1

Behaviorism and Social Learning Theory

Grace W. Kibe

Theorists referenced in this chapter:

Albert Bandura Ivan Pavlov Julian Rotter

Martin Seligman B.F. Skinner John Watson

This reading will focus on the behaviorist worldview of human development. The

behaviorist worldview seeks to explain how our behaviors are formed as we interact with the

environment. The behaviorist views learning in terms of the reactions (both voluntary and

involuntary) that we develop to specific things that we encounter. The most simplistic

interpretation of behaviorism is that humans like other animals, can be trained or taught to

respond in specific ways and in specific circumstances. To help explain how the behaviorist

worldview interprets how we function as humans, this reading will address the following: (a) the

two types of behaviorist learning, classical conditioning and operant conditioning, and how they

function; (b) social learning theory; and (c) how learned helplessness develops.

Behaviorism as a theory of learning was prominent in the 20th century. It rejected prior

psychological ideals which proposed that researchers should assess the conscious and

unconscious aspects of the mind to understand human functioning. The behaviorist perspective

proposed that it was more important to understand observable (external) human actions rather

than the human thought processes (internal and unobservable). In order to explain the

relationship between the environment and behavior, the behaviorist perspective focused only on

observable and measurable behaviors. Behaviorism introduced the terms “ ” and

“ to explain the interaction between the environment and the individual. A stimulus is

2

any type of object or event occurring in the environment that may cause the individual to have an

external behavioral response. A response refers to how an individual behaves in reaction to the

object or event (stimulus). The stimulus and response units are incorporated unto two types of

behaviorist learning: classical conditioning and operant conditioning. These two types of

learning will be discussed along with the theorists associated with the behaviorist perspective.

Social learning theory evolved from behaviorism and was developed in the mid- to late-

20th century. The name, social learning, describes the theory: that we learn from our society or

environment. Social learning theorists believe that we can combine thinking and conditioning to

develop behaviors and attitudes, both good and bad, about ourselves and others. Within social

learning theory, we will discuss modeling, vicarious learning, expectancy theory, locus of

control, and learned helplessness.

The concept of was developed in 1904 by a Russian

physiologist named Ivan Pavlov. Classical conditioning primarily focuses on the ability to use

stimuli to create involuntary responses, such as blinking and salivating (Pavlov, 1927). Pavlov

demonstrated the principles of classical conditioning through an experiment in which dogs, who

normally salivate at the sight of food, learned to salivate to the sound of a bell (Pavlov, 1902;

1927). The experiment involved three phases: (a) the pre-conditioning phase; (2) the

conditioning phase; and (3) the post-conditioning phase (see Figure 1).

The presentation of an is a natural and automatic

impetus that triggers an is the

automatic reaction to the and is an unlearned response. For

example, if you hear a really loud noise, you might startle or jump. In this case, the really loud

3

noise is an unconditioned stimulus your startling is the unconditioned response. In Pavlov’s

experiment, during the pre-conditioning phase, the was the meat

which, when presented to the dog, resulted in the unconditioned response (UCR) of salivation.

In the conditioning phase, a is paired with the unconditioned stimulus

(UCS) to create a relationship between them for the subject being trained. In the conditioning

phase of the experiment, Pavlov rang a bell (neutral stimulus) when presenting the dog with meat

(unconditioned stimulus). Of course, the dog salivated because of the meat. Pavlov repeated

ringing the bell (neutral stimulus) and presenting the meat (unconditioned stimulus) at the same

time, repeatedly. Each time, the dog salivated (unconditioned response). After a while, Pavlov

stopped giving the dog the meat but continued ringing the bell. In this post-conditioning phase,

the dog salivated upon hearing the bell although there was no meat. The behavior or response

was learned (conditioned); the bell had been transformed from the neutral stimulus to the

that resulted in a . In this classical

conditioning experiment, salivation changed from an unconditioned response to a conditioned

response. The conditioned response is also referred to as the learned response. Figure 1

illustrates the process of conditioning a dog to salivate when a bell is rung.

4

Pre-conditioning phase

Pre-conditioning phase

Conditioning phase

+

Post-conditioning phase

Figure 1. Phases of Classical Conditioning.

