Social Learning Theory

ntroduction
One significant mode of learning is through the imitation of observed behavior.
People are naturally observant and tend to pattern their behavior on the attitudes and
actions they observe, which appeals to them. As such, people have the tendency to
learn from social interactions with other people especially the people holding moral
ascendancy or social influence. Children have the tendency to learn behavior from their
parents or other adults around them while friends tend to exhibit similar behaviors
through mutual influences. This phenomenon finds explanation through the social
learning theory that emphasizes on observational learning occurring via social
interactions. Even in the traditional learning environment, observational learning still
occurs since students do not only learn through the instructions of the teacher but also
through the observed behavior of the teacher and other adults of authority in the school
system. The social learning theory largely explains various learning issues in different
circumstances so that the theory remains significant even in theorizing and practice in
various contemporary areas of study. The paper provides a thorough discussion of
social learning theory as behavioral learning.
Development of Social Learning Theory
The idea of social learning first emerged in the mid to late 19
th
century through
the paper written by Gabriel Tarde explaining social learning as arising from imitation
occurring in four stages, which are 1) close contact with people, 2) imitation of the
actions of behaviors, 3) rationalization and understanding of concepts, and 4)
occurrence of the role model behavior. The processes of imitation encompass learning
via social contact and individual cognitive thought. n 1954, Julian Rotter formally
developed social learning theory by going beyond behaviorism and psychoanalysis. n
his work, Rotter explained that behavior has an influence on people's motivation to
engage in a similar behavior. Ordinarily, people avoid doing things with adverse
consequences and do actions that espouse positive results. This means that behavior is
motivated by the expectation of positive outcomes with the experience of positive
outcomes influencing the repetition of the behavior. As such, Rotter also focused on
environmental factors as well as stimuli in influencing behavior and not just on cognitive
or psychological factors alone. (Ormrod, 1999) Then in 1977, further work developed
the social learning theory by expanding Rotter's work. Bandura incorporated aspects of
both cognitive and behavioral learning. Behavioral learning operates on the assumption
that the social environment within which people build social links influence individuals to
act in a particular manner. Cognitive learning works based on the assumption that a
combination of environmental and psychological factors influences people's behavior.
By combining social environment and psychological processes as influences in the
learning of people, this created the behavioral learning model, which provided that
people pay attention to other people's behavior, remember behavior with impact on
them, and reproduce the behavior that they remember because of motivations for
wanting to imitate this. Bandura's social learning theory became the model in explaining
various contemporary issues in behavioral learning. (Bandura, 1977)


Social Learning Theory as a Practical Theory
Social learning theory as a model applicable in practice has a three core
principles. First is observational learning with people learning from observing the
behavior of other people (Ormrod, 1999). Bandura proved this principle by conducting
studies using Bobo dolls. With children watching, adults were made to hit and kick the
Bobo doll. Afterwards, the children played in a room with a Bobo doll and the children
imitated the same behavior on the Bobo doll as they observed adults do (Bandura,
1977). Many social theorists also considered the effect of television on the social
learning of children with studies showing that children tend to repeat the behavior they
see on television so that without parental guidance, behavioral learning through
television viewing could lead to adverse effects on children's behavior (Lunt &
Livingstone, 1996).
Concurrently, Bandura (1977) suggested three ways of learning via observation.
One is through a live model involving actual people behaving in a certain way, which is
subject to imitation by another person. Another is through verbal instructions given via
oral communication of descriptions as well as explanations of particular behaviors. Last
is via symbolism covering fictional or real characters exhibiting behavior such as books,
magazines, movies, television shows, radio programs, and online media. Observational
learning operates on the assumption that people are normally observant and attentive to
the different behavioral stimuli in their social environment.
Second is the importance of mental state in observational learning. This reflects
the integration of external and environmental processes in observational learning.
nternal processes pertain to intrinsic reinforcement that comes in the form of rewards
such as satisfaction, fulfillment, and price. Since this is intrinsic, it targets the internal
thoughts and cognitive functions occurring within an individual in processing external
stimuli such as the behavior observed, understanding or making sense of the behaviors
observed, selecting and retaining appealing behavior depending on individual
motivations, and eventually expressing this in terms of attitudes and behavior.
(Bandura, 1977) n practice, this has found support in criminology with the commission
of crime understood as influenced by the social environment of individuals together with
the operation of individual motivations. ncreases in crime rates, especially property
crimes, commonly occur in impoverished communities. Juvenile crime also increases in
these areas because of behavioral learning. Children and young people observing
frequent crimes in the community are likely to commit similar crimes especially when
reinforced by their economic need. (Warr, 2002)
Third is that learning would not absolutely or necessarily result to behavioral
change. This is a development in behavioral and cognitive models since this does not
assume behavioral change from observational learning. This means that even if people
observe other people, this does not necessarily mean that they would pattern their
actions on their observations. n addition, people can learn new ideas and gain
information without expressing this new behavior. This implies the differences in the
manner that people process observations and derive learning depending on their
contextual circumstances. While some people change their behavior such as
committing crime because of reinforcements such as severe economic need, other
people only learn new things from observation without committing crime. This finds
support in the modeling process commencing with attention, followed by retention, then
by reproduction, and lastly by motivation. However, the process is not absolute for all
individuals with some people not imitating the behavior because of lack of motivation.
(Bandura, 1977; Ormrod, 1999)
These have implications on intervention strategies. Since behavioral learning
occurs through outcome expectancies from observed behavior reinforced by individual
motivations, intervention strategies targeted the expectations and motivations of
individuals (Ormrod, 1999). n the case of alcohol or drug use, young people consumer
alcohol and use drugs based on social influences operating on expectations of social
acceptance and motivations of building social networks. As such, interventions would
include exposure of young people to the expectancies of alcohol consumption and drug
use such as health and social risks and improving their social environment through
positive influences by the family and community.
Comparison of Assumptions of Social Learning Theory and its Underlying Philosophical
Paradigm

