bandura literature review

american government essay paper

A full set of resources to accompany this feature can be downloaded for free here. Calling all English teachers: does this sound familiar? As structure gcse english lit essay go through extracts in the last lesson on Friday afternoon, you ask carefully crafted questions, and note with satisfaction how students shoot their hands up in a flash, like Barry Allen on the run. Later, back at home, you mark them. What went wrong?

Bandura literature review cheap critical thinking writers service for phd

Bandura literature review

Behr Eds. Open Document. Essay Sample Check Writing Quality. The purpose of Chapter two is to review literature related to the major variables within the study. Two literature reviews were conducted. The first literature review examined the retention rates and low standardized test scores on Students taking Middle School Math. Here, there will be literature related to inform the study that is related to the research design, intervention design, and measurement instruments.

Lastly there will be a section on the Conceptual Framework. We cannot be satisfied until every child in America-and I mean every child- has the same chances for a good education that we want for our own children. With this promise came serious concerns over education taught students ranked 28th in the United States out of 40 other countries in Mathematics and Sciences.

In order to ensure that educators have enough money to fund the endeavor to be more competitive with the rest of the world in Mathematics and Science, President Obama will increase federal spending in education with an additional 18 billion dollars in k classrooms, guaranteeing educators have the teachers, technology, and professional development to attain highly quali Silver, E. Singh, K. Granville, et al. Stroup, A. Robins Washington, W. Barish, et al.

Obama Get Access. Better Essays. Mathematics Curriculum Research for K-6 Students. Read More. Good Essays. Howard Crumpton and Anne Gregory. No Child Left Behind Act. Cooperative Learning in Mathematics. Methods of Instruction for Teaching Mathematics. Powerful Essays. An Assessment for the Scott Cares program. Assessing Conceptual Understanding of Rational Numbers. Related Topics. Barack Obama Education.

When our searches identified information from multiple study publications about the same intervention, we combined this information during extraction. We considered interventions that were published by the same research team across multiple study publications distinct from one another only when at least one main theory component within the intervention was added or removed.

We extracted two types of data from included interventions: 1 study characteristics, and 2 theory-related intervention characteristics. A second reviewer SR checked the extracted data for accuracy. We extracted data on the intervention characteristics related to the social cognitive theory of self-regulation.

We initially followed a consensus procedure to define the extraction process. Self-monitoring involves attention to, noticing, and tracking personal behaviour, which may inform self-judgement. Self-judgement is the process of applying personal standards and values to judge monitored behaviour.

Finally, the theory proposes that self-evaluation of monitored behaviour may occur as a result of judgement and directly inform subsequent action, leading all three components to contribute to self-regulation and behaviour change. Within each of the three components, the theory proposes specific mechanisms that may directly influence self-monitoring, self-judgement and self-evaluation, Table 1.

We used the theory definitions to identify intervention characteristics that addressed each of the specific mechanisms proposed to be associated with the three theory components. Three reviewers MT, JH, AH independently reviewed four selected interventions that comprehensively described included intervention characteristics. The reviewers used the mechanism definitions to independently code the intervention characteristics that addressed each theory mechanism.

We explored agreements and disagreements across the reviewers and reached consensus through discussion about the types of intervention characteristics that were applicable to each of the theory mechanisms. We revised the extraction guide with descriptions to specify the type of intervention characteristics that addressed each theory mechanism S2 Table.

We used the extraction guide to develop the final extraction form. Subsequently, two reviewers MT, SR extracted the intervention characteristics from remaining studies using the extraction form. Two reviewers MT, SR independently assessed the risk of bias of the extracted studies. We rated each domain as high, moderate, or low risk of bias, and judged the overall internal validity across domains by judging studies as low risk only when all of the domains were rated as low, and as high risk of bias when any of the domains were rated as moderate or high.

A third reviewer was available for consultation about any unresolved discrepancies, however, consultation was not necessary. We report frequency of use of the social cognitive theory of self-regulation in the development of each intervention, including how often: 1 interventions addressed all three theory components together, two theory components, or only self-monitoring, 2 interventions had characteristics belonging to each specific theory component, and 3 interventions included characteristics belonging to each specific theory mechanism within each of the three theory components.