Pavlov also explored other learning mechanisms including

. refers to the capability for a

conditioned response to be produced after the presentation of a stimulus that is similar to the

conditioned stimulus (Sheehy, 2004). The effect of the original stimulus is then generalized, or

shared, with similar stimuli. In Pavlov’s experiment, a doorbell or the sound of an alarm clock

may have caused the dog to salivate, because these objects share similar sounds with the bell. If

that had happened, the doorbell or alarm clock would have been examples of stimulus

generalization. Discrimination involves the ability to identify differences between stimuli

(Sheehy, 2004). For instance, if the dog had responded differently to the sound of the bell

(conditioned stimulus) compared to the sound of a doorbell; then the dog would have the

capability to discriminate between two different stimuli. Extinction is the continuous elimination

of the conditioned response by removing its association with the unconditioned stimulus.

Unconditioned stimulus

Unconditioned response

Neutral stimulus

No conditioned response

Unconditioned response

Unconditioned Stimulus + Neutral stimulus

Conditioned stimulus

Conditioned response

5

Extinction would occur if Pavlov rang the bell numerous times without pairing it with the meat.

After extinction, the dog would not salivate when only the bell was rung.

Stimulus response is possible in humans just as it is in

animals. John Watson was an American psychologist who applied the principles of classical

conditioning in an experiment known as The Little Albert Experiment. Watson wanted to

demonstrate that behaviors such as emotional responses could be learned by humans. Similar to

Pavlov’s dog experiment, Watson’s experiment involved three phases: (a) pre-conditioning; (b)

conditioning; and (c) post conditioning. In the pre-conditioning phase, Watson presented a white

rat to Little Albert, his nine-month-old baby. Albert did not exhibit any signs of fear towards the

white rat, but rather developed an interest in the rat. Also, Albert did not exhibit fear of other

white, furry animals including dogs or rabbits. During the conditioning phase, Watson presented

the rat to Albert along with a loud noise produced by banging a steel rod. Scared by the loud

noise, Albert responded by crying and developed an immense fear of the rat. During the post-

conditioning phase, Watson presented the rat without the loud noise. Albert maintained his

immense fear towards the rat though the loud noise was not present. Can you identify the neutral

stimulus, unconditioned stimulus, and conditioned stimulus along with the unconditioned and

conditioned responses in the Little Albert experiment?

Findings from this experiment revealed that Little Albert’s behavior had changed. Not

only had he developed an irrational fear of rats, but he had a generalized fear of all furry things

that he encountered (e.g., dogs, rabbits). Albert had acquired a , which is defined as an

irrational and generalized fear of objects. Unfortunately, Watson was not able to cure Little

Albert’s fear of white rats because Albert relocated to another state with his mother (Watson &

Raynor, 1920). Consequently, another behavioral theorist by the name of Mary Cover Jones

(1924) proposed two types of treatment that may reverse a person’s irrational fear of objects,

6

animals, or situations. They are extinction and counter-conditioning. In Little Albert’s case,

extinction would involve introducing a rat (or other furry thing) without making the loud sound

that had been associated with the rat. This would be done slowly and over time, so that Albert

could get used to the rat not “causing” the loud noise that scared him. At first, the white rat

would be somewhere in the same room as Albert but far enough away from him so that he could

just see the white rat. After a period of time in which Albert would be comfortable with the rat

being in the same room, the rat would be brought closer to Albert. This activity would continue

with Albert becoming more comfortable each time the white rat was placed closer to him. Over

time, the rat would be right next to Albert and eventually he might even play with the rat.

Realize that this would work only if there were no loud noises during this phase.

would involve pairing the conditioned stimulus (the rat) with something pleasant.

In other words, Little Albert would be re-conditioned to associate the rat with something pleasant

rather than with something scary. This pleasant association would eventually replace the

unpleasant association made with the loud noise. As an aside, be sure to realize that conducting

such an experiment today would be unethical. During the time of this experiment, there were no

laws in place protecting humans from such types of experiments.

Classical conditioning may be used by educators to construct

environments that support students’ academic performance. That is, teachers may create

activities that enhance students’ competence in subjects in which they may previously have done

poorly due to negative learning experiences. For instance, some students have anxiety every

time they encounter a difficult math problem. The development of math anxiety may have been

a result of public embarrassment by a former math teacher for not answering a math problem

correctly. Initially, the math problems were the neutral stimulus, humiliation was the

unconditioned stimulus, and anxiety was the unconditioned response. After several occasions of

7

public humiliation, the difficult math problems transitioned to be the conditioned stimulus, which

led to the conditioned response, anxiety. To change this situation, a teacher could create an

environment that praises and rewards students who attempt to solve difficult math problems,

even though the answers are incorrect.

