The Cognitive Social Learning Perspective
Cognitive psychology examines mental processes and their effects on
behavior. This is more inclusive of human behavior motivations than simply
reactions to reinforcers or punishers. What the cognitive behaviorists add to
strict behaviorism is:
1. There are more elaborate descriptions of mental processes than before.
2. People differ in the ways they think about themselves and others.
These differences are part of personality differences.
3. Cognitive change is the key to personality change.
Cognitive theory has developed new techniques of therapy, as well as
different research methods. Behaviorists primarily do idiographic, single
subject research, but cognitive approaches use group nomothetic designs.
Also animal models are not useful in studying human cognition. Cognitive
behaviorists particularly emphasize modeling as a method of influence on
behavior.
Mischel and Bandura
Cognitive Social Learning Theory
Overview of theory- this theory analyzes personality according to learning
principles, but focus on cognitive variables because they are so central to
human functioning. Mischel emphasizes the context of behavior; Bandura
emphasizes how behavior is affected by internal thoughts, particularly goals
and expectancies.
Biography
Walter Mischel was born in 1930 in Vienna, Austria, but came to New
York City at the beginning of World War II. Mischel first majored and
worked in social work, focusing on adolescents. He earned his graduate
degree at Ohio State University, learning about personal constructs from
George Kelly. He taught at Stanford, until transferring to Columbia
University in New York.
Trait Controversy: Mischel’s Challenge
Mischel questioned the assumption that people hold global
characteristics that affect behavior.
 Personality coefficient is the relationship between self-report
personality measures and actual observed behavior- it is only .30, a
fairly low correlation, accounting for only 10% of variability in
behavior. So as Mischel found that lack of consistency between how
people described themselves and what they actually did in specific
circumstances, he held that theories about global characteristic traits
must be revised.
 Consistency paradox is the discrepancy between the intuition that
people are consistent and the findings that they are not. In some
circumstances they display the behavior that indicates the trait they
use to describe themselves, but in other circumstances they do not.
What makes the difference? Why aren’t people consistent? Mischel
came to believe that the behavior isn’t determined by a trait, but is
situation-specific. Social learning theorists would agree, since they
believe behavior is linked to potential rewards or punishers. The same
behavior won’t get you the same rewards in all circumstances. People
assess that and act accordingly. We will only see consistency of
behavior when a person can expect the same outcome in different
situations. So children in an autocratic home may behave very quietly
and respectfully, but with their friends outside the home, may behave
actively and even aggressively. Mischel believed traits have some
descriptive usefulness, but they exaggerate consistency. Traits
describe behavior; they act as labels, not explanations.
 Situational context of behavior – knowing the situation is important
if we hope to predict behavior. So a trait of aggressiveness is not seen
all the time in a person, but more likely when the person faces
frustration, or helplessness. Situations trigger thoughts and emotions
that developed as a result of past experiences in a similar situation.
Moods or goals are generated as a result of exposure to a situation. So
a situation is more than the actual experience- it is the person’s
emotional reaction to the experience as well. People can merely think
of a situation and begin ruminating about their feelings about the
situation and generate an entire internal experience, separate from the
physical situation. There are consistent individual differences in
situation-behavior relationships. So situations do define traits, more
than we think. People who are healthy and well-adapted are better
able to discriminate among situations accurately. (People with high
levels of anxiety assess most situations as threatening, whether that is
a likelihood, or not.) Even identical twin behavior can be observed to
be different from described by parents according to the situation they
find themselves in. Also Mischel observed that trait-linked behavior
ranges over a continuum- conscientious in some areas, less so in
others. Often this has to do with which area of life demands more
conscientiousness in order to be successful. So the trait holds a typical
score, and behaviors range about this mean.
Cognitive person variables are psychological processes within a person
that determine how a particular situation will influence a person’s behavior.
They develop from cognition and social learning.
 Personal constructs are trait terms we use to describe ourselves.
They are also known as a self-system. They are unique to each
person.
 Encoding strategies are ways of describing situations and events. The
meaning of situations range from person to person based on each
person’s individual learning history. So we vary our behavior in
response to the situation, but not merely the circumstances, but our
interpretation of those circumstances.
 Prototype is a typical example of a category. We judge whether a
person fits a category based on how close to the prototype they
behave. Introvert/extravert is a prototypical category of trait, but not
everyone fits neatly in that description. Many social stereotypes are
prototypical categories- absent-minded professor, dumb redneck, etc.
We even have prototypes for concepts- maternal love, good education.
Prototypes range from broad categories (extravert) to narrow
categories (a model-type), which are more vivid and concrete,
offering clearer visual images. It is harder to remember things about
people who don’t fit stereotypical prototypes.
 Competencies are typical things a person would do or think. They are
things a person knows how to do. Construction competencies include
learned behaviors or attitudes. They are more consistent over time and
across situations. There must be some incentive for a person to display
them, however.