We considered interventions to address a specific mechanism when at least one intervention characteristic included the theory element proposed to be associated with that mechanism, Table 1. We rated interventions as addressing a specific theory component when at least one mechanism related to that component was judged to be present. Interventions addressed all three theory components when at least one intervention characteristic was judged to be present for at least one mechanism related to each of the self-monitoring, self-judgement, and self-evaluation theory components.

Interventions addressed only two theory components when at least one intervention characteristic related to at least one mechanism was present for self-monitoring, along with one other theory component either self-judgement or self-evaluation. To illustrate the types of intervention characteristics that we judged as addressing the theory mechanisms, we provide some examples of characteristics from the included interventions that clearly represented the descriptions in our extraction guide.

We explored whether the study risk of bias impacted how often the main theory components were addressed across the interventions. We present subgroup information about how many theory components were addressed by interventions for each assessed risk of bias. We identified and screened 16, independent titles and abstracts Fig 1. We excluded the majority of citations because of ineligible study design. We assessed full text publications for potentially relevant studies that reported interventions for the health conditions of interest, and cited the social cognitive theory of self-regulation [ 10 , 11 ].

Our interrater reliability for study selection was moderate for title and abstract, as well as for full-text screening, with a Kappa of 0. We identified 60 relevant studies, which reported 35 unique interventions developed using the social cognitive theory of self-regulation as a conceptual framework, Table 2.

Interventions lasted from four weeks to twelve months, and were delivered through individual-based 17 interventions , group-based 16 interventions , or mixed settings 2 interventions. Our interrater reliability for risk of bias assessment was moderate with a Kappa of 0. Of the 34 intervention authors contacted regarding 35 interventions , 11 provided additional information: five provided access to an intervention manual, two provided intervention outlines, and four referred to previous publications.

Twenty-one of thirty-five interventions incorporated all three of the main theory components by including at least one intervention characteristic that addressed one or more mechanism for self-monitoring, self-judgement, and self-evaluation. Based on information available in peer-reviewed study publications, only 17 interventions were initially identified that used characteristics addressing mechanisms related to self-evaluation.

Additional information from four of five intervention manuals provided by authors, were found to incorporate self-evaluation characteristics that were not previously identified, resulting in 21 interventions identified to address all three of the main theory components. Each intervention addressed an average of 6. All mechanisms were frequently used across interventions, with an average of 24 interventions addressing each of the 8 self-monitoring mechanisms.

Table 4 describes the intervention characteristics that addressed each self-monitoring theory mechanism. S5 Table provides a summary of how many self-monitoring mechanisms were addressed by each of the individual interventions. All of the included interventions incorporated characteristics addressing at least one of the mechanisms related to self-judgement. Each intervention addressed an average of 2.

The five self-judgement mechanisms were implemented less comprehensively than those of self-monitoring, with an average of Table 5 describes the intervention characteristics that addressed each of the self-judgement theory mechanisms. S5 Table provides a summary of how many self-judgement mechanisms were addressed by each of the individual interventions. We identified a total of 21 interventions that included characteristics related to self-evaluation. Each of these interventions addressed an average of 0.

Self-evaluation was poorly addressed across interventions, with an average of 8. Table 6 describes the intervention characteristics that addressed each of the theory mechanisms. S5 Table provides a summary of how many self-evaluation mechanisms were addressed by each of the individual interventions. This review provides an example of how literature can be systematically reviewed to identify the extent to which a selected theory has been used as a framework for existing interventions.

To illustrate how researchers can explore theory use for interventions, we provide an overview of the specific theory components and mechanisms that were incorporated into interventions developed using the social cognitive theory of self-regulation as a conceptual framework. All of the interventions addressed at least two of the main theory components, and 21 of the interventions incorporated characteristics that addressed mechanisms related to all three of the main theory components.

We identified that self-monitoring was the theory component used most comprehensively across interventions, with a greater proportion of self-monitoring mechanisms being addressed than those of self-judgement and self-evaluation. Our review provides a novel example of how to explore the application of theory within existing interventions. Recommendations for the development of theory-driven interventions begin with the suggestion of exploring existing interventions, and conducting a systematic review if relevant synthesized evidence is unavailable for the health condition of interest [ 5 , 57 ].

Reviews exploring theory usually do so by identifying which theories are commonly used [ 7 , 8 ], or by testing theoretical mechanisms associated with change [ 58 , 59 ], rather than identifying intervention characteristics that are used to address theoretical mechanisms.

