Social learning concept. Education and development

1. Departure from classical behaviorism...

In American psychology it is believed that theories social learning- This is the most significant direction in the study of child development.

In the late 30s, N. Miller, J. Dollard, R. Sears, J. Whiting and other young scientists at Yale University made an attempt to translate the most important concepts of psychoanalytic personality theory into the language of K. Hull's learning theory. They outlined the main lines of research: social learning in the process of raising a child, cross-cultural analysis - the study of the upbringing and development of a child in different cultures, personal development. In 1941, N. Miller and J. Dollard introduced the term “social learning” into scientific use.

On this basis, concepts of social learning have been developed for more than half a century, the central problem of which has become the problem of socialization. Socialization is a process that allows a child to take his place in society; it is the advancement of a newborn from an asocial “humanoid” state to life as a full-fledged member of society. How does socialization happen? All newborns are similar to each other, but after two or three years they are different children. This means, say proponents of social learning theory, that these differences are the result of learning, they are not innate.

There are different concepts of learning. In classical conditioning of the Pavlovian type, subjects begin to give the same response to different stimuli. In Skinner's operant conditioning, a behavioral act is formed due to the presence or absence of reinforcement for one of many possible responses. Both of these concepts do not explain how new behavior arises. A. Bandura believed that reward and punishment are not enough to teach new behavior. Children acquire new behavior through imitation of a model. Learning through observation, imitation and identification is the third form of learning. One of the manifestations of imitation is identification - a process in which a person borrows thoughts, feelings or actions from another person acting as a model. Imitation leads to the fact that the child can imagine himself in the place of the model, experience sympathy, complicity, and sympathy for this person.

Social learning theory examines not only “how” socialization occurs, but also “why” it occurs. Satisfaction is especially considered biological needs child by mother, reinforcement social behavior, imitation of the behavior of strong personalities and similar influences of the external environment.

Several generations of scientists have been working in the field of social learning. The evolution of social learning theory is presented in Table. 4. This direction is characterized by a desire for synthesis different approaches in studying social development. From the table 5 clearly shows that this direction, as it developed in the USA, was a movement towards the awareness of a general theory, and not a separate field of knowledge.

Let us briefly consider the contributions made to the concept of social learning by representatives of the first, second, and third generations of American scientists.

N. Miller and J. Dollard were the first to build a bridge between behaviorism and psychoanalytic theory. Following Z. Freud, they considered clinical material as a rich source of data; in their opinion, a psychopathological personality differs only quantitatively, and not qualitatively, from normal person. Therefore, the study of the behavior of a neurotic sheds light on universal principles of behavior that are more difficult to identify in normal people. In addition, neurotics usually long time observed by psychologists and this provides valuable material for long-term and dynamic changes in behavior under the influence of social correction.

On the other hand, Miller and Dollard, experimental psychologists skilled in precise laboratory methods, also turned to the mechanisms of behavior of animals studied through experiments.

<Таблица 4. Эволюция теории социального научения (цит. по Р. Кэрнсу)>

Miller and Dollard share Freud's view of the role of motivation in behavior, believing that the behavior of both animals and humans is a consequence of such primary (innate) drives as hunger, thirst, pain, etc. All of them can be satisfied, but not extinguished. In the behaviorist tradition, Miller and Dollard quantify drive strength by measuring, for example, the time of deprivation. In addition to the primary ones, there are secondary urges, including anger, guilt, sexual preferences, the need for money and power, and many others. The most important among them are fear and anxiety caused by a previous, previously neutral stimulus. The conflict between fear and other important drives is the cause of neuroses.

<Таблица 5. Схема основных направлений в изучении социального развития (пит. по Р. Кэрнсу)>

Transforming Freudian ideas, Miller and Dollard replace the pleasure principle with the reinforcement principle. They define reinforcement as something that increases the tendency to repeat a previously occurring response. From their point of view, reinforcement is the reduction, removal of impulse or, using Freud's term, drive. Learning, according to Miller and Dollard, is the strengthening of the connection between a key stimulus and the response that it causes due to reinforcement. If there is no corresponding reaction in the repertoire of human or animal behavior, then it can be acquired by observing the behavior of the model. Attaching great importance to the mechanism of learning through trial and error, Miller and Dollard draw attention to the possibility of using imitation to reduce the number of trials and errors and to get closer to the correct answer through observing the behavior of others.

Miller and Dollard's experiments examined conditions for imitation of a leader (with or without reinforcement). Experiments were carried out on rats and children, and in both cases similar results were obtained. The stronger the incentive, the more reinforcement strengthens the stimulus-response relationship. If there is no motivation, learning is impossible. Miller and Dollard believe that self-satisfied, complacent people make poor students.

Miller and Dollard draw on Freud's theory of childhood trauma. They view childhood as a period of transient neurosis, and the small child as disoriented, deceived, disinhibited, incapable of higher mental processes. From their point of view, a happy child is a myth. Hence, the task of parents is to socialize children, prepare them for life in society. Miller and Dollard share A. Adler’s idea that the mother who gives the child the first example human relations, plays decisive role in socialization. In this process, in their opinion, the four most important life situations can serve as a source of conflict. This is feeding, toilet training, sexual identification, manifestation of aggressiveness in a child Early conflicts non-verbalized and therefore unconscious. To realize them, according to Miller and Dollard, it is necessary to use Freud's therapeutic technique 3. “Without understanding the past, it is impossible to change the future,” wrote Miller and Dollard

2. Education and development.

The famous American psychologist R. Sears studied the relationship between parents and children, under the influence of psychoanalysis. As a student of K. Hull, he developed his own version of combining psychoanalytic theory with behaviorism. He focused on the study of external behavior that could be measured. In active behavior, he emphasized action and social interactions.

Action is caused by impulse. Like Miller and Dollard, Sears assumes that all actions are initially related to primary or innate impulses. The satisfaction or frustration that results from the behavior prompted by these primary drives leads the individual to learn new experiences. Constant reinforcement of specific actions leads to new, secondary impulses that arise as a consequence of social influences.

Sears introduced the dyadic principle of learning child development: since it occurs within a dyadic unit of behavior, adaptive behavior and its reinforcement in an individual must be studied taking into account the behavior of the other, the partner.

