|
|
||
|
|
Social learning theory mixes many approaches from different schools of psychology. Like Skinner and the other behaviourists (see Behaviourism), social learning theorists agree that punishments and rewards play an important rôle. However, they also pay great attention to the mental processes intervening between perception of a stimulus and the decision to respond.
Bandura is the psychologist most closely associated with the notion of observational learning. Whilst accepting Skinner's view that we learn to do what we do because of the direct reinforcement of our responses to stimuli, Bandura adds that we learn also by observing the consequences of other people's actions. We can then imitate the behaviours that bring rewards and avoid those that are punished. We don't have to wait to get frostbite ourselves before we learn to wear gloves.
Bandura's studies normally consist of closely observing children who are shown a 'model' behaving in a particular manner. The extent to which they imitate the model is then measured. The results appear to show that children are more likely to imitate models
It is evident that other factors also play a rôle:
As a result of his observations, Bandura was convinced that learning does not take place solely through direct reinforcement. The type of learning is referred to as observational learning or vicarious learning because we learn by observing what happens to others. It is sometimes also referred to as imitative learning because we imitate what others do if we conclude from observation that their behaviour will be rewarding. Bandura is also quite sure that this kind of learning can be done symbolically through language. That, for example, is one way that parents pass their attitudes to their children.
An important aspect of social learning theory is that a specific behaviour, besides merely producing an external outcome, also leads to a self-evaluative reaction. People ask themselves whether their conduct is satisfactory or not according to their standards.
In Bandura's view, then, reinforcement is both external and self-evaluative.
What happens if the two don't coincide? For example, you may gain material rewards for behaviour which you consider unacceptable by your standards. It would be quite easy under certain circumstances to steal with little risk of being caught, but you don't do it because there will be no self-reinforcement; you are prevented from doing it by a sense of self-reproach.
This strongly suggests that reinforcement is not as straightforward as the behaviourists stated. External reinforcement certainly works, but it will be at its most effective when it is consistent with self-reinforcement. It will be at its least effective when it directly contradicts the self-evaluative response.
Schramm's Fraction of Selection
|
|