In 1948, B. F. Skinner, an American psychologist, originated the research in operant

conditioning. Skinner’s interest in operant conditioning evolved as he initiated the construction

of a box (i.e., Skinner box) that would serve as a controlled environment animal experimentation.

Skinner’s used pigeons to get them to turn a complete circle by turning to the left. Skinner

provided a reward to the pigeon for any minute movement to the left, and then a reward for any

large movements to the left, until the pigeon had completely turned to the left and had created a

circle in his movement (Skinner, 1948). With this experiment, Skinner argued that if one could

alter an animal’s behavior, then a human’s behavior could also be changed because a human is

not much different than an animal. Skinner believed human beings lack consciousness, and their

actions can be controlled through consequences that are reinforcements and/or punishments.

Further findings from this experiment indicated that operant conditioning, which is what he

called this theory, could be employed to shape and alter behavior. That is, he was able to explain

how operant conditioning could be used to change an animal’s behavior through the application

of reinforcement once an animal demonstrated the appropriate behavior (Skinner, 1948).

Skinner argued that behavior and interactions with the environment are primarily

impacted by external influences. Therefore, any action in which we engage is influenced by the

consequences (e.g., reinforcement or punishment) that we receive from the environment.

refers to the control of an individual’s voluntary responses; and places

emphasis on an individual’s actions. It is defined as a type of learning where a learner’s

8

behavior is changed by the consequences that follow. Operant conditioning reinforces those

actions that lead to appropriate outcomes and punishes those that lead to undesirable actions

(behaviors). Because of operant conditioning, individuals will tend to repeat behaviors that have

positive outcomes and refrain from repeating behaviors that have negative outcomes. Skinner

identified two types of consequences, reinforcement and punishment. Note that according to

operant conditioning, consequences are not viewed as good or bad but rather represent the

direction of the behavior as either increasing or decreasing.

Reinforcement is anything that strengthens or increases the likelihood

that a behavior will continue. In order for a reinforcement to be effective, it needs to be

important to and desirable for the individual. For instance, if a teacher is trying to encourage a

preschool student to finish her activities on time, the teacher may reward the student with

something that she likes, such as a sticker. However, this reward may not work for a student

who is in the elementary grades because these two students are from different age groups and

their likes and dislikes may be different. Thus, the appropriate type of reinforcement will depend

on an individual’s age and what the person finds to be desirable or salient. There are two types

of reinforcement; and .

Positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement consists of providing an individual

something favorable after a particular behavior. In situations that reflect positive reinforcement,

a response or behavior is strengthened by the addition of something, such as praise or a direct

reward. For example, a father wants to encourage his son to wake up early each school morning.

Every morning that the son wakes up early, the father lets him play video games before leaving

for school. In this example, the stimulus that was presented was the video games and the

behavior that increased was waking up early for school.

9

Negative reinforcement. Negative reinforcement is taking away something unfavorable,

something that the individual does not like, after a particular behavior that is to be increased In

these situations, a response is strengthened by the removal of something considered unpleasant.

For example, Ms. Woodard told her class that each time they were quiet during quiet time; she

would give them a homework-free pass on Friday. The students were excited because they did

not like doing their homework assignments every night and would enjoy having no homework on

Friday. For the first three weeks, only a few students were quiet during quiet time. They

received a homework-free pass on Friday. However, during the fourth week, the entire class was

very quiet during quiet time, and Ms. Woodard gave them all a homework-free pass on Friday.

In this example, the stimulus that was removed was homework on Friday. The behavior that

increased was everyone being quiet during quiet time.

Punishment, on the other hand, is anything that might weaken or diminish

the likelihood that a behavior will continue. Notice the word “might” and realize that

punishment does not eliminate the behavior; it may only decrease it. The only time punishment

works is when it is combined with reinforcement. There are two types of punishment,

and

Punishment I. Punishment I involves the addition of an unfavorable event or outcome

(e.g., spanking, cleaning the bathroom, writing “I will not lie” 500 times) in order to weaken a

specific behavior. For instance, a child may receive a spanking every time he leaves his toys on

the kitchen floor. Spanking is an example of punishment I, and the response that is weakened is

the child leaving the toys on the ground. Spanking may not prevent the child from leaving the

toys on the floor, but it may reduce the number of times this occurs. It might be that the child

may pick up his toys when the adult who provides the spanking is present, but he may leave the

toys on the floor when this adult is away.

