Learning to Be Aggressive: Bandura's Social Learning Theory and Media Influence

UPI Study › Courses › Advanced Social Psychology › Free lessons › Lesson 11.5 Free with a free account

Learning to Be Aggressive: Bandura's Social Learning Theory and Media Influence

Advanced Social Psychology · Chapter 11: Aggression and ViolenceSection 11.5 · lesson 76 of 859 min · free with a free account

← Harm Without Hands: Relational Aggression, Bullying, and Their ImpactNext lesson: Young Minds, Big Emotions: Emotion Regulation and Aggression in Early Childhood →

Earn 3 college credits for Advanced Social PsychologyRecommended for credit by NCCRS · Psychology 310 · self-paced · one payment, lifetime access
Enroll in Advanced Social Psychology · $250 →Download the syllabus (PDF)

In this lesson

How aggression is acquired by watching, and what the media-violence literature actually shows.

  • Explain social learning and social cognitive theory
  • Read the Bobo doll studies, including the 1965 follow-up
  • Name the 4 observational-learning processes
  • State the size and the limits of media-violence effects

Free study notes

Get this lesson's notes by email

The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.

One email. Unsubscribe in one click.

Transcript

Everything said in the video, section by section (1,245 words). Read along, or search it.

Aggression and Violence

Learning to Be Aggressive

This section covers how aggression gets learned by watching other people. And then what happens when the model is on a screen rather than in the room. It begins with an anomaly that behaviorism could not absorb. Children were acquiring behaviors nobody had ever rewarded them for. Bandura's answer to that anomaly reshaped the field. We will work through the Bobo doll studies carefully. Especially the nineteen sixty-five follow-up, which is the one that matters. It draws a distinction that most summaries of this work leave out. Then we turn to media violence, and to what the meta-analyses actually say. That literature is routinely overstated in both directions.

A Stubborn Anomaly

What Reinforcement Could Not Explain

By the late nineteen fifties, behaviorist accounts of aggression had a problem. Children were doing three things the theory did not allow. They acquired aggressive responses they had never been directly rewarded for. They sometimes did so after a single exposure. And they did so in a form that copied the model in detail. Take those one at a time, because each one hurts differently. No reward means there is no reinforcement history to appeal to. A single exposure means there was no gradual shaping either. And the fine-grained copying is the worst of the three. The child did not acquire a general tendency toward rowdiness. The child acquired the specific act.

Bandura

Learning by Watching Someone Else Get Paid

Albert Bandura's answer arrived as social learning theory, in nineteen seventy-three. He later broadened it into social cognitive theory, in nineteen eighty-six. Learning, he argued, occurs through observation of models. And through vicarious reinforcement. Vicarious reinforcement means seeing someone else rewarded or punished. The consequence never has to reach you at all. And what the learner takes away is not a stimulus-response bond. It is a general script, or a rule. Stored as a cognitive symbol, which can be retrieved later. Bandura put the central claim plainly in nineteen eighty-six. Behavior is learned, at least in rough form, through observation. Learners need not perform any responses themselves, nor receive any direct reinforcement.

The Design

The Bobo Doll Experiments

The Bobo doll experiments remain the canonical demonstration. They were run by Bandura, Ross and Ross, in nineteen sixty-one and sixty-three. And extended by Bandura alone in nineteen sixty-five. The participants were preschool-aged children. Each child watched an adult in one of two conditions. In one, the adult simply played quietly. In the other, the adult attacked a large inflatable Bobo doll. And the attacks were highly distinctive. Striking it with a mallet. Kicking it. Shouting scripted phrases. That distinctiveness is a methodological choice, not a stylistic one. A child who just becomes rowdier proves very little. A child who repeats a specific invented phrase has demonstrably copied this model.

The Original Result

They Reproduced the Specific Acts

The original result was clear. Children who had watched the aggressive model reproduced those specific acts. They did so at a much higher rate when given access to the doll themselves. Children who saw the non-aggressive model rarely produced them at all. Now think about why that was a problem for reinforcement accounts. The children had received no reward for those acts. They had never practiced them. On a strict reinforcement account, the behavior should not have been available. So observation clearly transmits something. That much was settled. But a harder question remained open. Does the model's fate change what the child learns? Or only what the child chooses to do?