Social learning theory assumes that positive reinforcements determine the
imitation of behavior by individuals, which operates on a general level . Although,
behavioral learning also takes into consideration individual cognition in line with the
processes of behavioral learning, the theory received criticism for the influence of other
individual factors in explaining behavior or change in behavior. Biological, psychological,
and socio-demographic factors could influence behavior more than observing it from
other people. (Ormrod, 1999) This finds exemplification in people committing crimes
because of opportunity and not really because of social influences. n addition, social
learning theory assumes that behavioral learning commences with contact (Bandura,
1977). However, the theory is not able to explain the manner that individuals encounter
other people or the forms of social interactions that lead to contact. This means the
need to differentiate modes of contact and the different implications on behavioral
learning. Moreover, social learning theory assumes behavioral learning via social
influences (Bandura, 1977). However, this does not account for individuals committing
certain behaviors on their own even without social influences or weak social contact. An
example is a child who has not seen anybody steal but decides to get money without
permission from the purse of his mother. This highlights the macro focus of social
learning theory opposite to individualistic approach of psychological and early
behavioral theories leading to an area of weakness. Lastly, another assumption of the
social learning theory is that people have the tendency to prefer and react to positive
interventions (Bandura, 1977). This raised the issue against the social learning theory is
the problem of definition since sufficient reinforcement or motivation for one individual
may not be the same for other people. n mentoring programs, children who are
misbehaving are partnered or seated alongside children with good behavior. The
intended effect is for the positive reinforcement from the well-behaved child to influence
the behavior of the misbehaving child. However, the result could be the well-behaved
child misbehaving and the misbehaving child continuing this negative behavior. This
means that although the behavioral learning can explain general behavioral learning via
social interactions through positive reinforcements and motivations, this cannot explain
specific individual behavioral learning.
Theory Validation and Methods Used
Although the social learning theory faces criticism, it remains an important model
especially in explaining violent behavior and supporting conflict criminology.
Social learning theory found use in explaining and understanding aggression
through its tenet of learned behavior. n the case of aggression, hundreds of studies
have provided evidence that aggression is a learned behavior. Gelles (1987) found that
children witnessing violent behavior of one parent against the other parent of the
children or by both parents tend to engage in aggressive behavior in their youth or
adulthood. Poppen and Segal (1988) provided that macho attitude that could translate
to sexually aggressive behavior can be explained by the social learning theory. Straus
and Donnelly (1994) explained that children experiencing corporal punishment tend to
exhibit the same behavior against family members or other people when the situations
that caused them to receive corporal punishment occur. Sellers, Cochran and Winfree
(2003) studied dating behavior and found that a significant percentage of violent
courtship behavior is learned from peers and other social influences. Wiesner, Capaldi
and Patterson (2004) found that coercive behavior is learned from family members
since coercive parents tend to have children also exhibiting this behavior.
Social learning theory also found extended application in conflict criminology
and labeling theories. Since social environment is the venue for behavioral learning,
conflict criminology provides that a social environment of conflict determine the manner
that people are labeled. Social influence affects behavioral learning via perceptions of
difference-based conflicts and labels. This means that people without power are likely to
engage in criminal behavior and labeled as criminals because of a social environment
that highlights conflict in interest leading to depravity in some sectors of society. Warr
(2002) explained that association with delinquent peers constitutes an enduring
correlate that affects behavior. Gordon et al. (2004) further explained that the correlation
is also found in less serious crimes or petty offences as much as violent crimes.
Generalization on the Merits of Social Learning Theory as a Practical Theory in the
Field of Criminal Justice

