Bandura's study of Children's imitation of adult aggression Flashcards
(22 cards)
What was the theory underpinning this study?
Social learning theory - Learning happens through observation and imitation of models
=> Fits in with the behaviorist perspective suggesting that behaviors are learned
What was the aim of Bandura’s study?
- To find out whether children would reproduce aggressive behavior when the model was no longer present
- To find out whether there were gender differences in learning aggression
Did Bandura’s study have hypotheses?
Yes-
1. Children who are shown aggressive models will show significantly more imitative aggressive acts resembling those of their models than those shown non-aggressive or no models
2. Children who are shown non-aggressive models will show significantly less aggressive behavior than those shown aggressive or no models
3. Boys will show significantly more imitative aggression than girls
3. Children will imitate same-sex model behavior more than opposite-sex model behavior
What were the variables of this study?
IV: 1. The behavior of the model (aggressive or non-aggressive).
2. Sex of the model (male or female)
3. Sex of the child (male or female)
DV: The amount of imitative aggression, partially imitative aggression and non-imitative aggression shown by the children . Aggression were both verbal and physical
How was the research method of this study?
It was:
Lab experiment
Matched pairs design
How were the children P’s matched on their characteristics?
They had to be pre-rated on their aggression:
1. They were rated on 4 5-point scales of aggression by their nursery teacher and the experimenter who both knew the children well
2. The scales measured physical, verbal aggression and aggression towards inanimate objects and aggression inhibition
3. They were arranged in triplets according to these ratings
4. Each member of the triplet was assigned to the aggressive model, non-aggressive model, or control group
How was the data collected?
Through structure observation
=> Behavioral categories included: Imitative aggression, partially imitative aggression, non-imitative aggression and non-aggressive acts
=> Observation carried out by the male model. Another researcher was watching through a one-way mirror
=> Time sampling. 5 second intervals for 20 minutes
What was the sample for this study like?
72 children
3-5 years of age
36 boys and 36 girls- same amount each
From Stanford Uni Nursery School
How was the study carried out?
3 phases:
Phase 1- Modelling
1. Child brought into a room to play with toys for 10 minutes. Model sat at a different playing with tinker toys
2. Non-aggressive: Model continues to play quietly
3. Aggressive: Model showed standardized aggressive acts towards Bobo doll.
Physical aggression- Hitting it with a hammer and kicking it
Verbal aggression- “pow”, “sock him in the nose”
=> Only experimental group participates
Phase 2- Aggression arousal
1. Child taken to a room
2. Given very attractive toys. Allowed to play for 2 minutes
3. Experimenter took this away. Told them these were his best toys, reserved for other children
=> Provoke all children to the same extent so aggression between groups can be easily compared
Phase 3- Test for Delayed Imitation
1. Child take into another containing aggressive and non-aggressive toys
2. Behavior tallied using a behavioral category through structured observation from a male model and a researcher
What were the quantitative findings of this study?
Quantitative
Social learning:
1. Children who observed the aggressive model were significantly more aggressive than those who did not and those who witnessed a non-aggressive model
2. There was little difference in the amount of aggression shown by control group and non-aggressive model group
Gender differences:
1. Boys produced more imitative physical aggression than girls
2. Boys were more likely to imitate the physical and verbal aggression of a same sex model than an opposite sex model
3. Same for girls but they were prone to imitate verbal aggression, but the effect was not strong enough to be significant
4. Behavior of the male model exerted greater influence than the female model on the children’s aggressive behavior
What were the qualitative findings of this study?
- Verbal responses of the children to aggressive model
“You should have seen what girl did in there. She was punching and fighting but no swearing”
What can be indicated from these findings?
- Children imitate aggressive behavior displayed by adult models, even without their presence
- Provides support for the social learning theory by showing that children learn by observation and imitation
- Children are more likely to learn masculine behaviors e.g. physical aggression from a male adult than a female adult
- Boys and girls are more likely to learn verbal aggression from same sex adults
Yay Research method!!!
- High in control
=> Lab setting
=> Room layout and toys was standardized for all children
=> Avoided extraneous variables (e.g. more aggressive toys available to some but not others) - Matched pairs design prevented natural aggression from acting as an extraneous variable
=> Children were pre-rated on 4 5 point scales then spread out over the 3 conditions. Each condition have the same number of aggressive and non-aggressive children
=> High internal validity
Naur Research method!!!
- Lack ecological validity
=> Lab experiment
=> Child witnessed adult hitting a TOY
=> Different to hitting another person which is more likely to be the way children see aggression in real life
Yay data types!!!
- Both quantitative and qualitative data
=> Researchers can carry out statistical tests on the data. Also get details and contexts
e.g. Quantitative data was statistically tested to find boys showed more physical aggression than girls.
Qualitative data enhanced the richness of the finding- culture norm of masculine aggression could be linked to greater imitation of the male model
Yay ethics!!!
- Amount of aggression observed was no more than would be seen in cartoons
=> Psychological harm is no greater than in real life - Useful in telling people how children learn to be aggressive
=> The ends justify the means
Naur ethics!!!
Responsibility
1. Protection from psychological harm breached
=> Children were caused mild distress in phase 2 of aggression arousal. Toys were taken away. Allowed to be immersed by it for 2 min before taken away. This could be frustrating and upsetting
=> They were purposefully exposed to an aggressive model. This may have encouraged them to show antisocial behavior after the experience to other people
=> Negative consequence could have been added (Positive punishment) for the model to reverse the negative effects but this was not done
=> Could have been frightened by the actions of the aggressive model. Children may have been scared he/she would hit them too
Respect
1. Informed consent
=> Cannot be given by children (3-5 y/o)
=> They had not agreed to view an aggressive model, an experience some P’s may not have wanted
2. Right to withdraw
=> Not understood by children
=> May have been scared to ask the model whether they could leave
Integrity
1. Children deceived
In phase 3- test for delayed imitation , P’s did not know they were being observed on their aggressive behavior
=> Information was deliberately withheld from them
Naur ecological validity!!!
Children witnessed adult hitting a toy
=> Different to hitting another person (more likely to happen in real life)
Yay reliability!!!
- High inter-rater reliability
=> Pre-rating of aggression: High between researcher and nursery teacher
=> Observation of imitation of aggression: High correlation between male model and observer - Highly standardized
=> Lab experiment
=> Another researcher could easily replicate the study to check whether results recur
Naur generalizability!!!
- P’s were divided into conditions
=> 6 children in each experimental condition
=> Not enough to generalize from (individual differences can greatly impact the results) - Socio-economically biased
=> Children attended the Stanford university nursery school
=> Children of academics
=> Reactions to observing may be different from children in general
e.g. less likely to imitate aggression because they had strict upbringing so was fearing punishment
How can Bandura be applied? (usefulness)
- For people working with children
=> Study suggests social workers should remove children from families where there is domestic violence because of imitation - For parents
=> Should not allow their children to watch aggressive films
=> Likely to imitate aggression from male characters
How did Bandura change our understanding of behavior? Or how did they not change?
Before: Social learning was demonstrated. it wasn’t known whether imitation of aggression would continue if the model was no longer present
Finding: Children who observed an aggressive model would be more likely to imitate aggression even after the model had left the room
=> the study had somewhat changed our understanding of social learning