The 1965 Follow-Up

Rewarded, Punished, or Nothing

The nineteen sixty-five study added the variation that answers that question. Children now saw the model rewarded, or punished, or facing no consequence. Imitation was lower among those who had seen the model punished. Which is exactly what a simple vicarious-learning account predicts. But Bandura added a second phase. Those same children were later offered juice and stickers. The offer was to show what the model had done. And under that incentive, all three groups reproduced the acts equally. Read that result slowly, because everything turns on it. The punished-model children could do it all along. Nothing about their knowledge differed. Only their willingness to display it.

The Conclusion

Learning and Performance Are Distinct

Bandura's conclusion is one sentence, and it is worth memorizing. Consequences regulate whether a behavior is enacted. Not whether it has been acquired. Learning and performance are distinct processes. Acquisition happens through observation alone. It is invisible from the outside, and it is not conditional on consequences. Performance depends on anticipated outcomes. That is the part punishment suppresses. Now notice the practical consequence, because it is uncomfortable. A deterrent that suppresses performance leaves the script fully intact. Change the incentives and it reappears, complete. Vicarious punishment suppresses performance but not acquisition.

Four Processes

Every Link Must Hold

Bandura's mature model specifies four sub-processes. Each one must succeed for observation to become a learned response. The first is attention. Attention depends on the model's salience, on similarity, and on arousal. The second is retention. The behavior must be stored in memory as a symbolic representation. One that can later guide reproduction. The third is motor reproduction, and it is often forgotten. You need the sub-skills, and accurate self-feedback, to actually perform it. The fourth is motivation, which depends on anticipated outcomes. Direct reinforcement, vicarious reinforcement, and self-reinforcement. Weakness in any single link disrupts either acquisition or performance.

Sticky Scripts

Why Aggressive Scripts Travel So Well

Not all observed behavior is equally learnable. Aggressive scripts happen to be particularly sticky. And the reasons have nothing to do with aggression as such. They are typically simple, which helps retention and reproduction. They are emotionally vivid, which helps attention. And they are usually depicted as successful in obtaining valued outcomes. Which supplies motivation. Now look at that list against the four sub-processes. It maps onto three of the four. So aggressive content is not privileged by its content. It is privileged by its format.

From Bobo To The Screen

What the Meta-Analyses Show

If aggression can be learned from a live model, what about a screen? Half a century of research suggests the answer is yes. With caveats about size, mechanism, and individual differences. Several large meta-analyses converge on the same picture. Exposure to violent media is associated with a small-to-moderate increase. An increase in aggressive cognition, affect, and behavior. And a comparable decrease in empathy and prosocial behavior. The effect sizes are correlations of roughly point one five to point two five. That is smaller than the effect of direct provocation. But it is comparable to many established public-health relationships. Asbestos exposure and laryngeal cancer, for instance. Or condom use and HIV. And longitudinal work shows childhood exposure predicts adult aggression.

Mechanism

Short-Term Priming, Long-Term Elaboration

The General Aggression Model supplies the integrative account. It separates two timescales that get confused constantly. Short-term effects work through three routes. Priming of aggressive concepts. Increases in physiological arousal. And direct imitation of a just-seen script. Long-term effects work quite differently. They involve gradual elaboration of aggressive scripts and schemas. The normalization of violence. And desensitization of emotional reactions to harm. Video games add interactivity, repetition, and direct reinforcement of aggressive choices. Whether that adds anything beyond passive viewing remains actively debated.

Consolidate

Three Caveats, and How to Read the Evidence

Three caveats deserve real emphasis, and they cut against overstatement. First, media exposure is one input among many. Population-level homicide trends do not track media-violence consumption closely. Any account predicting that they should is already wrong. Second, the effects are heterogeneous. Trait-aggressive viewers show the strongest gains. So do children with poor parental mediation. And many viewers show no measurable increase at all. Third, this literature concerns gradients of risk. Not deterministic causation. Most exposed individuals do not become more aggressive in any measurable way. So the responsible reading is probabilistic and developmental, not alarmist. Though notice that the same evidence also rules out simply dismissing it.

About Advanced Social Psychology at UPI Study

Advanced Social Psychology (Psychology 310) is a self-paced online course of 85 video lessons in 12 chapters, from attitudes, persuasion and the self to prejudice, attraction and relationships, conformity and obedience, helping, aggression and social life online. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.

Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Psychology and social science courses Every course with PRO →

Compare: Social Psychology vs Sociology

Why take it here

Why students take Advanced Social Psychology with UPI Study

How other people shape what we think and doAdvanced Social Psychology explains how people think about, influence and relate to one another: attitudes and persuasion, the self, prejudice and intergroup conflict, attraction and close relationships, conformity and obedience, helping and aggression. It is a common upper-level course in psychology and sociology degrees.
Credit at a fraction of the priceThe same 3 credits can cost $750 or more at a US college. Here it is one payment, self-paced, with lifetime access.
Finish your degree soonerTransfer credits reduce the courses you still owe, so you can graduate earlier or lighten a heavy semester.
Strengthen an applicationA completed college-level course on an official transcript shows admissions and scholarship committees you can do the work.
Study on your own scheduleNo start dates, no deadlines. Watch the lessons, practice, and take the final when you are ready.
130,000+students helped with college creditsACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Where the credit goes

Universities that work with NCCRS

Advanced Social Psychology carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Thomas Edison State UniversityThomas Edison State UniversitySigned partnerUniversity of the PeopleUniversity of the PeopleSigned partnerCharter Oak State CollegeCharter Oak State CollegeSigned partnerStrayer UniversityStrayer UniversitySigned partnerColumbia Southern UniversityColumbia Southern UniversitySigned partnerIndiana TechIndiana TechSigned partnerPenn StatePenn StateWorks with NCCRSSouthern New Hampshire UniversitySouthern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRSSUNYSUNYWorks with NCCRS +many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →

Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.

FAQ

Questions students ask us

About Learning to Be Aggressive: Bandura's Social Learning Theory and Media Influence

What did Bandura's Bobo doll experiment show?
Albert Bandura's Bobo doll studies, run with Dorothea Ross and Sheila Ross in 1961 and 1963, showed that children learn aggression by watching others. Preschoolers who saw an adult hit, kick, and shout specific phrases at an inflatable Bobo doll later copied those exact acts far more than children who saw a calm adult. The children had never been rewarded for the behavior, which challenged pure reinforcement accounts.
What is the difference between learning and performance in Bandura's theory?
In Bandura's theory, learning is acquiring a behavior by observation, while performance is actually doing it, which depends on expected consequences. In his 1965 study, children who saw a model punished imitated less aggression. But when later offered rewards to show what the model did, those children reproduced the acts about as well as the others. Punishment had suppressed performance, not learning.
What are the four processes of observational learning?
Bandura described four processes needed for observational learning: attention, retention, motor reproduction, and motivation. A learner must notice the model, store the behavior in memory, be physically able to perform it, and expect it to pay off through direct, vicarious, or self-reinforcement. Aggressive behaviors are learned easily because they tend to be vivid, simple, and often shown as successful.
Does violent media cause aggression?
Research links violent media exposure to small increases in aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior, but it is one risk factor among many, not a sole cause. Meta-analyses report average correlations of roughly 0.15 to 0.25, though some researchers argue the true effects are smaller, and the issue remains debated. Effects are strongest for already aggressive viewers and children with little parental guidance, and many viewers show no measurable change.

About the Advanced Social Psychology course

How many college credits is Advanced Social Psychology?
Advanced Social Psychology (Psychology 310) carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
How much does Advanced Social Psychology cost and what is included?
$250, paid once, with lifetime access: all 85 video lessons, a practice quiz after each, the graded work and final exam, and an official transcript when you finish. Students who want several courses choose UPI Study PRO instead.
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
UPI Study has signed partner agreements with universities such as Thomas Edison State University, University of the People and Charter Oak State College, and works with universities such as Penn State, SNHU and SUNY. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities. Use "Find my college" on this page to check yours.
How long does Advanced Social Psychology take?
It is self-paced with no deadlines. The 85 lessons total about 15 hours of video; most students add reading and practice time and finish in a few weeks to a few months, on their own schedule.
How are the exams done?
Quizzes and assignments are online in the course. The final exam is taken online with proctoring; a person on the UPI Study team checks assignments, usually within two days.
How do my credits reach my college?
When the course shows 100% complete, request the official transcript from your dashboard. It is sent to the college you name, and you can send it to more than one. Check your college first with "Find my college" on this page, or ask Athena.

Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Advanced Social Psychology.

85 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.

Enroll in Advanced Social Psychology →Download the syllabusEvery course with PRO →
Advanced Social Psychology
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →