By: Lisa Thomas and Jenny Johnson

Biographical Information

• Born in 1925 in Alberta, Canada• Grew up in a small town• Attended the U. of British

Colombia• Enrolled in an Gen. Psych. Course

by chance• Majored in Psychology and

graduated in 1949• Went to graduate school at U. of

Iowa and graduated in 1952• In 1953 he taught at Stanford

and wrote his first book Adolescent Aggression with Richard Walters

• In 1974 he was elected President of the American Psychological Association

• Retired from teaching March 15th 2010.

• Social Cognitive Theory provides a large body of verified knowledge about the determinants and psychological mechanisms governing observational learning of behavioral and social competencies, cognitive skills, and emotional propensities. (Bandura, Self-Efficacy)

•“Observational Learning”• Bandura believes that we learn a great deal through imitation by observing models and mentally

coding what we see.

Bandura vs. Skinner

Bandura SkinnerIn Skinner’s theory,

learning appears to be a gradual process in which organisms must act to learn—behavior shaped overtime by consequences

Bandura argues that in social situations we often learn much more rapidly simply through observing behavior of others—more immediate

“Learning would be exceedingly laborious, not to mention hazardous, if people had to rely solely on the effects of their own action to inform them what to do.”—Bandura, 1977

BehaviorBehaviorss

CognitionsCognitions

EnvironmenEnvironmentt

Attentional Processes: what is selectively observed in the profusion of modeling influences and what information is extracted from ongoing modeled events

Retention Processes: an active process of transforming and restructuring information about events for memory representation in the form of rules and conceptions

Production Processes: conceptions are translated to appropriate courses of action—when deficits exist, the sub-skills required for complex performances must 1st be developed by modeling and guided enactment

Motivation Processes: social cognitive theory distinguishes between acquisition and performance because people do not perform everything they learn—people are more likely to exhibit modeled behavior if it results in valued outcomes than if it has unrewarding or punishing effects (Bandura, Self-Efficacy)

Bobo Doll Experiment

Bandura wanted to prove that behavior such as aggression is learned through observing and imitating others

People who view aggression in society (consciously or unconsciously) think that the behavior is acceptable for them to imitate

Group A: Watched an adult hitting doll with a mallet

Group B: Watched an adult play nicely with the doll

Group A: In playroom, children battered the doll with mallet

Group B: In playroom, children played nicely with doll

Observation

Results

“Beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments”—Bandura , Self-Efficacy

•Plays a major role in how one approaches goals, tasks, and challenges•Center of Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory

The Difference Between Self-Efficacy & Self-Esteem

Often used interchangeably as though they represent the same phenomenon, when in fact they refer to entirely different things.Self-Efficacy: concerned with judgments of

personal capabilities Example: “I’m going to make this free-throw shot.”

Self-Esteem: concerned with judgment of self-worth

Example: “I’m a terrible person.”

“There is no fixed relationship between beliefs about one’s capabilities and whether one likes or dislikes oneself.” (Bandura, Self-Efficacy)

__________________________________________________

Sources of Self-Efficacy Appraisals1. Actual Performance: efficacy perceived through performance

experiences. Success builds a strong belief in one’s personal efficacy, and failure undermines it.

Bandura believes this to be the most influential source of knowledge

2. Vicarious Experiences: appraising one’s capabilities in relation to the attainment of others

3. Verbal Persuasion: easier to sustain a sense of efficacy, especially when struggling with difficulties, if significant others express faith in one’s capabilities than if they convey doubts

4. Psychological Cues: In judging their capabilities, people rely partly on somatic information conveyed by physiological and emotional states.(Bandura, Self-Efficacy)

Is verbal persuasion or a child’s actual performance the most influential source of a child’s self-efficacy appraisal? If verbal persuasion is most effective, does it matter whether it is positive or negative in regard to the effect it has on the child’s recorded running time? To what degree do vicarious experiences affect the child’s self-efficacy appraisal.

HypothesisSince society today focuses

primarily on encouraging students through verbal persuasion, this study will attempt to disprove Bandura’s conclusion about actual performance as the most effective source by proving verbal persuasion, negative or positive, to be the most influential source.