Considering psychoanalytic concepts (suppression, regression, projection, sublimation, etc.) in the context of learning theory, Sears focuses on the influence of parents on the development of the child. In his opinion, practice children's education determines the nature of child development. Based on his research, he advocates parental education: every parent will naturally raise their children better if they know more; What matters is how and to what extent parents understand parenting practices.

Sears identifies three phases of child development:

Ø phase of rudimentary behavior - based on innate needs and learning in early infancy, in the first months of life;

Ø phase of secondary socialization systems - based on learning within the family (the main phase of socialization);

Ø phase of secondary motivational systems - based on learning outside the family (goes beyond early age and is associated with school enrollment).

According to Sears, the newborn is in a state of autism; his behavior does not correspond to social world. But already the child’s first innate needs, his internal motivations, serve as a source of learning. The first attempts to extinguish internal tension constitute the first learning experience. This period of rudimentary antisocial behavior precedes socialization.

Gradually, the baby begins to understand that the extinction of internal tension, for example, the reduction of pain, is associated with his actions, and the “crying-chest” connection leads to the satisfaction of hunger. His actions become part of a sequence of goal-directed behavior. Each new action that leads to the extinction of tension will be repeated again and built into a chain of goal-directed behavior when tension increases. Satisfying the need is positive experience baby.

Reinforcement comes from the mother. The child adapts his behavior so as to evoke constant attention from her. In this way, the child learns to evoke reciprocal behavior from the mother. He is forced to choose the answers that the people around him expect from him. Through trial and error, he manipulates this environment in pursuit of a satisfying response, while his environment offers him the opportunity to choose from various options for satisfying his impulses. In these dyadic relationships, the child learns to control the situation and is constantly under control. The child early develops the technique of cooperation with those who care for him. From this moment socialization begins.

Every child has a repertoire of actions that are necessarily replaced during development. Successful development is characterized by a decrease in autism and actions aimed only at satisfying innate needs, and an increase in dyadic social behavior.

How do new motivational systems arise? Under what conditions? How and what environmental factors influence children's learning? What is the result of learning?

According to Sears, the central component of learning is dependence. Reinforcement in dyadic systems always depends on contacts with others; it is already present in the earliest contacts between the child and mother, when the child, through trial and error, learns to satisfy his organic needs with the help of the mother. Dyadic relationships foster the child's dependence on the mother and reinforce it. Between four and twelve months of age, dependence is established, and with it the dyadic system is established. Both the child and the mother have their own repertoire meaningful action, which serve them to stimulate mutual responses consistent with their own expectations. At first, the child shows his dependence passively, then he can actively support it (external signs of behavior and more active love). Child dependence, from Sears’s point of view, is a strong need that cannot be ignored. Psychoanalysis shows that psychological dependence on the mother arises very early. Physically, the child depends on her from birth, that is, his life depends on her care Psychological dependence appears several months after birth and persists to some extent throughout adult life But the peak of addiction occurs early childhood

Psychological dependence manifests itself in searches attention - child asks the adult to pay attention to him, to look at what he is doing, he wants to be close to the adult, sit on his lap, etc. Dependence manifests itself in the fact that the child is afraid to be left alone. He learns to behave in ways that will attract the attention of his parents. Here Sears argues like a behaviorist: by showing attention to a child, we reinforce him, and this can be used to teach him something. How is dependence formed from a behavioral point of view?9 To do this, it is necessary to comply with two laws, the law of association and the law of reinforcement by reinforcement. addictive behavior serves to receive attention. Association is the presence of the mother and the comfort of the child, hence only the presence of the mother creates comfort for the child. The child often stops crying as soon as he sees the mother, before she has time to do anything for him to satisfy his organic need. When a child is scared, only the mother's approach calms him down. On the other hand, the absence of a mother means a lack of comfort. The absence of a mother is a stimulus for anxiety and fear. This is also taken into account in raising a child. The significance of maternal approach or distance gives the mother an effective tool for raising her child necessary rules social life But as soon as dependence appears, it must be limited. The child must learn to be independent. Parents often choose the strategy of ignoring. For example, if a child is crying, then parents in some cases try not to pay attention to it. But there may be other strategies that help a child learn to behave in ways that will gain an adult's attention. Lack of reinforcement of addiction can lead to aggressive behavior. Sears considers addiction as a complex motivational system that is not innate, but is formed during life

Under what circumstances does a child develop dependent behavior? The usual behavior of a mother caring for a child provides him with objects that the child can manipulate; reinforcing influences from the mother give these reactions a stable form of dependent behavior. For its part, the child has operant reactions from the very beginning. The first such reactions are limited to sucking or palpating movements of the mouth, reflexes of grasping and squeezing, postures that allow an adult to pick up the child and move him.

The mother's operant behavior is very complex because it is aimed at achieving many goals associated with caring for the child - feeding, bathing, lubrication, warming, etc. It also includes numerous actions that please the mother, such as cuddling the baby, caressing, listening to the baby, perceiving its smell and even taste, feeling the touch of the baby’s hands and lips

Unfortunately, there is no detailed description of the behavior for even a single mother-child pair, nor are there clear ideas about individual or cultural differences in such actions, Sears notes, although it is an area of almost infinite variety. But since the mother’s behavior is always determined by the conscious or unconscious goals of her actions, this multiplicity is channeled into controlled systems that have a formative influence on the baby’s behavior. His own repertoire of actions increases as her behavior “matures” and as some of his movements are reinforced and others do not receive reinforcements. As a result of such mutually satisfying interactions, secondary reinforcers and reinforcing stimuli arise for both members of the couple. This is conversation, stroking, the mother’s smile when feeding and the baby’s responses.

The second consequence of the interaction between mother and child is the development in both members of the couple social expectations. Everyone learns to respond to the posture, smile and other actions of the second member of the pair with reactions that correspond to the expectation of subsequent events.

The child's expectations are an indirect internal reaction to signals emanating from the mother; they are essential for changing his reactions, turning them into purposeful units of activity. If the mother does not perform the action expected of her by the child from her own repertoire, the baby becomes frustrated and expresses dissatisfaction by crying or worrying, or some other way of behavior, which he had previously learned in relation to circumstances of frustration. For example, if a mother performs all the actions that usually end with inserting a nipple into the baby’s mouth, but then, at some critical moment, begins to hesitate and interrupts the flow of her actions, the baby reacts with an angry cry.

