Genetic Basis of Behaviour

Social Learning Theory

Social learning theory (SLT), developed by Albert Bandura (1977), extended the behaviourist account of learning by proposing that behaviour can be acquired not only through direct reinforcement (as operant conditioning maintains) but also through observing and imitating others. Bandura argued that traditional behaviourism was too mechanistic and ignored the cognitive processes that intervene between stimulus and response — processes that are essential for understanding how humans learn from watching each other in social contexts.

Observational Learning

The central claim of SLT is that humans (and many animals) learn by observing the behaviour of others — called models — and the consequences that follow that behaviour. If an observer sees a model rewarded for a behaviour (vicarious reinforcement), the observer becomes more likely to imitate that behaviour. If the model is punished (vicarious punishment), the observer becomes less likely to imitate. Critically, the observer does not need to perform the behaviour or receive reinforcement themselves — learning can occur purely through observation, which Bandura termed no-trial learning.

Mediational Processes

Bandura proposed four internal cognitive processes — mediational processes — that must occur between observation and imitation for learning to take place:

• Attention: the observer must notice and attend to the model's behaviour. Attention is influenced by the characteristics of the model (status, attractiveness, similarity to the observer) and the salience of the behaviour.
• Retention: the observer must encode and remember the observed behaviour in order to reproduce it later. This involves the formation of mental representations — images and verbal descriptions — of the behaviour.
• Reproduction: the observer must have the physical and cognitive capability to reproduce the behaviour. Skills beyond the observer's current ability cannot be imitated regardless of attention and retention.
• Motivation: the observer must be motivated to perform the behaviour. This motivation is influenced by the anticipated consequences — vicarious reinforcement increases motivation to imitate; vicarious punishment reduces it. Self-efficacy — the person's belief in their own ability to perform the behaviour successfully — also influences motivation.

The Bobo Doll Study (Bandura et al., 1961, 1963)

Bandura's most famous research involved the Bobo doll experiments. Children watched a film of an adult model behaving aggressively towards a large, inflatable Bobo doll — hitting it with a mallet, kicking it, and using specific verbal phrases. In one condition, the model was rewarded after this behaviour; in another, the model was punished; in a third, there were no consequences. Children were then placed with the Bobo doll and their behaviour was observed.

Children who saw the model rewarded showed the most imitative aggression; those who saw the model punished showed the least. Crucially, when all children were offered incentives (stickers and juice) to reproduce the model's behaviour, the differences between conditions largely disappeared — demonstrating that all children had learnt the aggressive behaviour through observation (acquisition), but performance of the behaviour was regulated by vicarious consequences. This distinction between learning and performance is one of SLT's most important contributions.

Evaluation

SLT extended behaviourism in an important direction, incorporating cognitive processes and providing a plausible account of social learning. The Bobo doll studies provided controlled experimental evidence for observational learning and the influence of vicarious reinforcement. However, the Bobo doll studies have been criticised for low ecological validity — the artificial laboratory setting and the inflatable doll may not reflect real-world aggression. Children's behaviour may have been demand-characteristic-driven (they may have understood that they were expected to hit the doll). SLT also underplays biological and genetic factors in behaviour, and whilst it incorporates cognitive mediators, it does not fully specify the mental processes involved.