Researchers can use our process as a first step during intervention development to identify which theory mechanisms are commonly or infrequently addressed by interventions, to determine if the selected theory is a feasible framework for development of future interventions for health conditions similar to those included in the review. This type of review is an information source that illustrates examples intervention characteristics used to address theory mechanisms, and can provide direction for use of the characteristics in the development process of future interventions.

Of the full text articles screened, studies evaluating interventions using the social cognitive theory of self-regulation as a conceptual framework were excluded because they did not include self-monitoring as a core component of the intervention and therefore did not appropriately address the self-regulation concept of the theory.

Studies evaluating interventions reporting use of the social cognitive theory as a conceptual framework, often either address only specific concepts of the overall theory, or report use of the theory without appropriately including intervention characteristics to approach its theoretical concepts.

Researchers and clinicians should cautiously interpret individual studies that report using theory as a conceptual framework, as we found many interventions appear to only cite the theory without actually describing how they addressed each of the main theory components. A systematic review as we have conducted can help to highlight the interventions that appropriately implement theory. In spite of our comprehensive search across multiple sources that identified over 16 thousand citations, we retrieved only 35 self-monitoring interventions developed using the social cognitive theory of self-regulation, with less than ten interventions identified for four of the five health conditions, and only 21 interventions addressing all three of the main theory components.

Although our review process was successful for identifying interventions developed using a well-known theory, we did so across five health conditions. Researchers interested in exploring theories that are infrequently implemented, or are exploring uncommon health conditions, may find an insufficient availability of relevant reports evaluating interventions of interest. The Kappa values reporting our interrater reliability for title and abstract screening, full-text, screening, and risk of bias assessment were moderate, yet lower than preferred.

We conducted the title and abstract screening in increasing increments, , , , etc. Although our Kappa values improved with each increment from a starting Kappa of 0. To improve interrater reliability for title and abstract screening, we recommend that reviewers review small increments of abstracts until a stable and acceptable interrater reliability is reached. When we were screening full-text articles, the reviewers were most often discrepant when determining whether or not self-monitoring was a core component of the intervention.

This discrepancy is largely a result of poor reporting within the reviewed publications. As a result of unclear or missing information, the reviewers often independently searched for additional information from available protocols, publications, or online websites that reported information about the intervention.

The reviewers sometimes explored different sources of supplemental information, resulting in differing opinions as to whether self-monitoring was a core component of the intervention or not. To avoid this type of discrepancy, we recommend that reviewers decide a priori whether or not they will be searching for additional information. If additional information about an intervention will be searched, reviewers should ensure that the same information is examined by all reviewers involved.

When assessing risk of bias, the reviewers consistently identified when an intervention was of high risk. To avoid missing the identification this type of trend, we recommend that reviewers search for any patterns in their ratings while discussing discrepancies in their risk of bias assessment. This type of pattern may also arise when screening title and abstracts or full-texts and could be useful for reviewers to identify early during screening and improve overall reliability by guiding decisions about how to address and prevent further discrepancy.

We attempted to comprehensively retrieve information related to interventions through duplicate publications, available resources, and author contact, however, we were only able to judge intervention characteristics based on available information, often provided as a summary or table of contents.

Only five of the authors of included interventions provided us with access to full treatment manuals. We were able to use the additional information to identify more theory mechanisms and components that were not addressed in the published materials that we originally extracted. For example, we identified intervention characteristics guiding participants in self-evaluation in four interventions that were not previously identified as using this theory component.

Most publications provided overviews of intervention content with broad overarching concepts. Through supplementing our extraction with information from available manuals, it became clear that publications were not comprehensively representing all of the intervention content and application to theory mechanisms and components that we were able to identify from their manuals.

Without the option of reviewing entire intervention manuals for the remaining interventions, it is difficult to confirm that we have comprehensively identified all of the intervention characteristics related to relevant theoretical mechanisms. Poor description of intervention content is recognized as a common problem in the reporting of interventions [ 60 ].

To address the problem of underreporting and to improve clarity in the use of theoretically based interventions, intervention investigators should provide access to a comprehensive outline of intervention characteristics and how they apply to each of the related theory mechanisms [ 61 ]. Fourteen of the 35 interventions did not address self-evaluation, one of the three main components of the social cognitive theory of self-regulation.