The development of mutual expectations fuses mother and infant into a single dyad, a unit that functions effectively only as long as both members perform their habitual roles in accordance with the expectation. As a result of this infant experience, the child learns to “ask” the mother for appropriate reciprocal behavior. Signs of behavior, movements expressing a request constitute dependent actions, the frequency and intensity of which. the degree of dependence can be determined.

According to Sears, there must be a definite, predictable relationship between parental care practices. for the child and dependent behavior in children.

The social environment in which a child is born influences his development. The concept of “social environment” includes: the gender of the child, his position in the family, the happiness of his mother, social. family position, level of education, etc. The mother sees her child through the prism of her ideas about raising children. She treats the child differently depending on his gender. IN early development The child reveals the mother’s personality, her ability to love, to regulate all the “dos and don’ts.” A mother's abilities are related to her own self-esteem, her assessment of her father, her attitude towards her own life. High scores on each of these factors correlate with high enthusiasm and warmth towards the child. Finally, social status mothers, her upbringing, and belonging to a certain culture predetermine the practice of education. The likelihood of a child's healthy development is higher if the mother is happy with her position in life. Thus, the first phase of child development connects biological heredity the newborn with his social heritage. This phase introduces the infant to the environment and forms the basis for expanding his interaction with the outside world.

The second phase of child development lasts from the second half of the second year of life until entering school. As before, primary needs remain the motive of the child’s behavior, however, they are gradually restructured and turn into secondary motivations. The mother continues to be the primary reinforcer early in this phase. She observes the child's behavior that needs to be changed, and she also helps to learn patterns of more mature forms of behavior. It must instill in the child a desire to behave like an adult and to socialize.

On this basis, the child develops incentives to acquire social behavior. The child realizes that his personal well-being depends on his willingness to behave as others expect of him; therefore, his actions gradually become self-motivated: the child strives to master actions that bring satisfaction to him and satisfy his parents.

As the child gets older, the mother begins to see emotional dependency as a behavior that needs to change (usually coinciding with the birth of a new child or returning to work). The child’s dependence in the relationship with his mother is modified: signs of love and attention become less demanding, more subtle and consistent with the capabilities of an adult’s behavior. Other people enter a child's life. Gradually he begins to understand that there is nothing that can be his sole monopoly; now he must compete with other people to achieve his goals, compete for his mother's attention; now the means become as important to him as the goal itself.

Liberation from dependence in a child begins with weaning, teaching neatness, and instilling sexual modesty. The tendency of parents to put pressure on the child in these areas of life, according to Sears, leads to the feminization of both boys and girls; tolerance, on the contrary, contributes to the formation of masculine character traits in both boys and girls. Proper education suggests a middle ground.

In the third year of a child’s life, identification with his parents appears. The child loves his mother and is emotionally dependent on her. When his mother is not with him, he reproduces a sequence of actions similar to what would have happened if his mother had been with him. He does this to gain the satisfaction he associates with his mother's presence, Sears said. The child’s own activity extinguishes the need and reduces the frustration caused by the absence of the mother. In this way he identifies himself with his mother. This leads the child to the ability to act “like others.”

Unlike early forms learning, identification is not built on the basis of trial and error, but arises from role playing game. It reproduces dependent behavior in the absence of parents. Thus, dependence is a fundamental source of identification as a process that occurs without parental training. Summarizing the results of his research, Sears identified five forms of addictive behavior. They are all the product of different childhood experiences.

Sears made an attempt to identify a correlation between forms of dependent behavior and the child care practices of his parents - mother and father. Using a specially developed questionnaire, a study of attitudes towards different manifestations child from mothers and fathers. This material was supplemented with indicators identified in observations of real interaction between mother and child in a pre-organized situation. The mother was instructed on simple tasks to perform during the observation. After this, the couple was left alone, and observers recorded the behavior of both mother and child through the Gesell mirror.

Studies have shown that neither the amount of reinforcement, nor the duration of breastfeeding, nor feeding by the hour, nor the difficulties of weaning, nor other features of feeding practices have a significant impact on the manifestations of dependent behavior in children. preschool age. The most significant factor for the formation of dependent behavior is not oral reinforcement, but the participation of each parent in caring for the child.

1. “Seeking negative, negative, attention”: seeking attention through arguing, breaking up relationships, disobedience or so-called oppositional behavior (resistance to direction, rules, order and demands by ignoring, refusing or opposing behavior). This form of addiction is a direct consequence low requirements and insufficient restrictions in relation to the child, that is, weak upbringing on the part of the mother and - especially in relation to the girl - strong participation in the upbringing of the father.

Sears notes that this behavior has features of aggressiveness, but it manifests itself mainly in search of attention to oneself. Conditions for the emergence of this form of behavior: cessation of attention to the child on the part of the mother (“busy mother” as opposed to “attentive mother”); weakness of restrictive requirements absence of requirements for the implementation of mature forms of behavior These are General terms for both boys and girls. But there are also conditions of care that are different for different genders.

For girls, the father's position and behavior are important. He is an important person in the girl's life. Sears constantly emphasizes that search negative attention associated with the father's higher share of the mother's lower share of child care, the severity of separation from the father, and the extent to which he encourages the daughter's dependence. The lack of restrictive requirements for the child (as, indeed, for the mother) also has an impact.

Other important characteristics of father behavior that influence girls' negative attention seeking, according to Sears, are the infrequent use of ridicule, the infrequent use of models of good behavior, high degree satisfaction with the child’s socialization, high empathy for the child’s feelings. A high negative correlation of this behavior with the father's assessment of the mother was found. The father took a large part in caring for the child from the very beginning because he does not trust the mother.

Sears writes, “It's as if these negative attention-seeking little girls were daddy's girls from the start: they developed strong attachment to their fathers and separation from him causes them to become dependent aggressive type" These are masculinized girls, and masculinization is determined by the father's involvement in their care.

For boys, the picture is less clear: there is also an impact of parental permissiveness, as well as longer breastfeeding and abrupt weaning. The latter means there is early pressure to socialize quickly, Sears said. As for boys who are characterized by this form of dependent behavior, there is a weak disposition of the father; the father does not expect from the boy male type behavior and does not reinforce it. It looks as if the fathers of these boys neglect their sons, and do not condone them out of love, like the fathers of girls.

2. “Continuous reassurance seeking”: apologizing, asking for over-promises, or seeking protection, comfort, reassurance, help, or guidance. This form of addictive behavior is directly related to high requirements achievements on the part of both parents.