10

Punishment II. Punishment II involves the removal of a favorable event or outcome

(e.g., having a cell phone, having access to the car keys, playing video games) in order to weaken

a behavior. For example, Louise and her son, John, have agreed that he can go to the movies

with his friends after he completes his school assignments. However, one day, John went to the

movies before completing his homework and left his schoolwork on the table. When his mother

arrived from work, she saw that John had left his school assignments on the table and he had not

completed any of the assignments. Thus, when John came home, his mother told him that he

could not go out to the movies for four months because he went out to the movies before

completing his homework. In this example, going to the movies was the pleasant event that was

taken away as a result of John not adhering to the agreement he had with his mother. Again, it is

important to note that in this example, as in the previous punishment example, the negative

behavior may decrease but will not be eliminated. This can only occur when reinforcement is

used. Table 1 provides a matrix to help you remember the different kinds of reinforcements and

punishments.

Table 1.

Operant Conditioning: Reinforcement and Punishment Matrix

Something Good Something Bad

Add Positive Reinforcement Punishment I

Remove Punishment II Negative Reinforcement

This section will cover two types of schedules used to reinforce behavior

and With , the behavior is reinforced every

11

time it takes place. With this type of schedule, the individual learns to expect the reward every

time the behavior takes place. Continuous reinforcement is particularly beneficial when a learner

is learning a new behavior because the behavior is likely to change very quickly. With

intermittent reinforcement, the behavior is reinforced only periodically With this type of

schedule, the individual is not aware when the reinforcement will be given. Intermittent

reinforcement plays a substantial role in the retention of previously learned behaviors (Cooper,

Heron, & Heward, 2007). For example, Mr. Jericho gives his students an additional two points

for each day they submit a completed homework assignment. After providing the extra points

daily for three weeks (continuous reinforcement); Mr. Jericho rewards the students every other

day for about two weeks. Afterwards, he gives additional points whenever he thinks it would be

good for the students (intermittent reinforcement). In this way, more students submit completed

homework assignments, hoping to receive the extra points whenever they are given.

Thus far, the theorists mentioned focused on how human and animal behavior can be

learned through the use of conditioning, reinforcements, and punishments. However, these

theories did not assess how an individual’s social context may influence behavior. The

perspective involves the interaction between individuals and others (e.g., social

groups). This perspective suggests that a substantial amount of human learning takes place as

individuals observe the actions that occur within the environment. This type of learning is

referred to as . According to the social learning perspective, individuals

gain knowledge of the rules, skills, and attitudes that are appropriate for various contexts through

observation. Further, social learning theory adds a cognitive component (internal or

unobservable) to the behaviorist perspective (external) that acknowledges that human beings

strive to comprehend and acquire an in-depth understanding of their present environment

12

(Bandura, 1963; Rotter, 1954). There are two main theorists within the social learning

perspective: Julian Rotter and Albert Bandura.

Julian Rotter’s social learning theory emerged in the 1950s and 1960s. It was heavily

influenced by two clinical psychologists, Alfred Adler and Sigmund Freud. Unlike Freud and

Adler’s theories, which focused on biological instincts, unconscious motives, and earlier

childhood experiences, Rotter’s theory argued that in order to understand human behavior, one

must assess an individual’s personality in conjunction with the environment in which the person

is situated. That is, the type of life experiences that a person encounters in various contexts

impacts his beliefs, which in turn influences his behavior. Rotter’s theory has four elements:

behavior potential, expectancy, reinforcement value, and the psychological situation (Rotter,

1954). Rotter also developed the theory concerning

Behavior potential refers to the probability that a certain response

will occur at a specified time and place if it is reinforced (Rotter, 1954). For example, if a

teacher provides an assignment with an extra credit question, in addition to completing the

assignment, some students may attempt to respond to the additional question in order to earn the

extra points. If the extra points were not connected to the additional question, it is unlikely that

many students would answer it.

Expectancy refers to the notion that when individuals demonstrate a

particular behavior, it will lead to a specific outcome (Rotter, 1954). Based on past experiences

of reinforcements and punishments, people will either develop expectancy for success or

expectancy for failure for any future tasks of that kind. For example, if a student has had prior

successful experiences in completing math problems (i.e., earning good grades), the student will

13

expect success in future, related math tasks. Conversely, if a student has experienced failing

grades in math, the student will likely expect to fail in any future math tasks.