 Expectancies are beliefs about one’s ability. Internal expectancies
determine performance. One may have learned to play piano well in
the privacy of home, but in the spotlight, the person’s doubts may
overwhelm his/her skills- s/he does not believe his skills are up to
inspection.
o Behavior-outcome expectancy is an expectation of what will
happen if a person behaves in a certain way. Preschoolers
generally believe they can learn anything.
o Stimulus-outcome expectancy is a belief about how events
will develop in the world, beyond their own actions. This
maintains our awareness of the environment around us, to the
point that sometimes we decide to change environments once
we believe the current one has no hope of positive change.
o Self-efficacy expectancy is a belief in one’s ability to do a
behavior. Confidence in success can motivate persistent
behavior toward a goal. Many theorists have studied aspects of
this phenomenon: internal-external locus of control, learned
helplessness, mastery orientation. Our beliefs about what we
think we can accomplish determine our actions. (Henry FordWhether you think you can, or whether you think you can’t,
you’re right.) In new circumstances, we bring our past success/
failure history with us, determining our choice of behaviors
until we learn what is unique about the new situation.
 Subjective stimulus values are the way we assess the goal- is it
desirable or not so desirable? The value of the potential reward.
 Self-regulatory systems and plans are internal mechanisms for
guiding one’s efforts- we set performance goals, reward ourselves for
some success, criticize ourselves, delay gratification in search of a
goal. These internal mechanisms can overwhelm the situational power
to inhibit us. If you want something bad enough, you visualize it, set
up a plan for accomplishing it, see no obstacles that are immovable,
and ultimately sacrifice other things in service of that goal. These
skills are learned, however, and to some degree cultural, as we see
different levels of dedication to achievement in different cultures.
Delay of gratification is the ability to defer present gratification for larger
future goals. Mischel found that children could be taught how to avoid the
present reward (a marshmallow) for a later increased reward (several
marshmallows). He found: delay is more difficult if rewards are visible,
especially if the child is thinking about how good the marshmallow would
taste; seeing pictures of rewards instead of the actual reward can increase
delay of gratification; covering the reward (out of sight, out of mind);
distraction with thoughts of other things; exposure to models who delay their
own gratification. Aggressive teens can be taught to use imagery to increase
self-control in frustrating situations. Other things that increase delay of
gratification: a parent who is authoritative, gives direction & is not so
permissive. Preschoolers who can master this skill have positive
consequences in the future: higher SAT verbal and math scores in high
school, better able to concentrate and cope with frustration or stress.
Children who are impulsive, or have temper tantrums have worse outcomes
in life: more divorces, less successful occupations. Ego control is the child’s
ability to control his/her impulses. Ego resiliency is the child’s ability to
modify his/her behavior according to the demands of the situation (this also
relates to emotional intelligence and is highly adaptive.) Ego resiliency helps
people learn from experience, develop empathic understanding of other
people, develop friendships and form higher moral judgments. Interestingly,
this issue has been conceptualized as a battle of cognition over emotion.
Those with a hot “go” emotional system go for immediate pleasure. Those
with a cool “know” cognitive system can restrain themselves when it is
beneficial. Tempting, desirable stimuli trigger the “go” system. Delay of
gratification is activated by the “know” system and overcomes the stimulus
control power. It takes time during development to form the controlling
“know” system, but children can be taught the benefits and skills of selfcontrol. Under severe stress, however, the cool system can be overwhelmed
with impulsive behavior. So, depending on the nature of the stress, chronic
or intense, single or multiple, the person may display self control- or not.
Performance in Cognitive Social Learning Theory: Bandura also studied
the nature of personal skills in controlling the response to environmental
stimuli. He said, “The capacity to exercise control over the nature and
quality of one’s life is the essence of humanness.”
Biography
Albert Bandura was born in 1925 in Alberta, Canada. He earned his
first degree at University of British Columbia, and finishing graduate work
at University of Iowa. He spent his career teaching at Stanford University
and was awarded the APA Award for Distinguished Scientific Contributions
in 1980. He has studied therapeutic interventions as well as child
development.
Reciprocal Determinism is the concept that sees the person, environment,
and behavior as having multiple influences on one another. Cause and effect
move in a variety of ways. Environment does affect behavior (classic
behaviorism) but characteristics within a person influence behavior (trait
approaches) and behavior can cause changes in the environment (we are not
mere pawns of our environment- human free will.) Bandura’s concepts are
very complex by nature. So the environment is not only a cause of behavior,
but also an effect of behavior. People choose situations according to their
personality traits and competencies. Chance/ fate also affect our life
outcomes. Some people handle setbacks more positively than others. And
life is more unpredictable than any of us want to think.