We hypothesize that potential reasons for low frequency of identified self-evaluation mechanisms could be that the mechanisms were either more difficult for intervention researchers to implement, or they may have been incorporated but not reported in the available publications. It is possible that the other two self-evaluation mechanisms were addressed by intervention characteristics that were not explicitly reported in the identified publications.

Therefore the self-evaluation component may have been underrepresented due to availability of resources, or not been identified due to inaccurate reporting. These issues highlight the importance of comprehensive reporting, to improve replicability of similar interventions, and facilitate empirical and clinical understanding of the mechanisms addressed and intervention characteristics used [ 6 ].

Future researchers can use protocols and publications about intervention development as a source of understanding the process of which intervention characteristics were selected to address specific theory mechanisms. The development of consensus guidelines for guiding the use of theory within interventions is needed to improve both reporting use of theory use as well as implementation of theory throughout intervention development.

In our subgroup analyses that explored the number of theory components that were addressed according to assessed risk of bias, we found that nine of 11 interventions with low risk of bias incorporated intervention characteristics associated with each of the three main theory components in contrast to only six of 11 and 12 interventions with high or unclear risk of bias, respectively. It is possible that these small differences may have been influenced by poor reporting. Since risk of bias assessment relies on reported information [ 24 ], poor reporting may contribute to some interventions being assessed with high or unclear risk of bias and incomplete descriptions of theory mechanisms.

These differences highlight the importance of accurate reporting to allow for understanding of mechanisms and intervention characteristics addressed. This review is not without limitations. We may have overlooked relevant interventions that were developed using the social cognitive theory of self-regulation, but that failed to cite either of the two publications we specified for inclusion. However, we expect that our inclusion criteria identified the best examples of interventions developed using the theoretical framework.

We surmise that our database searching, citation searching, systematic review reference list searching, and reference list searching of included studies, limited the number of interventions missed in our investigation. During our consensus process of determining how we would judge whether or not intervention characteristics address theoretical mechanisms, we identified some overlap in concepts of the theory. As a result of this overlap, we may have been overly inclusive when identifying whether each of the theory components and mechanisms were represented.

The available descriptions of the social cognitive theory of self-regulation theory do not provide guidelines as to which mechanisms may overlap, or outline specifically which mechanisms or combination of mechanisms may be most relevant or useful for successful behaviour change. We therefore attempted to explicitly outline in our coding guide potential overlap across mechanisms, and set our criterion of identifying theory components at a minimum to provide a foundation upon which to build future exploration of applying the social cognitive theory of self-regulation in the development of interventions for chronic health conditions.

Research is needed to identify and evaluate which specific mechanisms and associated intervention characteristics are most important to address in behaviour change interventions. These evaluations may lead to the development of comprehensive guidelines suggesting how to use the theory mechanisms and components when developing interventions theory. We conducted this systematic review as a first-step method to inform the process that researchers can take during intervention development.

Review authors exploring use of the social cognitive theory of self-regulation are encouraged to use our extraction guide to identify intervention characteristics addressing the theory components S2 Table. For review authors exploring a different theory, following a similar consensus procedure with multiple reviewers to develop an extraction guide that includes comprehensive understanding of the type of intervention characteristics that will be judged as addressing the theory mechanisms may be useful.

Our extraction guide may serve as an appropriate starting point and an example of how theory can be identified from exploring intervention characteristics. If a review identifies that theory is comprehensively addressed across interventions, as our review did for the social cognitive theory of self-regulation for chronic health conditions, sufficient information is likely available for researchers and clinicians to identify which theory mechanisms to consider including during the preliminary phases of developing a theory-driven intervention.

Researchers and clinicians can use the review information to choose intervention characteristics that are commonly incorporated to address the theory mechanisms, likely based off of frequency of implementation across interventions. The phases for development of theory-driven interventions suggested by the UK Medical Research Council can then be followed for further testing the intervention components, to identify what intervention version and characteristics can achieve optimum clinical effectiveness [ 5 , 6 ].

If, on the other hand, a review does not identify that theory or specific theoretical mechanisms have been comprehensively used across existing interventions, additional testing and exploration using alternative methods or theories may be required to identify which, if any, of the theory mechanisms are applicable to the population of interest.

We assumed for the purpose of this review that theory-driven interventions provide some benefit over atheoretical interventions. However, the effectiveness of theory-driven interventions compared to those developed without a theoretical framework is unclear.