Sears again finds stark differences in the background experiences of girls and boys.

For girls, the father again turns out to be a bright figure. In addition, it acts as a rather strong sexual irritant for a little girl. He freely shows himself to the child, gives him information on gender issues - these are signals that arouse sexual impulses in the girl. According to Sears, a child's sexual arousal under the influence of his opposite-sex parent contributes to feelings of insecurity in the child's relationship with the same-sex parent. This is the same situation of jealousy that Freud described as the Oedipus complex.

On this basis, a number of consequences arise, one of which is the search for approval. On the same basis, inattention to the mother arises, even if the girl is at arm's length from her.

In considering the behavior of the mother in this form of dependent behavior, Sears notes that the mother is not a dummy to idly wait to see what degree of hostility her daughter might develop towards her. She can have an additional effect on the child's emotions, she behaves in a way that causes insecurity in her daughter. She presents to the child high standards achievements, is persistent in demanding independence, does little to encourage the child’s achievements and mature forms of his behavior, uses moral teaching, shows consistency in his educational policy and, when interacting with the child, encourages the latter’s dependence. “She persuades rather than demands, but the high standards she has in mind dictate that her love for her child must be met only when certain conditions are met,” Sears writes.

The father is not only a sexual object for a little girl. He is seen by her as the source of strength in her family, he believes it is important to teach her the difference between right and wrong, and he also sets high standards for achievement.

For boys, the features of previous experience are similar in one respect and strikingly different in another. A mother whose son seeks approval is cold, makes restrictive demands, and has high anxiety regarding gender issues and aggressiveness. She constantly monitors the child, but does not necessarily make a constructive effort to exercise him; in her interaction with the child, she does not insist on his independence and does not encourage the latter, but she does not encourage dependence either.

The result is an image of a rather ineffective mother, which is reinforced by the father's low assessment of the mother and his desire to interact with the child.

Boys have no trace of the Oedipus complex. On the contrary, the search for approval is a product of the mother's constant coldness of restrictive demands, even neglect in the sense that neither the child's independence nor his dependence are encouraged.

3. “Seeking positive attention”: the search for praise, the desire to join the group, thanks to the attractiveness of cooperative activity, or, conversely, the desire to leave the group, to interrupt this activity. This is a more “mature” form of dependent behavior, it includes efforts aimed at obtaining approval from the people around her. As for the conditions of the previous upbringing of the child, here again the mother’s tolerance towards her daughter’s behavior is revealed. The mother encourages her daughter’s dependence and believes that she is like her. She expresses affection for her daughter, but so does the father. Tolerance regarding gender does not extend to aggression, since both parents are very strict in this matter.

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

Departure from classical behaviorism

In American psychology, it is believed that social learning theories are the most significant direction in the study of child development.

In the late 30s, N. Miller, J. Dollard, R. Sears, J. Whiting and other young scientists at Yale University made an attempt to translate the most important concepts of psychoanalytic personality theory into the language of K. Hull's learning theory. They outlined the main lines of research: social learning in the process of raising a child, cross-cultural analysis - the study of the upbringing and development of a child in different cultures, personality development. In 1941, N. Miller and J. Dollard introduced the term “social learning” into scientific use.

Social learning theory examines not only “how” socialization occurs, but also “why” it occurs. Particular attention is paid to the satisfaction of the child's biological needs by the mother, reinforcement of social behavior, imitation of the behavior of strong personalities and similar influences of the external environment.

Several generations of scientists have been working in the field of social learning. The evolution of social learning theory is presented in Table. 4. This direction is characterized by the desire to synthesize different approaches in the study of social development. From the table 5 clearly shows that this direction, as it developed in the USA, was a movement towards the awareness of a general theory, and not a separate field of knowledge.

Let us briefly consider the contributions made to the concept of social learning by representatives of the first, second, and third generations of American scientists.

N. Miller and J. Dollard were the first to build a bridge between behaviorism and psychoanalytic theory. Following Z. Freud, they considered clinical material as a rich source of data; in their opinion, a psychopathological personality differs only quantitatively, and not qualitatively, from a normal person. Therefore, the study of neurotic behavior sheds light on universal principles of behavior that are more difficult to identify in normal people. In addition, neurotics are usually observed by psychologists for a long time, and this provides valuable material for long-term and dynamic changes in behavior under the influence of social correction.

On the other hand, Miller and Dollard, experimental psychologists skilled in precise laboratory methods, also turned to the mechanisms of behavior of animals studied through experiments.

Table 4. Evolution of social learning theory (cited by R. Cairns) 1900-1938 Predecessors 1938-1960 First generation 1960-1970 Second generation 1970 - to date vr. Third generation Psychoanalysis Social learning Social learning and personality development Interactional analysis 3. Freud R. Sears A. Bandura G. Petteoson J. Whiting R. Walters A. Yarrow Learning theory N. Miller R. Bell I. P. Pavlov J. Dollard Analysis behavior W. Hartup E. Thorndike J. Rotter S. Bijou J. Watson J. Gewirtz Social cognitive analysis K. Hull Operant conditioning W. Michelle E. Tolman B. Skinner E. Maccoby J. Aronfried Cognitive theories J. Baldwin Structures of the social environment J. Piaget H. Rausch Field theory R. Park K Levin Y. Bronfenbrenner

Table 5 Scheme of the main directions in the study of social development (based on R. Cairns)

Social learning Cognitive development sociology Genetic psychoanalysis Genetic psychobiology Main tasks Learning social behavior Cognitive control of social behavior Evolution of social behavior Development of pathology of behavior Interrelation of behavior and biology Main populations Normal preschool and school age Infants to adolescents Adults Invertebrates and vertebrates Patients Mammals (non-humans) and birds Methods Brief behavioral experiments Interviews Verbal assessments Naturalistic observation Controlled observation Observation Clinical study Physiological and behavioral experiments Basic concepts Imitation Social reinforcement Stage concept Self-development Innate control Video typical patterns Programmed attachment Deprivation Anxiety Bidirectional organization Reciprocal control

Miller and Dollard draw on Freud's theory of childhood trauma. They view childhood as a period of transient neurosis, and the small child as disoriented, deceived, disinhibited, and incapable of higher mental processes. From their point of view, a happy child is a myth. Hence, the task of parents is to socialize their children, to prepare them for life in society. Miller and Dollard share A. Adler’s idea that the mother, who gives the child the first example of human relationships, plays a decisive role in socialization. In this process, in their opinion, the four most important life situations can serve as a source of conflict. This is feeding, toilet training, sexual identification, manifestation of aggressiveness in the child. Early conflicts are non-verbalized and therefore unconscious. To realize them, according to Miller and Dollard, it is necessary to use Freud's therapeutic technique 3. “Without understanding the past, it is impossible to change the future,” wrote Miller and Dollard

Education and development

Sears introduced the dyadic principle of studying child development: since it occurs within a dyadic unit of behavior, adaptive behavior and its reinforcement in an individual should be studied taking into account the behavior of the other, the partner.

Considering psychoanalytic concepts (suppression, regression, projection, sublimation, etc.) in the context of learning theory, Sears focuses on the influence of parents on the development of the child. In his opinion, the practice of child upbringing determines the nature of child development. Based on his research, he advocates parental education: every parent will naturally raise their children better if they know more; What matters is how and to what extent parents understand parenting practices.

Albert Bandura's social learning theory or social cognitivism is one of the most influential learning theories. In this article, psychologist Patricia Sanchez Seisdedos will tell you who Albert Bandura is and what experiments he conducted. You will learn about the basic principles of the theory of social or vicarious learning, as well as how the methods of this theory can be used in education and upbringing.

Who is Albert Bandura and his interest in studying the learning process

Psychologist Albert Bandura was born in Canada on December 4, 1925. Albert Bandura conducted psychological research learning process, giving a decisive role to the cognitive aspect.

In other words, Albert Bandura relied in his research on social-cognitive theory, based on the fact that human behavior is determined by the interaction between the subject (interpretation) and environment(punishments and feedback).

Based on this, Albert Bandura developed his famous theory social or vicarious learning, also called social cognitivism theory or the concept of learning by modeling.

Social or vicarious learning theory: learning through observation

According to Albert Bandura, the picture of reality on which we act is the result of our experiences received from other people (vicarious experience).

And this is how we learn every day. Each of us has people who are role models in various life spheres: our parents, teachers, work colleagues, friends, public people and “stars” that inspire us, etc.

We repeat the behavior of other people, almost without realizing it. However, this does not happen automatically. We choose a model to follow, carefully observe, remember, evaluate whether it makes sense to imitate or not, etc.

Within the framework of the theory vicarage training this assessment is extremely important. In essence, this is what distinguishes Albert Bandura's theory from other learning theories, and what is why his theory would later be called social-cognitive.

With the help of our memory, we mentally reproduce the pictures of behavior that we observed in our role model. We also use internal dialogue and remember what was happening at that moment. Then we decide whether we want to repeat the behavior pattern we have seen or not, whether we will do it identically or make changes... We can even change this pattern depending on our goals. This is where the motivation of each person and his interest in this type of behavior comes into play.

Bobo doll experiment: aggression and aggressive behavior

From theory to practice

To empirically substantiate his theory, Albert Bandura conducted an experiment with the Bobo doll. Thus, he tried to put into practice the theory of observational learning (in other words, the theory about the influence of the behavior of other people seen by a person on his own behavior) using the example of aggressiveness.

The purpose of the research was to find out how watching scenes of violence affects children (later an experiment was also conducted to study the influence of what they saw on TV aggressive actions).

In this video you can see how the experiment was carried out. Don't forget to turn on subtitles in Russian.

How was the experiment conducted?

As you can see, the Bobo doll resembles a tumbler that automatically returns to its upright position when hit or knocked over.

The experiment involved two experimental groups (EG1 and EG2) and one control group (CG). Each experimental group consisted of 24 children (equally divided between boys and girls). Control group also consisted of 24 children, boys and girls in equal proportions.

EG1: 24 children of both sexes. Was divided into 2 groups of 12 people each.
- EG1A: We observed a woman who carried out aggressive actions towards the doll.
- EG1B: We observed a man who committed aggressive actions towards a doll.
EG2: These children observed non-aggressive actions towards the doll.
GK: 24 children. 12 boys and 12 girls. They were simply shown the doll, without first observing any actions of other people in relation to the doll.

Conclusions made by Albert Bandura:

EG1 (children who observed aggressive actions) acted more aggressively towards the doll compared to children from other groups.
Boys were more likely to repeat physically violent acts than girls. However, there were no significant differences between boys and girls in verbal aggression.
Girls were more likely to imitate a woman's behavior model, and boys were more likely to imitate a man's behavior (resemblance to a role model).

However, not all so simple. To implement any type of behavior, only observation and a model that reproduces this type of behavior are not enough.

Moreover, for a behavior model to be adopted, it must be “attractive and interesting” for those who repeat it. Culture also plays a vital role here. Not every person can become an example for a child in all life situations.

It is true that a child who observes aggressive behavior incorporates it into his behavioral repertoire, which in turn increases the likelihood of aggressive actions on his part. However this does not completely determine the child’s behavior.

People are endowed with consciousness, the ability to make decisions and choices. Therefore, having acquired any knowledge or skill, a child should want to use it in this moment. In other words, depending on your goals, choose the most correct, from his point of view, line of behavior.

In this experiment, children were influenced by the fact that they were shown how to handle an object that they had no prior experience with (the doll was a new, unknown object to them). In this regard, to some extent, the children's freedom was limited, since they were shown how to behave. In other words, a child's behavior will differ depending on the choices he has in a given situation.

Bobo doll by Albert Bandura

Albert Bandura's theory of social or vicarious learning. Processes

Albert Bandura identified four processes that are involved in social or vicarious learning:

1. Attention

It is necessary that the observer's attention be focused on the model he is observing. Any distraction will interrupt the task.

2. Saving

Memory plays the most important role. A person must keep in his memory new type behavior in order to reproduce it in the future.

3. Playback

In addition to implementing a certain type of behavior in practice, a person must be able to reproduce this behavior symbolically. In other words, even if a child watches his favorite tennis player play a lot, he will not be able to hit the ball as well as him, since this requires certain motor skills. The child can reproduce the type of movement and action, but repetition and training are needed for correct reproduction.

In addition, certain cognitive abilities are required to be able to activate all the mechanisms. In other words, the child must reach a certain level of cognitive development.