Reinforcement value refers to the value that is placed on various

outcomes. Individuals will place a higher reinforcement value on activities that lead to a desired

outcome and a lower reinforcement value on activities that lead to an undesirable outcome. Our

expectancy and reinforcement values change and develop as demonstrated in our motivation to

complete different tasks. For example, a student who does not think she is good in math will

have low expectancy and low reinforcement value. If the student receives intervention and

practices math problems, she may think that she could be good at math. In this case, she has

medium expectancy because of the assistance and medium value as she sees the benefit of the

intervention. On the other hand, a teacher could have high reinforcement value if he expects to

teach well. This results in high reinforcement expectancy and value.

Psychological situations refers to how individuals analyze and

make conclusions of the various events that take place in the environment. These interpretations

are distinct and vary from one person to the next. For instance, Matthew’s friends expect him to

wear something green on St. Patrick’s Day. However, Matthew was born in Denmark, where St.

Patrick’s Day is not considered a holiday, and his family adhere to their native culture. Thus,

Matthew does not think about wearing green on St. Patrick’s Day. This example shows that

since Matthew was not born in the United States, he has a different interpretation of St. Patrick’s

Day than that of his friends.

In addition to the afore-mentioned elements, Rotter also developed the concept of

. Locus of control refers to an individual’s perception of the level of control that she

has on the events that take place in her environmental context (Grimes, Milleal, & Woodruff,

2004). Individuals either have an or locus of control. Individuals who have an

14

believe that they have an innate capability to exercise control of the

events that take place in their lives. On the other hand, individuals with an

believe that the ability to control the events that take place in their environment is

outside of their control. For example, a student with internal locus of control will interpret an A

on her math test as a result of the effort she exerted to prepare for the exam. Conversely, a

student with external locus of control will interpret an A on a math test as her good luck or that

the teacher was feeling generous by giving her a great grade.

Albert Bandura is an American psychologist who is credited for developing social

cognitive theory. His theory was initially known as social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) and it

is recognized for several concepts including , (as demonstrated

in the well-known Bobo Doll experiment), and

Bandura also developed the concept of reciprocal determinism. This concept

demonstrated the idea that human behavior is a result of the interaction between psychological

processes (i.e., cognitive states), the environment, and a person’s behavior. This section will

primarily focus on social learning theory.

is more than simple imitation, because it involves adding to and

subtracting from observed behavior, but imitation is at the core of the modeling concept.

Individuals tend to model behavior that they see as rewarding to their chosen model. Modeling

focuses on four important elements: (a) attention, (b) retention, (c) reproduction and (d)

motivation. refers to the idea that in order for anyone to learn anything, the individual

needs to be attentive. If anything distracts their attention, such as sickness or hunger, people will

learn less. refers to the capability to remember the observed images or verbal

language and reproduce it using one’s own behavior. refers to the ability to

15

demonstrate previously observed actions or spoken language. refers to an

individual’s level of enthusiasm to repeat the observed actions. A person’s enthusiasm can be

influenced by past reinforcements or punishments. Bandura argues that reinforcement does not

lead to learning, but it motivates us to show what we have learned. Bandura also suggests that

punishments do not work well to motivate a person to repeat the observed behavior or to

demonstrate what a person has learned (Bandura, 1977).

Observational learning occurs when a change in behavior takes

place as one observes a model performing certain actions. Bandura conducted the Bobo doll

experiment, which demonstrated that children learn and behaviors by observing the

actions of other people within their environment. The Bobo doll was an inflated doll which was

approximately five feet in height. It was constructed in such a way that it could spring back and

forth when hit. The study encompassed twenty-four pre-school children who were enrolled in

three experimental conditions (Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1961). Children in the first condition

observed the model (an adult) aggressively hit the Bobo doll. Children in the second condition

observed the model interact non-aggressively with the Bobo doll. Children in the control group

did not observe the model or anyone else interact with the Bobo doll.

Findings revealed that the children who observed the model aggressively interact with the

Bobo doll exhibited more aggressive behaviors when compared to children who were in the non-

aggressive group and the control group (Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1961). This experiment refuted

the behaviorist notion that reinforcements and punishments are important in shaping human

behavior. Rather, it highlighted that observation alone is effective in shaping new behaviors.

Bandura (1986) also highlighted the importance of vicarious

learning, which takes place when individuals learn by observing the actions of others and the

consequences that others receive (learning from watching others) (Bandura, 1986; Rosenthal &

16

Zimmerman, 1978). Through vicarious learning, individuals have the opportunity to escape

negative consequences by observing the consequences associated with demonstrating

unacceptable behavior. For example, Peter learned to follow his parents’ rules regarding

weekend curfews based on observing the punishments that his older brother receive after

disobeying his parents’ curfew rules.

Bandura also maintained that self-efficacy beliefs influence human

behavior. Self-efficacy beliefs refer to “people’s judgments of their capabilities to organize and

execute courses of action required for attaining designated types of performances” (Bandura,

1986, p. 391). Self-efficacy beliefs influence the type of goals that individual sets for themselves

and the amount of effort that individuals exert in task completion, thought processes, and

emotional reactions. Self-efficacy beliefs are created as individuals interpret information from

four sources; (a)

.

Mastery experience Mastery experience involves an individual’s experience of failure

or succe as he participates in various activities, or completes various tasks. Consequently,

individuals interpret the results (i.e., successes or failures) of their actions following the

activities, and use these interpretations to construct beliefs about their capabilities to participate

in future actions.

Vicarious experience. Vicarious experience helps individuals construct their self-

efficacy beliefs as they observe other people perform actions. Vicarious experience plays a

substantial role in the construction of self-efficacy beliefs particularly when individuals have

minimal experience with the task at hand and when the individuals can identify with the models

performing the action. For example, a student’s math self-efficacy beliefs may be enhanced if

17

she observes a female peer successfully compute a math problem while observing a male peer

unsuccessfully compute a math problem.

Verbal persuasion. Verbal persuasion also influences an individual’s self-efficacy

beliefs. This refers to verbal judgments and encouragement that an individual receives from

other people. That is, if an individual receives positive support, as he completes a challenging

task, the individual’s self-efficacy is enhanced. Conversely, if an individual receives negative

criticisms, his level of self-efficacy may decrease, resulting in low motivation and the possibility

that he might eventually fail to complete the task.

Psychological states Psychological states refer to one’s feelings, emotions, and level of

anxiety. Positive psychological states enhance one’s level of self-efficacy when she engages in

various tasks, whereas negative psychological states decrease a person’s level of self-efficacy.

Based on the above-mentioned information, individuals may develop high self-efficacy

or low self-efficacy. Individuals with high self-efficacy demonstrate greater levels of resistance,

effort, and perseverance as they face difficult circumstances (Pajares, 2002). They interpret hard

tasks as challenges to be mastered rather than tasks to be avoided (Pajares, 2002). When coping

with various situations, these individuals are intrinsically motivated and maintain an internal

locus of control.

Bandura is also credited with the development of learning contracts.

A learning contract is an agreement between a student and a teacher. A learning contract

guarantees the student certain reinforcements if he adheres to certain expectations. Learning

contracts encourage students to take initiative and responsibility as they complete tasks, which in

turn results to higher levels of academic competence.

18

So far, we have discussed how classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and

interaction with the environment may impact human behavior. However, we have not assessed

some of the outcomes that may result if individuals are unable to effectively cope with negative

situations that may arise within the environment. One outcome that may develop is a condition

known as learned helplessness, which has a connection to behaviorism.

Learned helplessness develops when an individual responds passively to an adverse

stimulus rather than escaping and avoiding it (Seligman, 1975). According to Martin Seligman

(1975), the individual does not take initiative to cope with a negative situation within the

environment, but remains passive and allows the situation to be in control. A person with

learned helplessness will respond to the environment passively and will retain the belief that the

situation cannot change. This false assumption leads to the development of low self-efficacy; as

well as an external locus of control that may adversely affect the individual’s academic

performance, as well as his social competence in various contexts.

Behaviorism, in its initial theoretical framework, is not the predominant practice in

education. It is still present, however, in our current thinking and school systems. On the other

hand, social learning theory has played an increased role in education. That is, how we interact

and respond to the environment has a direct impact on an individual’s behavior, thought

processes, and engagement in future tasks. Consequently, it is important for individuals to be in

control of thoughts, actions, and feelings as they continually interact with others and interpret the

events that take place in various environmental contexts. Failure to control one’s interactions

with the environment may lead to low self-efficacy, learned helplessness, and negative

attributions to any adverse situations that arise. In this perspective, it is important for educators

19

and parents to construct environments that support positive behaviors; as well as, help students

effectively cope and adjust to any adverse situations that may arise.