Future research should explore whether there are any benefits when implementing theory-driven in comparison to atheoretical interventions. Even if theory-driven interventions are identified equally as effective as atheoretical interventions, they build on existing knowledge and provide explanations of specific interactions that influence how interventions may work, which is useful for informing improvement and modification of future intervention characteristics and implementation [ 60 ].

We used the social cognitive theory of self-regulation as an example and identified that it is an adequate and practical theoretical framework to guide the preliminary phases of intervention development for some chronic health conditions. Researchers and clinicians can use this type of systematic review to identify whether a selected theory is a feasible framework to guide intervention development, and which intervention characteristics are used to address the theoretical mechanisms.

This work provides a preliminary investigation into exploring use of theory to inform the development of interventions. Further guidelines are needed to assist exploration of theory as a framework in the early phases of intervention development. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. PLoS One. Published online Aug 7. Michelle E. Hayden , 1 Patrick J. Jill A. Patrick J. Delphine Sophie Courvoisier, Editor. Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Received Jan 18; Accepted Jul This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.

This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract Background Theory is often recommended as a framework for guiding hypothesized mechanisms of treatment effect. Methods We conducted a systematic review to provide an exemplar review evaluating the extent to which use of theory is identified and incorporated within existing interventions. Introduction Theory can provide a framework for guiding the development and implementation of health interventions.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria We included peer-reviewed publications of studies reporting interventions for chronic health conditions based on the social cognitive theory of self-regulation meeting all of the inclusion criteria described below. Selection Process We used two screening phases to identify studies reporting potentially relevant interventions from titles and abstracts.

Data Extraction To supplement information extracted about the content of included interventions, we searched for related publications, protocols, guidelines, and web-based resources. Table 1 Description of the self-regulatory mechanism proposed by the social cognitive theory of self-regulation [ 10 , 11 ]. Open in a separate window. Data Synthesis We report frequency of use of the social cognitive theory of self-regulation in the development of each intervention, including how often: 1 interventions addressed all three theory components together, two theory components, or only self-monitoring, 2 interventions had characteristics belonging to each specific theory component, and 3 interventions included characteristics belonging to each specific theory mechanism within each of the three theory components.

Results Description of Included Interventions We identified and screened 16, independent titles and abstracts Fig 1. Fig 1. Flow diagram. Table 2 Summary of intervention characteristics included in the review. Overview of Theory Component Use Twenty-one of thirty-five interventions incorporated all three of the main theory components by including at least one intervention characteristic that addressed one or more mechanism for self-monitoring, self-judgement, and self-evaluation.

Self-monitoring Each intervention addressed an average of 6. Self-judgement All of the included interventions incorporated characteristics addressing at least one of the mechanisms related to self-judgement. Self-evaluation We identified a total of 21 interventions that included characteristics related to self-evaluation.

Mechanism Number of interventions Description Self-satisfaction 16 Guided in self-approval or respect for behaviour through promoting confidence, self-efficacy, acceptance, and positive thoughts associated with behaviour change Self-incentives 6 Guided in personally setting self-administered rewards for achieving progress or attaining goals External rewards 4 Rewarded for achieving progress, such as certificates, stickers, t-shirts, bags.

Discussion This review provides an example of how literature can be systematically reviewed to identify the extent to which a selected theory has been used as a framework for existing interventions. Limitations This review is not without limitations. Future Directions We conducted this systematic review as a first-step method to inform the process that researchers can take during intervention development.

Conclusions The present review establishes that systematic review is a feasible method of identifying use of theory as a conceptual framework for existing interventions. DOC Click here for additional data file. DOCX Click here for additional data file.

Data Availability All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files. References 1. Realist review—a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Policy. Benefits of treatment theory in the design of explanatory trials: cognitive treatment of illness perception in chronic low back pain rehabilitation as an illustrative example.

J Rehabil Med. Health Behavior Theory and cumulative knowledge regarding health behaviors: are we moving in the right direction? Health Educ Res. Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance.

Int J Nurs Stud. The use of theory in health behavior research from to a systematic review. Ann Behav Med. A systematic review of the use of theory in the design of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies and interpretation of the results of rigorous evaluations. Implement Sci.

BIOGRAPHY RESEARCH PAPER OUTLINE

Vogler, K.