•17 kids (9 boys and 8 girls)•Age range: 6-17 years old1.We divided the kids into 4 groups: actual performance, vicarious experience, negative verbal persuasion, and positive verbal persuasion—leaving out psychological cues.2.Each child observed the measured distance of about 100 feet and predicted how long it would take he or she to run it.3.After implementing the different sources of self-efficacy appraisal in each group and we then asked for a second prediction from the child.4.Then depending on the group, after the child ran, he or she gave a third prediction

Actual Performance GroupName Age 1st

Prediction

1st Run 2nd Prediction

2nd Run

Joseph 11 years 15 seconds

9 seconds 9 seconds 9 seconds

Grace 9 years 45 seconds

14 seconds

20 seconds

15 seconds

Ryan 9 years 10 seconds

10 seconds

10 seconds

10 seconds

James 16 years 13 seconds

9 seconds 7 seconds 8 seconds

Actual Performance

Vicarious Experience GroupName A

ge

1st Prediction

Revised prediction

1st Run 3rd Prediction

2nd Run

Mariella

6 20 sec. 12 sec. 11 sec. 12 sec. 12 sec.

Will 6 15 sec. 10 sec. 12 sec. 12 sec. 11 sec.

Michaela

7 20 sec. 12 sec. 12 sec. 12 sec. 12 sec.

Kieran 9 20 sec. 12 sec. 11 sec. 11 sec. 11 sec.

Beth 8 10 sec. 10 sec. 13 sec. 12 sec. 12 sec.

Vicarious Experience

Verbal Persuasion (Positive) GroupName A

ge

1st Prediction

Revised Prediction

1st Run

3rd Prediction

2nd Run

Lochlan 7 60 sec. 40 sec. 11 sec. 10 sec. 12 sec.

Martin 6 13 sec. 10 sec. 13 sec. 1o sec. 13 sec.

Erin 12

11 sec. 9 sec. 9 sec. 9 sec. 9 sec.

Claire 17

12 sec. 10 sec. 8 sec. 9 sec. 9 sec.

Verbal Persuasion-Positive

Verbal Persuasion (Negative) Group

Name Age

1st Prediction

Revised Prediction

1st Run

3rd Prediction

2nd Run

Rose Mary

7 10 sec. 13 sec. 10 sec.

10 sec. 11 sec.

Rachel 10

10 sec. 10 sec. 10 sec.

10 sec. 11 sec.

Brandon 11

10 sec. 10 sec. 9 sec. 9 sec. 9 sec.

Jeff 12

8 sec. 8 sec. 9 sec. 9 sec. 9 sec.

Verbal Persuasion-Negative

Which has the most Influence?1st Prediction

2nd Prediction Difference

Actual Performance

21 seconds 12 seconds 9 seconds

Vicarious Experience

17 seconds 11 seconds 6 seconds

Verbal Persuasion- Positive

24 seconds 17 seconds 7 seconds

Verbal Persuasion- Negative

10 seconds 10 seconds 0 seconds

Comparing 1st RunsInfluences of Self- Efficacy

1st Runs

Actual Performance 11 seconds

Vicarious Experience 12 seconds

Verbal Persuasion- Positive

10 seconds

Verbal Persuasion- Negative

10 seconds

Our Conclusion:

Bandura was Right!

Told ya so!

Our ConclusionThrough our testing we found our hypothesis

to be INCORRECT: Like Bandura, our test results proved actual

performance to be the most influential source of self-efficacy appraisal

Negative and positive verbal persuasion had the same effect on the child’s running time

Vicarious experience was the 3rd most influential source of self-efficacy appraisal.

•Not have parents present •Do it in a even more controlled setting•Focus more on gender and age•Make sure that the kids are not sharing scores between groups•Include “Physiological Cues”

Further Questions

How does age affect the child’s self-

efficacy appraisals?

Does gender matter when using different sources of self-efficacy

appraisal?

Piag

et

Bandur

a

Nurture

L

ocke

Nature

Ro

usse

au

It’s appealing to imagine children making their own discoveries and creating their own ideas. In reality, however, children’s minds are

structured by the environment, by the models and the social training practices the environment provides (Bandura, 1977)

Thank you for

your time!

Hope you have a Happy Easter!