Self-Regulation of Behavior: The Self-System
People have considerable control over their own behavior, but they
vary in how they exert that control. Some people are very forthright in
telling others what they need and what their goals are, others are passiveaggressive, others are covert and shady (Nixon was a good example.) Some
people procrastinate, or act helpless and depend on others to do what they
want for them. Gifted students have been found to take more responsibility
for their own learning than other students. Bandura describes human agency
in which people act with intention, forethought, self-adjustment and
thoughtfulness. (Obviously to different levels, determined by how one was
rewarded and trained in the past. People act impulsively and with disregard
of consequences to other people, also.) But we are conscious, and we act
with some concern for future goals, considering our own perceived skills. As
we factor in those skills and future goals, we become more self-directed and
autonomous. Good learners also monitor their progress toward the goal and
self-correct when one plan is less successful. They also factor in personal
values as they choose courses of action. The self-system is all these
cognitive processes that we factor in when choosing a course of action. One
big step in self-regulation is the choice of goal. Higher goals generally
produce higher levels of performance. People set their own goals, as well as
conforming to the goals set for them. If they can also set subgoals, it can
improve their ultimate success. People also have the ability to self-regulate
their emotional state. Some people have better control systems on their
emotionality. They can distract themselves from their emotional reactions in
order to complete a job. This is critical for crisis managers such as firemen
or police. Even dealing with personal loss, bereavement, can be managed
more or less successfully, depending on how well a person can manage
his/her emotionality.
Self-Efficacy means believing one can muster up the necessary behaviors in
a situation in order to be successful. This is a specific confidence in one’s
mastery skills. High self-efficacy beliefs are related to very persistent
behavior toward a goal. It also relates to setting higher goals for oneself.
Low self-efficacy beliefs link to discouragement and giving up. Health
management is linked to self-efficacy beliefs, since so many proactive health
behaviors depend on lifestyle choices. Nutrition and exercise choices, as
well as health testing or stopping smoking depend on self-efficacy levels.
Self-efficacy beliefs can reduce pain, can help teens resist using alcohol or
drugs or act out sexually. Role-playing techniques can increase safe sex
behaviors, because they increase the teen’s self-efficacy beliefs. So selfefficacy is very specific to situations or skills and can be enhanced by
training. (This may be part of the success of group support systems for
addictions- AA or Weight Watchers- they teach members skills in
management of cravings and enhance their beliefs in their abilities to
manage tempting situations. This is done through modeling by longer-term
members and discussion of actual techniques as well as sponsors being
available when a member faces a temptation.) Self-efficacy leads to
persistence toward a goal. Persistence leads to creative, adjusting, ongoing
behavior and ultimately success. Self-efficacy beliefs are particularly
important in the beginning of a new task. It is interesting that preschoolers
have very high self-efficacy as they begin school- this allows them to face
repeated experiences of frustration as they learn basic school skills. Their
self-efficacy beliefs drop the longer they compete in school, though. They
become more realistic, so as they reach adolescence, they make specific
choices in skill development. Low self-efficacy beliefs relate to depression,
and high self-efficacy beliefs relate to trying to learn new things more
readily.
 Outcome expectations are the beliefs that if the person does the
behavior successfully, it will result in positive outcomes. We may
believe we have the skills, but the system is skewed against us. That
was a particular and realistic belief of many minorities during times
when the legal system did not protect them from discrimination.
 Efficacy and striving toward goals- People vary in the goals they
choose and value, but striving toward goals is particularly human and
has implications for emotional health. People with high self-efficacy
beliefs are more persistent in academics, and achieve higher levels of
academic performance. Occupational choice depends on self-efficacy,
with people who hold broader positive self-efficacy beliefs believing
they have a broader range of occupations available to them. Coaches
develop high levels of self-efficacy beliefs in players through drills,
modeling, rituals that enhance comfort with each opponent. Bandura
does believe efficacy beliefs should be grounded in experience, or
they are too fragile to hold up against setbacks. He also believes that
unrealistically high expectations can be dangerous or harmful, if they
lead us to do things that put us at unnecessary risk. He also realized
that high self-efficacy beliefs for negative behaviors (violence or
harassment) will lead to more use of those behaviors, especially when
they are rewarded.
 Physiological correlates of efficacy are interesting, as the body
responds in sync to what the mind tells it. The body responds to
manageable stress with stress hormones that facilitate active response:
cortisol, epinephrine. Stressors can increase or decrease immune
system functioning. In the face of situations we feel helpless or in
danger of embarrassment (low self-efficacy) our body produces
endogenous opioids that interfere with the immune response. As selfefficacy develops, these opioids are reduced. Repeated exposure to
these hormones can change the brain structure or damage the heart.
Culture can change so rapidly that physiology can’t keep up. Women
are performing in occupational areas that their developmental history
over generations has not fully prepared them. We are seeing women’s
risk of heart attack growing as a result.