4. Motivation

Even if a person remembers a behavior he observes, in order to repeat it, one needs the desire to do so. Our motives can be very different, for example:

Reinforcement/punishment received: Based on behaviorist theory or behavioral approach. When we have already reproduced some type of behavior and received something good for it (reinforcement). This means we will repeat again this type behavior to obtain the same reinforcement.
Future reinforcements/punishments: expectations of what we want to achieve. We imagine the consequences.
Vicarious reinforcement/punishment: what the model we observed received or achieved.

How can the methods of social cognitivism theory be used in practice?

1. Observational learning in education

Children all over the world take into account the behavior of adults in order to remember and adopt patterns and lines of behavior... They learn by taking as a standard certain people. Albert Bandura says:

“Fortunately, human behavior is largely modeled through observation.”

This helps avoid a lot of trial and error, since the child has the opportunity to observe the situation, behavior and consequences. However, children do not pay attention to and do not remember all types of behavior of the model; this depends on various factors , such as complexity, cognitive skill tuning, significance and authority of the adult model for the child, as well as the functional value of the modeled behavior.

Thus, it was concluded that children, as a rule, to a greater extent imitate simple rewarded types of behavior close to their level of cognitive competence, demonstrated by models that are authoritative for them at the moment when they actively observe such a model-object of imitation.

From a social cognitive learning theory perspective, we can put this knowledge into practice in school in a variety of ways. It is desirable that the teacher or educator be perceived by children as an authoritative person who constantly teaches them new verbal, behavioral and symbolic models. Effectiveness will depend on the consistency of the models, their relevance to students' competence, affective valence, and the effectiveness of how the teacher or educator presents these models. On the other hand, students get the opportunity to observe and remember what not only teachers but also their classmates say and do, thereby practicing observational learning skills.

2. Forecasting and learning in education

Bandura highlights forecasting how very important element when teaching children, since they very quickly learn what the consequences of their behavior are, being able to distinguish between them depending on the situation.

For example, sometimes parents ask themselves why children behave well with some teachers and poorly with others? Or, for example, they ask themselves the question, why does a child ignore his parents until he pisses them off?

This happens because of the predictions that children make. For example, if every time Ivan sits still, teacher “A” does not appreciate it (does not praise him), Ivan will do what he likes or is interested in at the moment. If teacher “B”, every time Ivan tries to get up, scolds him and makes a remark about staying in his seat, then this will teach the children not only to sit in class, but also to sit down as soon as the teacher begins to raise his voice. Therefore, Ivan and other children will remember that in teacher “A’s” lesson you can behave as you please, while if teacher “B” begins to get angry and raise his voice, then you need to sit down.

That is why, according to the theory of social learning, the teacher not only teaches children how to behave, but also creates situations and models of responsive behavior.

On the other side, expectations people, in this case children, do not necessarily have to be related to personal experience. For example, if the most popular boy in class exhibits destructive or problem behavior, many will imitate him in order to achieve the same thing: popularity and attention.

It is very useful to apply this knowledge at school, the main thing is to do it correctly. What is really effective is to reward the student for good deeds so that he becomes an example for most other children. This is much more effective than focusing on misdeeds.

3. Motivation and learning in education

Albert Bandura believes that the consequences of behavior (such as reinforcements and punishments) play a significant role in respectively strengthening or weakening a particular type of behavior.

This is the main thing in motivation and what classical training is based on. However, the difference in Bandura and Skinner's model is that, according to Albert Bandura's theory, the consequences create expectations, which, in turn, will strengthen or weaken this type of behavior in the future. In contrast to Skinner, who defines consequences as certain determinants that result from the repetition of a type of behavior.

Therefore, following the assumptions of Albert Bandura, perceived consequences control behavior more than actual ones. This explains why the child behaves this way, realizing that he may not achieve what he wants. Why does a child spend all day trying to attract everyone's attention in class, although he often fails? Because he knows that he already succeeded once.

People analyze cause-and-effect relationships and draw conclusions from this information.

4. Thinking and regulation of cognitive processes in education.

As we learned earlier, according to Albert Bandura, the basis of behavior is thinking. When a child learns, it is important that he builds conceptual symbolic representations. In other words, I understood context, behavior and wondered - Why?

Albert Bandura believes that if a child does not understand the consequences of his behavior, he will not be able to learn correctly.

Based on social learning theory, in school we must explain to children why they are learning, what they will achieve and what the goals of learning are. Otherwise, according to this theory, they will receive knowledge “automatically,” without understanding why they need it.

In addition, constant, conscious repetition of a particular type of behavior will lead to the fact that such behavior will come naturally to children, and they will be able to better concentrate on their studies.

Have you ever heard of this psychologist? Do you have an idea how to use his theory in your studies? What do you think about social cognitivism theory? Do you agree with her?

We will be grateful for your questions and comments on the article.

Translation by Anna Inozemtseva

Psicóloga Sanitaria especialista en Psicología clínica.
Enamorada de las relaciones entre pensamientos, emociones y comportamiento humano.
Descubramos conocimientos compartiendo información
“Cada uno es dueño exclusivo de sus pensamientos, hasta que decide compartirlos a través de sus conductas”

Already in the works of E. Tolman and B. Skinner, questions were raised about the need to study and manage social behavior. Analysis of the socialization process, factors determining and guiding the acquisition social experience and norms of behavior, determined the content of the concepts of a wide range of scientists, especially in the second half of the 20th century.

One of the first to address these problems was D. G. Mead (1863-1931). After graduation Harvard University(1888), where he studied psychology and philosophy, Mead interned in Europe. Returning to America, he worked with Dewey at the University of Chicago, where he received a doctorate in psychology in 1894. Mead, in his works, first addressed the problem of personality, showing how awareness of one’s “I” is born. He argued that a person’s personality is formed in the process of his interaction with other people, being a model of those interpersonal relationships that are most often repeated in his life. Since in communication with different people the subject plays different “roles”, his personality is a kind of unification of various roles that he constantly “assumes”, and language has vital importance. At first, the child has no self-awareness, but through social interaction, communication and language, he develops it, learns to play roles and gains experience social interaction. This experience allows him to objectively evaluate his behavior, i.e., he develops awareness of himself as social subject. Great importance both in the formation and in awareness of oneself and one’s roles has story game, in which children first learn to take on different roles and respect certain rules games.

Thus, the idea of “I” arises from the social environment, and due to the existence of many social environments there is the possibility of developing many different types of “I”.

Mead's theory is also called expectancy theory because, in his opinion, people play their roles taking into account the expectations of others. It is precisely depending on expectations and past experience (observation of parents, acquaintances) that children play the same roles differently. Thus, the role of a student is played by a child, from whom his parents expect only excellent grades, in a completely different way from the role of a child who is “passed” to school only because it is necessary and so that he does not get underfoot at home for at least half a day. Mead also distinguishes between story games and games with rules. Story games teach children to accept and play different roles, change them during the game, just as they will later have to do in life. Before the start of these games, children know only one role - a child in their family, now they learn to be a mother, a pilot, a cook, and a student. Games with rules help children develop arbitrary behavior, master the norms that are accepted in society, since in these games there is, as Mead writes, a “generalized other”, i.e. a rule that children must follow.

Concept generalized other was introduced by Mead to explain why children follow the rules in a game, but cannot yet follow them in real life. From his point of view, in a game the rule is like another generalized partner who monitors the children’s activities from the outside, not allowing them to deviate from the norm.

Mead first addressed the problems social learning and had a significant influence on many prominent psychologists, especially G. Sullivan. Of great interest are studies of antisocial (aggressive) and prosocial behavior undertaken by psychologists this direction. This problem was at the center of the scientific interests of D. Dollard (1900-1980). After graduating from the University of Wisconsin and receiving his doctorate, he began working at Yale University, where he became interested in Hull's ideas. His goal was to combine reinforcement theory and psychoanalysis. Already in his first works, he expressed the idea of the connection between aggression and frustration, which formed the basis of his frustration theories. According to this theory, holding back weak manifestations of aggressiveness (which were the result of past frustrations) can lead to their compounding and creating very powerful aggressiveness. Dollard also suggested that all the frustrations experienced in childhood and which, according to frustration theory, always lead to aggression, can lead to aggression in mature age. However, this widely held belief is now being questioned and considered controversial.

Dollard considered his best work to be the book “Personality and Psychotherapy” (1950), written in collaboration with N. Miller. Scientific interests N.Miller(b. 1909) were associated with the development of problems of motivation, drives and the nature of reinforcement.

His experiments aimed at studying motivation examined various types of instrumental learning related to the satisfaction of basic human needs. The principles of teaching socially adaptive behavior that he developed formed the basis of his concept of psychotherapy, considered as a process of acquiring more adaptive social and personal skills. Miller's work stripped psychotherapy of its purely medical aura and provided it with a rational basis based on the principles of behavioral learning. In their joint books Social Learning and Imitation (1941), Personality and Psychotherapy, Dollard and Miller attempted to interpret Freud's basic concepts (dependence, aggression, identification, conscience) in terms of learning theory. Dollard and Miller sought to create a psychotherapy based on the principles of social learning theory; was dedicated to this subject most of Dollard's research in the 50s of the 20th century. Their work was the first to develop the foundations of the concept of social learning, including the concept of skill, which laid the foundation for social learning theory in the 60s.

One of the first terms social learning used by D.B. Rotter (b. 1916). He specialized in chemistry, but an interest in psychology and a meeting with A. Adler led him to graduate school at the University of Illinois. After serving as a military psychologist during World War II, he pursued scientific and teaching work V various universities USA. Rotter's main research involves studying individual differences in people's ideas about sources of reinforcement. These ideas depend on who people hold responsible for what happens to them. He introduced the concept expectations, those. confidence (or subjective probability) that a certain behavior in a given psychological situation will be reinforced. Some people are confident that they can influence the reinforcements they receive, and these are people with internal (internal) locus of control. The other part believes that reinforcements are a matter of chance or fate, these are people with external locus control.

Rotter's work has shown that people with an internal locus of control are not only more successful, but also healthier, both mentally and physically. It has also been shown that locus of control is established in childhood and is largely determined by parenting style. Rotter developed the widely used Internality-Externality Scale test, as well as a number of other popular personality tests.

The most significant works in the field of social learning belong to A. Bandura (1925-1988). Bandura was born and received his high school education in Canada, then moved to the United States, where he graduated from the University of Iowa, receiving a doctorate in 1952. clinical psychology. Since 1953 he began working in Stanford University, where he became acquainted with the works of Miller and Dollard, which had a significant influence on him.

Early in his career, Bandura focused primarily on problems of learning as a consequence of direct experience. This interest led to a research program devoted to studying the mechanisms of learning. Starting with the stimulus-response methodology, he came to the conclusion that for human behavior this model is not entirely applicable, and proposed his own model, which better explains the observed behavior. Based on numerous studies, he came to the conclusion that people do not always need direct reinforcement to learn; they can also learn from the experiences of others. Observational learning is necessary in situations where mistakes can lead to unpleasant or even fatal consequences. This is how the concept important for Bandura’s theory appeared indirect reinforcement based on observing the behavior of other people and the consequences of this behavior. In other words, a significant role in social learning is played by cognitive processes, what a person thinks about the reinforcement scheme given to him, anticipating the consequences of specific actions. Based on this, Bandura paid Special attention imitation research. He found that role models tend to be people of the same sex and age who successfully solve problems similar to those facing the subject himself. Imitation of people occupying positions is widespread high position. At the same time, it is more accessible, i.e. simpler models, as well as those with which the subject is in direct contact, are imitated more often.

Research has shown that children tend to imitate adults first and then peers whose behavior has led to success, i.e. to achieve what he strives for and this child. Bandura also found that children often imitate even behavior that they have seen that did not lead to success, that is, they learn new behavior patterns as if “in reserve.” A special role in the formation of behavior patterns is played by means mass media, distributing symbolic models in a wide social space. Imitation of aggressive behavior is also easy to provoke, especially in children. Thus, fathers of hyper-aggressive teenagers serve as models of such behavior, encouraging them to display aggression outside the home. Research by Bandura and his first graduate student, R. Walters, into the causes of aggression in the family demonstrated the roles of reward and imitation in shaping certain behavior patterns in children. At the same time, Walter came to the conclusion that one-time reinforcements are more effective (at least in the development of aggression) than constant ones.