n the field of criminal justice, Akers (1973) applied social learning theory as a
means of explaining deviance by combining two variables including the factors
encouraging delinquency such as peer pressure together with factors discouraging
delinquent behavior such as the response of parents or people with authority to provide
feedback on the deviant behavior. n addition, social learning theory also served as a
model for understanding aggression, which constitutes an explanation for criminal
behavior. Pfohl (1994) further explained that it was the concept of reinforcement that
made it possible to determine the extent of impact of observed behavior on the
consequent behavior of the observer. n addition, Lunt and Livingston (1996) explained
that social learning theory and the specific concept of differentiated association served
as a justification for the imposition of penalties, the rise in the number of inmates, and
the return of inmates to the prison system since upon release individuals that served
their sentence still face a similar social environment.
Apart from explaining delinquency, rise in prison population, and recidivism, the
social learning theory also influenced the development of a number of intervention
strategies. One intervention is counseling that involves monitoring together with family
or group therapy in order to prevent or address deviant behavior learned from
observations by using social influences. This works by matching negative social
influence with positive social influence. Nurturing programs by drawing parents to
become conscious positive influences to their children to build self-esteem of children
and develop law-abiding values. Resistance training together with peer-led
interventions such as the big brother and big sister programs or mentoring to prevent
deviance and support behavioral change among deviants. Community service together
with re-socialization programs such as reconciliation with the victims also comprise
intervention derived from the social learning theory. (Ormrod, 1999)
mplications on Theory Generation and Validation
Similar to other theories, social learning theory has its strengths and
weaknesses that support theoretical validation and the generation of further theories.
The strengths of the social learning theory include the emphasis on prevention and
early intervention, applicability because of the critical timing of its development, and
verification to support the theory based on empirical studies. The weaknesses of social
learning theory include its inability to consider individual differences, non-
accommodation of biological factors, and non-consideration of opportunity as the
reason for criminal behavior. (Ormrod, 1999) As a model, social learning theory has
been able to find validation even if it also faced criticisms especially in the different
empirical studies explaining that behavior is learned via social influences. n addition, it
developed as an alternative to cognitive or psychoanalytical theories that were unable to
provide more practical explanations of issues arising in a number of fields such as
education, health, and criminal justice. Since social learning theory has been able to
explain behavioral learning in different fields, it also supported the development of
interventions such as mentoring and re-socialization applicable to these different fields
but importantly in criminal justice, a field that has been seeking to come up with
interventions effective in addressing the social influence resulting to the rising frequency
of crime and recidivism. Social learning theory remains an important model explaining
behavior and it would also likely to expand to other fields and emerging behaviors such
as terrorism.
Conclusion
Social learning theory developed as a response to the failure of cognitive and
psychoanalytical theories to explain behavior. As such, its thrust was on to provide a
model explaining various behavioral phenomena together with a basis for effective
interventions especially for deviant behavior. This is the reason why it was adopted as a
sound theory in various fields. Although, it received criticisms because of its macro
focus, it received empirical support that heightened the validation of the theory. n the
future, the social learning theory would persist as an important and useful theory in
understanding behaviors and learned behavior. As the theory finds wider application in
different fields and emerging behavioral issues, its utility and scope would also increase.


Read more: http://ivythesis.typepad.com/termpapertopics/2010/06/social-learning-theory-
1.html#ixzz1etDRnrjZ