Processes Influencing Learning – Bandura’s most powerful example of
cognitive variable influencing learning was the preschoolers exposed to the
Bobo doll experiment. He showed that specific aggressive behaviors could
be learned simply by watching a model demonstrating the effects of
behaviors. The children were not personally being reinforced, but they saw
the model do a behavior that appeared to be reinforcing. This set the strict
behaviorists on their ears, but Bandura operationally defined the conditions
in which such learning takes place.
 Attentional processes: Observing the Behavior
o The behavior must be seen to be learned. We see many things
but we don’t pay attention to all of them. So models catch our
eye, as they appear to be doing something interesting, or their
appearance is attractive. They may appear to be likable, or
getting positive attention from others for their looks or
behavior.
 Retention processes: Remembering It
o The learner must have the capacity for remembering the
demonstration. So language and symbolism must be present to
the learner for the demonstration to be learned.
 Motor Reproduction Processes: Doing It
o The learner must have the ability to do the behavior. Babies
watch adults and children walking all the time, but they won’t
walk until they have balance, coordination, and strength.
 Motivational Processes: Wanting It
o The learner may observe and potentially learn a behavior, but if
s/he has no reason to display the behavior, no one will know.
So motivation is necessary to see what the learner has learned.
The model may hold such status that the learner desires to
display the behavior with the hope of gaining similar status.
This is the idea behind celebrity endorsements of products.
Also the model may receive rewards, and the learner believes
that similar rewards will come to him – vicarious
reinforcement.
Observational Learning and modeling- Bandura demonstrated that
learning is not dependent on the learner receiving rewards himself. Bandura
distinguished between learning and performance. Reinforcers are incentives
for display of learned behavior. We learn many things in environments we
are regularly exposed to, without even knowing we know this thing. But at a
necessary time, the skill comes to the fore. (McGyver!) Modeling is a
behavior change that results from exposure to models. (Also called vicarious
learning, observational learning) Children show they learn many aggressive
skills from watching other people on TV- even cartoon characters. But they
can also learn higher moral reasoning from a strong model. Bandura tried to
determine what kinds of models were most powerful: those who controlled
rewards (parents- controller models) or those who received rewards
(consumer models.) Children more often based their responses on the
controller model- so like Freud suggested, children will identify with the
more powerful parent, in most cases the father. But children are also
influenced by peer models. So bullies on the playground teach aggressive
behavior, even if they are punished. TV shows that show the perpetrator
being caught and punished still display the violent behavior in a learning
modality. Using aggressive punishment against children in the home is a
powerful model for using aggression to get what you want- in the situations
that might allow it for the child- for instance, against younger children not in
the presence of a punisher. Physical punishment just doesn’t work in the
long run. It teaches more negatives than it suppressed.
Therapy was fine-tuned by Bandura, because he believed just talking about
problems wasn’t very effective. The therapist needs to model the desired
behaviors, as well as assign practice sessions for desired change behaviors.
(Freudians believe if you simply change the behavior, the internal conflict
will cause other undesirable behaviors to erupt in response to the unresolved
conflict. This hasn’t been shown, however, using social learning techniques.)
Cognitive behaviorists believe that therapy should be a learning process, so
therapists should use active teaching techniques and insist on clients
practicing different behaviors to make change. This practice actually
enhances the client’s efficacy beliefs, empowering the patient to make
specific changes in behaviors. Therapy must change dysfunctional beliefs
and expectations.
The Person in the Social Environment- the environment is a critical
component in the 3-part reciprocal determinist system. It is where we
practice new skills, gain encouragement from others, face difficult problems
that force us to learn something new.
 Collective efficacy occurs when groups believe they can do what
needs to be done. The group develops a belief about its power. They
exert collective agency- which is why trade unions are powerful. (It’s
always interesting to me how a few guards in a prison can control so
many inmates, who, if they rose up collectively could easily overcome
the guards, even though they hold guns. But prisoners rarely see the
power they have from binding together. They have been socialized
against other people, so they rarely work together with others. This is
true of members of oppressive systems, like in China or Russia before
the fall of communism.)
 Moral disengagement is the phenomenon of people not choosing to
live up to their moral standards. People can rationalize that the ends
justify the means, regardless of how inhumane those might be. They
rename the behavior to reduce the impact of their choice morally.
They dehumanize their victims, not even seeing their faces. They
displace responsibility for their actions on others (Milgram found this
was powerful in getting subjects to “shock” the victim- if they knew
the researchers would take responsibility for any damage done to the
victim.) This was the defense for Nazi prison guards during World
War II, but the Nuremberg trials rejected that. The judges said these
people were acting against the barest human values toward their
prisoners and they could have made different moral choices. So
situations can trump one’s stated moral values, which is why we have
a legal system to follow up and reinforce the laws we have agreed on.
We simply can’t trust people to do the right thing in all circumstances.