Bandura's work was the first to explore the mechanisms of self-reinforcement associated with assessment of one's own effectiveness, decision skills complex problems. These studies have shown that human behavior is motivated and regulated by internal standards and a sense of adequacy (or inadequacy) to them. People with highly appreciated self-efficacy, they more easily control their behavior and the actions of others, and are more successful in their careers and communications. People with a low assessment of personal effectiveness, on the contrary, are passive, cannot overcome obstacles and influence others. Thus, Bandura comes to the conclusion that the most significant mechanism of personal action is the person’s perceived effectiveness of attempts to control various aspects of human existence.

Of great importance are the works of F. Peterman, A. Bandura and other scientists dedicated to correction of deviant behavior. Lesson plans were developed to reduce aggression in children aged 8-12 years, which consisted of six lessons of 45 minutes each, taught individually or in a group. In individual lessons, alternatives to aggressive behavior are discussed, videos and problem games are used. On group classes Various behavior options are played out using role-playing in situations close to life. In addition, a “model child” took part in the classes, who had already “acquired a set of well-adjusted skills of social behavior” and whose behavior children began to imitate. Bandura is also the author of a psychotherapeutic method called “systematic desensitization.” At the same time, people observe the behavior of the “model” in situations that seem dangerous to them, causing a feeling of tension and anxiety (for example, indoors, in the presence of a snake, an angry dog, etc.). Successful activity evokes a desire to imitate and gradually relieves tension in the client. These methods have found wide application not only in education or treatment, but also in business, helping to adapt to complex work situations.

Bandura's contribution to the development and modern modification of behaviorism is undoubted and is recognized by all scientists who consider him the most significant figure of this movement at the end of the 20th century.

Behaviorism has become the leading psychological school XX century IN THE USA. It has not lost its significance to this day, despite various (and often serious) criticisms from representatives of other directions. Although during the last 60 years there has been a major modification of the principles of behaviorism laid down by Watson, the basic postulates of this school have remained unchanged. This is the idea of the predominantly intravital nature of the psyche (although the presence of innate elements is now recognized), the idea of the need to study reactions mainly accessible to experiment and observation (although the content of internal variables and their significance is not denied), as well as the belief in the possibility of influencing the process formation of the psyche using a number of well-thought-out technologies.

Confidence in the need and possibility of directed training that forms a certain type of personality, as well as the methods that carry out the learning process, are one of the most important advantages of this direction. Learning theories (operant, social, role), as well as various trainings to correct behavior, ensured not only the vitality of behaviorism in the United States, but also its spread throughout the world, although this school did not receive wide recognition in Europe.

The concepts of aggression, developed in line with social learning theories, originate from theoretical concepts of the S-R type (primarily from Hull): in them, the components of behavior responsible for its motivation and direction are defined in different ways and in different ways relate to each other. The most influential representatives of this movement are Berkowitz and Bandura. Initially, Berkowitz took positions closely related to the frustration theory of aggression. Abandoning the untenable postulate that frustration always leads to aggression, he introduced two intervening variables, one related to drive and the other to the direction of behavior, namely anger (as a stimulus component) and trigger stimuli (triggering or causing a reaction key features). Anger arises when the achievement of the goals towards which the subject’s action is directed is blocked from the outside. However, in itself it does not yet lead to behavior determined by this type of impulse. In order for this behavior to be realized, trigger stimuli that are adequate to it are necessary, and they will become adequate only in the case of a direct or indirect (for example, established through reflection) connection with the source of anger, i.e., with the cause of frustration. Thus, the fundamental concept for Berkowitz here is the concept of behavior as a consequence of a push, which fits into the paradigm of classical conditioning.

He himself gives the following definition:

“The strength of an aggressive reaction to any obstacle is a joint function of the intensity of the anger that arises and the degree of connection between its motivator and the trigger.”

Berkowitz later expanded and modified his mechanistic concept of push, consistent with Lorentz's innate trigger model. The trigger stimulus is no longer a necessary condition transition from anger to aggression. Further, it is possible to induce aggression by stimuli associated with the reinforcing consequences of aggressive actions, in other words, Berkowitz uses the instrumental conditioning paradigm as an additional support for his concept. In addition, it is assumed that the appearance of key stimuli relevant to aggression can increase the intensity of an aggressive action, for example, noticing a weapon in a situation perceived by a person as provocative, the so-called weapon effect. Bandura is more focused on the instrumental conditioning paradigm, and central place it focuses on learning by observing a model. The emotion of anger is, in his opinion, neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for aggression. Since anger is, from Bandura's point of view, just a state of arousal that is labeled only after the fact, any emotional arousal that comes from a negatively perceived stimulation (say, noise, heat) can influence the intensity of aggressive actions, if the action proceeds at all. ways of aggression. The course of such an action is not associated with a simple launch conditioned reactions, depending on the anticipated consequences of possible actions, and no state of emotional arousal, no incentive component is necessary for it. Bandura's theoretical position, as a multicomponent, attraction-theory-oriented concept of pull behavior, represents a synthesis of the traditions of learning theory and cognitive theories of motivation. First of all, behavior is determined by the attractiveness of the anticipated consequences of actions. Such decisive consequences include not only reinforcement from other people, but also self-reinforcement, which depends on compliance with internally binding standards of behavior for the individual. Therefore, given the same characteristics of the situation, an action of a completely different type may be chosen instead of aggression, for example: submission, achievement, retreat, constructive solution problems, etc.

The main provisions of the concepts of Freud, Lorenz, Berkowitz and Bandura are presented in the form of somewhat simplified diagrams in Fig. 2.

More recent theoretical approaches based on social learning theory largely share their rejection of the emphasized simplicity and rigor of the S-R mechanism by expanding the role of cognitive processes in understanding situational information - a trend that goes back to Heider. These processes include attribution of states of emotional arousal, interpretation of other people’s intentions, explanation of both one’s own and others’ actions by dispositional or situational factors, designation of behavior as aggression [N. A. Dangerink, 1976].

Hypothetical constructs are framed

Along with Berkowitz and Bandura, Feshbach should also be named among the authors who played a significant role in the development of this direction. He contributed significant contribution in clarifying the concept of “aggression”, and in later works in identifying the conditions for the emergence of aggression and individual differences in aggressiveness, correlating the latter with the general cognitive development. Feshbach adheres to a point of view very close to typical cognitive-personal and motivational-psychological concepts, such as those of Kornadt [N.-J. Kornadt, 1974; 1983] and Olweus.