Class Notes (836,126)
Canada (509,644)
Psychology (5,217)
PSYCH 2B03 (299)

The Cognitive Behavioural Approach- Bandura and Mischel.pdf

9 Pages
Unlock Document

Jennifer Ostovich

Cognitive Social Leanring Theory Albert Bandura & Walter Mischel - behaviourist learning approach and cognitive approach combined in this theory - no pure behavioural personality behaviour o behaviourist don’t think that the construct of“personality” is useful, doesn’t see any value for it - introspection: ask subjects to look inside themselves, and analyze the perception intoit’s component sections - professors had a lot of power, so students analyzed into elements of consciousness of which their professor wanted/own professor’s theories literature showed contradictory views (1865~1900s) Historyof Behaviorism - John B Watson: Radical Behaviorism o Began with methodological behaviourism: we have to focus as a science on things that we can publicly observe. And behaviour is the only thing that meets that criteria o Cannot rely on the truth of introspective reports of the contents of somebody else’s unconsciousness  unreliable, unverifiable o If we rely on overt, observable behaviour (including speech) safe, everyone can repeat and get same results o Psychology has to be rooted in publicly observable, verifiable behaviour o Methodological behaviourism (the method we should use): Recording, observing behaviour - Went on to be more radical. Then said that there’s no thing as consciousness/thought  thinking is just subtle muscle movements (imaging doing something  muscles actually move a little bit) o Psychology should not, cannot, talk about the interior life o Radical behaviourism: Nothing about thinking, emotion, nothing outside observable behaviours  they do not exist, none of them are real, therefore do not talk about them at all - Behaviourism is amethod, as a way of getting information about why and how people behave, was a great idea  had taken off dramatically in mid 1920s o Became and remains the dominant way of doing psychology- you study behaviour o We are all methodological behaviourists - Within few years of publishing behaviourmanifesto, left academia as he got in trouble in an affair with a graduate student  wentinto advertising o Widely credited for having invented the celebrity endorsement (convinced princess of Bohemia to sell a hand cream)  modify behaviour or whatever - In 1920s, there was a split  everyone remainedmethodological behaviourist, but some people did not want to give up on theorizing what’s going on in the head of subjects  group who tried to develop a large scale model of how learning takes place (behaviourists stressed: behaviours come about primarily from learning). - Studies demonstrating the power of learning (in relation to behaviour): o Pavlov: classical conditioning o E.L. Thorndike Instrumental Learning  Named and studiedinstrumental learning/operant conditioning  Relationship between behaviour and consequences  Animals in puzzle box: if behaviour was followed by reward/satisfying consequence, it became more frequent. if followed by unsatisfying consequence/punishment, became less frequent  Study patterns of re-enforcement and how that impacted behaviour o Upsurge in interest in basic learning principles (could be done at lab, experimentally)  dominated for next 40 years o Maslow worked with Thorndike for several years when he was starting out o Thorndike wanted to develop a general/mathematical model of learning  equation which describes how learning takes place o General learning theory developed  Mathematical equation which describes how classical + instrumental learning takes place  understand more fully how things work  Trying to figure out how processes were in a math formula, they tried to develop a mathematicalmodel of learning:  Clark Hull (was a big deal)  Kenneth Spence (@ university of Iowa, where Bandura did his PHD later) - A second group, led by B.F. Skinner: Radical behaviourism returns o Wanted to completely ignore internal processing, didn’t want to theorize  didn’t want theory in his work o Study relationship between patterns of reinforcement and patterns of resulting behaviour (schedules of re-enforcement) o Wanted a purely empirical theory o Determine what relationship was between stimulus presentation and behavioural output  and then catalogue input/output relationships  no theory at all - Rule in psychology was to never talk about the mind, don’t talk about things that you cannot observe - Exploring the mind was un-thinkable Historyof Cognitivism - Methodological behaviourism is dominant, but radical is dead due to a second “revolution”  cognitive revolution - difficult to pinpoint the history of cognitivism - had original roots back in experimental psychology when people were interested in mind, thought, consciousness  also came up with work on humanmemory  disappeared in the tide of wave of methodological/radical behaviourism, came back in 1940s’: began in England during the war years, two people primarily involved: - Alan Turing: Digital computer o Mathematician, computer guy o Previously, computer referred as a person who did computation o Part of team that first developed computer  Motivation was from the enigma machine (Germans), wanted a machine which could de- code the messages o Metaphor for mind: mind is like a computer, wired in programs that run by itself- takes in information, spits out data/makes decisions by themselves based on built in rules (unlike telephone or something)  information is being processed, thinking is happening people began to turn to cognitive view again- should be thinking, talking about the head, what happens wheninformation comes in o People studyingmemory, read list of words to subjects, asked them to repeat words back nd st immediately afterwards  the learning model is that you form a chainndassociate 2 word with 1 word etc, so when you retrieve, you start with first word, brings you to 2 )  but some people didn’t do this- they gave them in categories (e.g. furnitur, animal, flower words)- did not fit learningmodel  how did they re-organize?  