Consumer law course work in uk 301
Help writing film studies blog post We included peer-reviewed publications of interventions that referenced the social cognitive theory of self-regulation as a framework for interventions to manage chronic health conditions. Given these important concerns, however, these findings need to be interpreted with caution. Interventions addressed only two theory components when at least one intervention characteristic related to at least one mechanism was present for self-monitoring, lady of shallot essay with one other theory component either self-judgement or self-evaluation. Student changes in social cognitive theory constructs. Further, it is not the organism who is associating; rather, the environment is where all associating takes place.
Pat riley coaching resume Citing websites in research papers apa
Business resume objective examples Tudor-Locke [ 44 ]. Mediators of physical activity change in a behavioral modification program for type 2 diabetes patients. Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. J Asthma. Rogers, E. Observational learning seems to defy traditional discriminative stimulus—response—reinforcer analyses, even when more contemporary concepts e. Int J Pediatr Obes.
Cheap persuasive essay editing websites for college 502
Bandura literature review Assessing Conceptual Understanding of Rational Numbers. On the origins of naming and other symbolic behavior. Discussion This review provides an example of how literature can be systematically reviewed to identify the extent to which a selected theory has been used as a framework for existing interventions. A multitude of research studies have been published investigating individual behavior from the viewpoint of Social Cognitive Theory. Guided in self-approval or respect for behaviour through promoting confidence, self-efficacy, acceptance, and positive thoughts associated with behaviour change.
How to write good assignment Essay on tv reality shows
Underline author in essay Hayden1 Patrick J. English language a level representation coursework in observational learning represents a critical development in the history of psychology. We excluded studies that: 1 cited the social cognitive theory of self-regulation but did not report evaluation of an intervention, 2 were available as conference proceedings, abstracts, case studies, theses, bandura literature review, summaries, commentaries, editorials, letters to the editor, or study protocols without published data, 3 used proxies of the population of interest e. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. When our searches identified information from multiple study publications about the same intervention, we combined this information during extraction. Related Topics. The term association is used here to refer to spatiotemporal relationships; that is, to relationships among various factors that occur in the environment together in space and time.
How to write museum wall text Fishbein, M. Revista Mexicana de Psicologia. We searched clinicaltrials. Our interrater reliability for study selection was moderate for title and abstract, as well as for full-text screening, with a Kappa of 0. Equivalence as process. DOC Click here for additional data file. We cannot be satisfied until every child in America-and I mean every child- has the same chances for a good education that we want for our own children.
Bandura literature review 962

Think, essay tungkol sa nutrisyon not agree

Theories direct and guide our perception of thinking. Three conditions were compared for effectiveness: While the learning process is essentially the same, the characteristics of the social transmitters and other interpersonal variables can greatly affect the rate, level, and types of responses that will be acquired observationally. View all posts by kayliekropp You are commenting using your WordPress.

You are commenting using your Google account. You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account. Notify me of new comments via email. Notify me of new posts via email. Skip to content. Home About Contact.

Share this: Twitter Facebook. Like this: Like Loading Published by kayliekropp Published August 18, Previous Post Abe post graduate diploma assignments. Next Post Essay paper report. Leave a Reply Cancel reply Enter your comment here Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:. Email required Address never made public. He further argued that vicarious learning is a means of short-circuiting this method, and humorously employed a play on terminology to underscore the fallacy of differential reinforcement as a suitable means for acquiring certain types of skills in hazardous situations: [2].

It is evident from informal observation that vicarious-learning experiences and response-guidance procedures involving both symbolic and live models are utilized extensively in social learning to short-circuit the acquisition process, and to prevent one-trial extinction of the organism in potentially hazardous situations.

Bandura, , p. For the purposes of the present discussion, a vicarious learning event is defined as one in which new responses are acquired or the characteristics of existing response repertoires are modified as a function of observing the behavior of others and its reinforcing consequences, without the modeled responses being overtly performed by the viewer during the exposure period.

Any learning that occurs under these limiting conditions is purely on an observational or covert basis. This mode of response acquisition is accordingly designated as no-trial learning, since the observer does not engage in any over responding trials although, as will be shown later, he may require multiple observational trials in order to reproduce the stimuli accurately.