20

Attention Behavior potential Classical conditioning Conditioned response Conditioned stimulus Continuous reinforcement Counter-conditioning Discrimination Expectancy External locus of control Extinction Imitate Imitation Intermittent reinforcement Internal locus of control

Learned helplessness Learning contracts Locus of control Mastery experience Modeling Motivation Negative reinforcement Neutral stimulus Observational learning Operant conditioning Phobia Positive reinforcement Psychological situation Psychological states Punishment

Reinforcement Reinforcement value Reproduction Response Retention Schedule of reinforcement Self-efficacy Social Learning Stimulus Stimulus generalization Unconditioned response Unconditioned stimulus Verbal persuasions Vicarious experience Vicarious learning

1. In your experiences as a student or employee, what types of objects or events have you found to be reinforcing or punitive? How did each object or event influence your behavior?

2. As a teacher, which type operant conditioning will you use to manage your classroom? Why?

3. Did you act out as a child? What could your parents or your teachers have done differently to manage or prevent the misbehavior?

4. A mother intends to teach her daughter a new skill. Which type of reinforcement schedule do you think she should use first? Why?

5. Imagine you are a camp counselor; you notice that one of the children has a fear of fish. Explain how you would help the child to overcome the fear of fish?

6. Is there a teacher you have encountered whom you would like to imitate? What specific characteristics did the teacher demonstrate that warrant modeling? Why?

7. Reflect on your self-efficacy for becoming a teacher. How strong is it? What kinds of teaching goals do you have? Identify them according to the following sources: (a) mastery experience; (b) vicarious experience; (c) verbal persuasion; and (d) psychological states.

8. A student in your classroom demonstrates low motivation and low interest in academic tasks. Provide techniques or strategies you would use to assist their learning.

9. Think of your experiences with learned helplessness. What were the conditions surrounding this behavior? How do you think it might have negatively affected your performance?

21

(1925-) is the David Starr Jordan Professor Emeritus of Social Science in Psychology at Stanford University. A prolific writer and researcher, Bandura’s theories of social learning, modeling, and self-efficacy, among others, are widely known in the world of psychology. Bandura graduated from the University of British Columbia with a degree in psychology in 1948. He obtained both his M.A. (1951) and his Ph.D. (1952) from the University of Iowa. In 1953, he accepted a teaching position at Stanford University, where he has worked ever since. Bandura also served as the President of the American Psychological Association. Bandura was born in Alberta, Canada. He was the last of six children born to immigrants from Eastern Europe. Although they were, themselves, uneducated, Bandura’s parents placed a high value on their children’s education. Bandura’s work has been influential in educational and clinical settings. Specifically his book Social Foundations of Thought and Action (1985), which provides a theoretical framework for social cognitive theory, has been used by many researchers to explain the triadic relationship among environment, behavior, and psychological processes. His research has also made profound contributions in personality psychology, cognitive psychology, and psychotherapy.

(1849-1936) was a Russian physiologist. Initially, Pavlov was primarily interested in theological studies. After he came across the work of Charles Darwin, he transitioned his interest from theological studies to studies in the natural sciences. His first empirical scientific research focused on the digestive and circulative systems of dogs, and he continued this work at the Institute of Experimental Medicine, of which he was director for 45 years. Pavlov was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine for four successive years, but he never won. He was, however, awarded the Nobel laureate. Although he was openly disapproving of the Soviet Union, he received considerable support from that government for his research. Pavlov’s theoretical ideas have influenced the behaviorist perspective, particularly the work of John Watson. Further, Pavlov’s work has contributed to the scientific community by demonstrating how the nervous system plays a substantial role in regulating the digestive system. This discovery has led to the current physiology of digestion.

(1916- ) is an American Psychologist who was born of Jewish immigrant parents. He is known for his social learning and locus control theories. His social learning theory is grounded in the empirical law of effect, which states that individuals strive to find positive reinforcement in order to escape undesirable outcomes. Rotter’s locus of control theory highlights the control that individuals have over the situations that take place in their environments. Currently, Rotter is Professor Emeritus at the University of Connecticut. Rotter’s work has substantially contributed to clinical settings in terms of helping individuals who have persistently coped with failures to adapt behaviors and techniques that yield successful results. Rotter has also contributed to the field of clinical psychology through several written works.

