mental representation of how the behaviour is performed.
• Reproduction - the observer must be able to transform the mental representation of the aggressive behaviour into actual physical action. This involves the individual mentally appraising their ability to do this.
• Motivation - the observer needs a reason to imitate behaviour, which will depend on their expectations that behaving aggressively in a specific situation will be rewarding.

Question 4

Self-efficacy

Answer 4

• Self-efficacy is the extent to which we believe our actions will achieve a desired goal.
• A child’s confidence in their ability to be aggressive grows as they learn that aggression can bring rewards.
• For example, consider a child who regularly hits other children to get hold of a toy.
• They learn that they have the motor skills necessary to force another child to hand over the toy, and that this ability comes easily to them. T
• he child’s sense of self-efficacy develops with each successful outcome.
• He or she is confident that, because their aggression has been effective in the past, it will continue to be so in the future.
• In other words, they learn that aggression works and they are good at it.

Question 5

Bandura et al.’s research

Answer 5

Bandura et al’s (1961) famous Bobo doll study illustrates many of the features of SLT discussed on this spread.

Question 6

Bandura et al.’s research

Procedure

Answer 6

• Young children individually observed an adult model assaulting an inflatable plastic toy called a ‘Bobo doll’:
• The aggressive behaviours included throwing, kicking and hitting with a mallet, and were accompanied by verbal outbursts such as ‘Sock him in the nose!’.
• There followed a short period during which the children were not allowed to play with some attractive toys, which created a degree of frustration.
• They were then taken to another room where there was a Bobo doll, plus some other toys including ones the adult model had used.

Question 7

Bandura et al.’s research
Findings

Answer 7

• Without being instructed to do so, many of these children imitated the behaviour they had seen performed by the model, physically and verbally.
• The closeness of the imitation was remarkable in some cases, a direct copy of what the children had observed, including the use of specific objects and verbal phrases.
• Boys imitated physical aggression more than girls, but there was no difference in imitating verbal aggression.
• Boys were also more likely than girls to imitate a same-sex model. There was also another group of children who had observed an adult interacting non-aggressively with the doll.
• Aggressive behaviour towards the Bobo doll by these children was almost non-existent.

Question 8

Evaluation
Research support

Answer 8

• Poulin and Boivin (2000) found that aggressive boys aged between 9 and 12 years formed friendships with other aggressive boys.
• These friendships mutually reinforced each boy’s aggressive behaviour through modelling.
• For example, the boys would observe each other successfully using proactive aggression (to get what they wanted from peers), which provided reinforcement.
• This means they were exposed frequently to models of physical aggression (i.e. each other) and to its positive consequences. The boys also gained reinforcement from the rewarding approval of the rest of the ‘gang’.
• These social learning processes made imitation of aggressive behaviour by the boys much more likely, as predicted by SLT.

Question 9

Counterpoint

Answer 9

• However, the study did not find similarity between friends for reactive aggression.
• Reactive aggression (‘hot-blooded”’) is angry retaliation in the heat of the moment.
• The researchers found that the boys were much less likely to influence each other’s reactive aggressive outbursts.
• They observed them but generally did not imitate them. This was perhaps because the consequences of reactive aggression are unpredictable and not often as positive as they are for proactive aggression (so less reinforcing).
• Therefore, SLT is limited because it is a relatively weak explanation of reactive aggression.

Question 10

Real-world application

Answer 10

• SLT can help reduce aggression.
• Children readily imitate models when they observe them being rewarded for any behaviour and especially when they identify with them.
• This applies to modelling aggressive behaviour. One way to reduce aggression is to provide rewarded non-aggressive models.
• The same learning processes that can lead to aggressive behaviour can produce non-aggression.
• For instance, encouraging children to form friendships with children rewarded for non-aggression (and/or presenting them with media characters) gives them more opportunities to model non-aggressive behaviour.
• Therefore, SLT offers practical steps to reduce the development of aggressive behaviour in children.

Question 11

Biological influences (Reductionist, Limited)

Answer 11

• Underestimates the influence of biological factors.
• Bandura recognised the role of biology because he accepted that there is an urge to be aggressive that is instinctive in nature. But he was equally clear that the form aggression takes is primarily learned and is the outcome of ‘nurture’.
• However, as we have seen on previous spreads, it is well established that there are powerful genetic, evolutionary, neural and hormonal influences on aggression. SLT barely acknowledges these and certainly does not explain them.
• Therefore, SLT is an incomplete explanation of aggression because it underplays the role of biological factors.

Question 12

Research methods

Answer 12

• Many studies into social learning and aggression are conducted in controlled conditions (e.g., Bandura et al. 1961).
• This means researchers can manipulate an independent variable while controlling potential confounding variables. Control allows researchers to establish that social learning processes may cause aggressive behaviour.
• However, such studies are unlike real-world social learning situations.
• They create ‘ideal’ testing conditions which generally do not exist in reality. An important one in Bandura et al’s study was that the Bobo doll could not retaliate to being hit.
• There are also demand characteristics, the Bobo doll is designed to be hit.