It is important to note that in promoting this change Bandura did not advocate the wholesale abandonment of principles of learning in the behaviorist tradition altogether. For example, although he argued that learning can take place through observation without the observer performing any responses to be reinforced, he was not throwing out the principle of reinforcement. What he was doing was presenting a supplementary view of reinforcement based on evidence from a number of empirical studies which suggested that reinforcement, both of the classical conditioning and the operant conditioning varieties, may occur vicariously.

Thus, reinforcement could be provided not only by rewarding or punishing the learner directly, but by rewarding or punishing someone else in their presence, with whom they could identify. Second, it concluded with a challenge that set a new standard for the variables of learning theory:. The study of social transmission of response patterns is necessitated by the fact that the behavioral repertoires which constitute an enduring part of a culture are to a large extent transmitted on the basis of repeated observation of behavior displayed by social models rather than by memory drums.

While the learning process is essentially the same, the characteristics of the social transmitters and other interpersonal variables can greatly affect the rate, level, and types of responses that will be acquired observationally. Moreover, the efficacy of parameters established on the basis of learning in one-person situations may differ in dyadic and group situations Bandura et al. A comprehensive theory of behavior must therefore be based on experimentation involving both social and learning variables.

Twelve years after declaring the need for any comprehensive theory of behavior to include an accounting of both learning and social variables Bandura answered his own challenge with the publication of Social Learning Theory Bandura, b. In fact, the central claim of the theory is that most human behavior is learned in this way:. Learning would be exceedingly laborious, not to mention hazardous, if people had to rely solely on the effects of their own actions to inform them what to do.

Fortunately, most human behavior is learned observationally through modeling: from observing others one forms an idea of how new behaviors are performed, and on later occasions this coded information serves as a guide for action. Bandura, b, p. According to social learning theory, observational learning is comprised of four component processes: a attentional, b retention, c motor reproduction, and d motivational:. They are more likely to adopt modeled behavior if it results in outcomes they value than if it has unrewarding or punishing effects…those behaviors that seem to be effective for others are favored over behaviors that are seen to have negative consequences.

Social learning theory acknowledges the acquisition of antecedent determiners of behavior. They can be learned not only through direct experience, but also through symbolic generalization, such as the casting of stereotypes pp. Consequent determinants are often learned through direct experience, but can also be learned through vicarious reinforcement p. Like reinforcement in direct experiential learning, reinforcement in observational learning has the same informative, incentive, and strengthening functions Bandura, b, p.

However, in observational learning it is assumed that reinforcement has an antecedent influence rather than a consequent one. It follows from social learning theory that observational learning can be achieved more effectively by informing observers in advance about the benefits of adopting modeled behavior than by waiting until they happen to imitate a model and then rewarding them for it.

Bandura also introduced the concept of triadic reciprocal determinism. Where the behaviorist view was one in which the environment determined behavior, social learning theory included the additional notions that a behavior also determines the environment to which a person is subjected to, and b that cognitive regulation influences both behavior and how environmental stimuli are perceived.

The same ideas presented in were again published in under the name of social cognitive theory Bandura, Bandura explained the purpose behind his use of the terms social and cognitive by saying,. In the more fitting appellation as social cognitive theory , the social portion of the title acknowledges the social origins of much human thought and action; the cognitive portion recognizes the influential contribution of cognitive processes to human motivation, affect, and action.

Bandura, a, p. Along with the name change, many of the transitional links to behavioral learning theory that were leveraged in the initial presentation were dropped—presumably because they were no longer needed in order for the core ideas to be accepted.

By observational and vicarious learning was well known, and well supported by both empirical and anecdotal evidence. The ideas of the theory were further organized and presented a decade later in an entry for the International Encyclopedia of Education Bandura, In summary, they are as follows:. Model of Causation. Symbolizing Capability.

Vicarious Capability. The four subfunctions that govern observational learning are a attentional processes, b cognitive representational and memory processes, c the behavioral production process, and d motivational processes p. Rather, modeling influences convey rules for generative and innovative behavior…. Forethought Capability. Self-regulatory Capability.

Self-reflective Capability. Characteristics of Human Nature. While originally cast with a behavioral orientation Bandura, b , it took on a more cognitive feel in the s and early-to-mid s Bandura, ; Bandura, b; Bandura, In more recent years it has undergone another shift toward an agentic perspective of social cognitive theory Bandura, ; Bandura, b; Bandura, c and toward a psychology of human agency Bandura, b.