. (1942- ). Martin Seligman, a native of Albany, New York, is an American psychologist. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania in psychology.

22

His research on learned helplessness highlighted how depression and pessimistic attitudes develop and the type of treatments that should be employed. Research on learned helplessness and pessimism inspired his interest in optimism. Studies on how optimism develops and its impact on human behavior led to the construction of a branch in psychology known as positive psychology. Currently, Seligman works as a professor of psychology and director of the Positive Psychology Center at the University of Pennsylvania. Seligman’s work has profoundly contributed to the field of psychology nationally and internationally, as well as to the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Aging, the National Science Foundation, and the MacArthur Foundation. Currently, Seligman is teaching positive psychologists in employing a variety of techniques to maintain positive behavior and emotions among individuals in clinical educational settings.

(1904-1990) was an American psychologist who significantly contributed to the procedures of shaping behavior in academic and social contexts. After earning a Ph.D. from Harvard, Skinner taught at the University of Minnesota and the University of Indiana before returning to Harvard, where he remained until his retirement. His experiments with rats and pigeons led to his theories of reinforcement as an important change agent in the behavior of animals, including humans. The theories of operant conditioning – that behavior can be predicted and managed by a series of external rewards – were both widely accepted and controversial. Skinner’s work has impacted educational and social communities in terms of strategies to use for behavior regulation.

was an American psychologist who was born in South Carolina. He attended Furman University and earned his Ph.D. in 1903 from the University of Chicago. He went on to accept a position at Johns Hopkins and was made chair of the psychology department there. He was asked to leave that position in 1920, after publicity of his affair with his graduate assistant, Rosalie Rayner, surfaced. It was then that Watson left academia to work in advertising. In 1913, Watson gave a lecture at Columbia University entitled, Psychologist as the Behaviorist Views It. His speech emphasized the idea that psychology should not primarily focus on the human mind, but on observable human actions. Watson believed that in order to understand human development, researchers should focus on how individuals respond to external stimuli within their contexts. Watson’s work has been very influential in educational and social settings by demonstrating how conditioning can be used to help individuals cope with psychological problems. Watson also used his principles of behaviorism in the advertising industry. He demonstrated techniques that could be used to control human emotions such as love, fear, and rage.

23

References

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of

aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 3-11.

Bandura, A. (1963). The role of imitation in personality. The Journal of Nursery Education, 18

(3).

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York, NY: General Learning Press.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Cooper, J., Heron, T., & Heward, W. (2007). Applied behavior analysis. New Jersey: Pearson

Education.

Jones, C. M. (1924). A laboratory study of fear: The case of Peter. Pedagogical Seminary, 31,

308-315.

Grimes, P. W., Millea, M. J., & Woodruff, T. W. (2004). Grades-who’s to blame? Student

evaluation of teaching and locus of control. The journal of Economic Education, 35(2),

129-147.

Miller, K. (2005). Communication theories: Perspectives, processes, and contexts (2nd ed.). New

York, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Pajares, F. (2002). Overview of social cognitive theory and self-efficacy. Retrieved from

http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/eff.html.

Pavlov, I. P. ([1897] 1902). The work of the digestive glands. London, UK: Griffin.

Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes. London, UK: Routledge.

Rilling, M. (2000). How the challenge of explaining leaning influenced the origins and

development of John B Watson’s behaviorism. The American Journal of Psychology

113(2), 275-301.

24

Rosenthal, T. L., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1978). Social learning and cognition. New York, NY:

Academic Press.

Rotter, J. B. (1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. New York, NY. Prentice Hall.

Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Helplessness: On depression, development, and death. San Francisco:

W. H. Freeman.

Sheehy, N. (2004). Fifty key thinkers in psychology. New York, NY: Routledge

Skinner, B. F. (1948). Superstition in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 168-

172.

Zimmerman, B. J. & Schunk, H. D. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement:

Theoretical perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence & Erlbaum Associates,

25

Grace is a fourth-year doctoral student at the University of Memphis in the Counseling, Educational Psychology, & Research Department. She has taught Human Development Across the Lifespan for a year. She is interested in behaviorism and social cognitive theories as a window to the importance of understanding how class climate influences the academic performance of students and teachers. Her research interests focus teacher self-efficacy, teacher attrition and retention in rural low-income areas, and teacher epistemologies.