there’s activity going on, what is happening? o Need to think about it, hypothesize and infer  leaning towards cognitive approach - Donald Broadbent: Selective Attention o Why were operators not alterning fighter commands aboutthe bomber fighters? o Began work on selective attention: paying attention to something while ignoring everything else o Developed model of auditory selective attention: noisy room, but person can focus in on one conversation, follow in and ignore the others  developedmodel: storage areas, different systems, flow of information etc. o First cognitivemodel (multi storemodel ofmemory)  What’s going on in themind? o Became classic model of memory (developed into), short term and long term memory etc. (Broadbent: S system and P system  short term and long term- basically the same)  remains powerful model of memory o Because of the successes, cognitive approaches became more popular, replaced behaviourmodel of not being able tomake inferences o Late 1960s, cognitive model became dominant, replaced behavioural model  Didn’t replacemethodological behaviourism: still looking at overt behaviour of participants  but going beyond that, drew inferences from those: what sort of mental processes were going on to produce what we see/the data o Methodological behaviourism + theoretical cognitism  came together into onemodel/work of Bandura and Mischel Bandura and Mischel - Bandura: important bobo doll study  impact of exposing children to violence o Canadian, eventually went to Standford o Release violent drives, will become less aggressive o Ran study: showed them movie of a clown playing with toys in a playroom  some saw clown doing gentle things, other saw him kicking the toys etc.  boys let loose in room, boys who saw peaceful interaction behaved the way they saw, and boys who saw aggressive clown did what they saw- aggressive o People not interested as the boys did it with toys not real people o Ran study again, instead of bobo doll, had person in a clown suite  sent boys in again, boys wacked the clown as they saw o They will express against human begins if they were exposed to violence - Mischel: younger, Jewish family from Vienna, who moved to NYC o Trained as a social worker, trained in psychoanalytic processes o Experience led him to give up psychodynamic approaches as he went into practice o Worked under number of people who were pioneers of cognitive approach  became cognitivist (it’s the way we think that matters, the way we interpret things)  eventually moved off to Stanford (collaborated with Bandura), then went to Columbia- still publishing - Classical behaviourism: classical, operant conditioning – consequences of your behaviour thatmattered - Here (combination): add social learning, learning not just from being reward/punished yourself, but by watching others (observational learning)  this is how personality changes - Bandura came to fame with social learning of aggression, Mischel came to prominence in late 60s, with work entitled Personality and Assessment  still in print o When he wrote the book, dominant approach: trait approach (still is) o Mischel trained in cognitive personality, took a different angle: criticized the trait perspective, said that it cannot possibly be the best way to look at personality  if you assume the existence of stable, underlying characteristics/traits, then you expect to see high correlations between an individuals self reported traits and their behaviours in any situation, also expect there will be high correlation between behaviours of an individual in different situations  Summary: according to the trait perspective, expect high correlation between (1)measured traits and behaviour and (2) between behaviours in different situations o Surveyed literature:  if you looked at correlation between measured traits and actual behaviour in a situation, it’s remarkably low (0.3)  Square correlation: proportion of variance in those two measures (behaviour) that can be accounted for by the correlation  0.3 correlation: only 10% of variability in behaviour can be accounted for by its relationship with traits  Then looked at correlation of behaviours in different situations of same individual  expect correlation to be high since behaviour is governed by stableunderlying traits? Yet correlation was only about 0.3  only about 10% of variance between situations can be accounted for by traits, 90% variability accounted by something other than traits  conclusion: highly generalized behavioural consistencies have not been demonstrated, and concept of personality traits as broad dispositions is thus untenable  condemned the trait theory o People studying trait theory were not advancing, Mischel’s critique energized the trait perspective  trait theorists realized that they have problems, rethink ideas/relationships that were hypothesized, construct better measures  critique set them busy, led tothe increased dominance of the trait theory since the late 1970s o Mischel has come to an understanding with the trait theory, and about how it can come together with his cognitive behaviour work  come down to debate, discussion, and even compromises instead of competition Reciprocal Determinism - response to the question: which is most responsible for determining the behaviour we exhibit in a given situation  why do we behave as we do in a given situation? - Responsibility of two sets of variables/constructs which shapes behaviour: - (1) Due to inner personality – who we are/the person - (2) The situation itself creates expectations, demands, pressure to act in a certain way - Person- situation debate: which of these two things (internal characteristics/person vs. demands of the situation) is more responsible for our behaviour in a situation - Answer varies depending on the situation: o E.g. in class: everyone writing notes, this is not due to the person- no indication of individual differences  the primary determine of behaviour is the situation it self, and expectations that we and others have of how we should behave in this situation (class)- situation dominated behavioural pattern o E.g. at a party- more indication of individual differences of behaviour, more dependent on “who am I” o Unclear expectations, demand/unusual the role of the person dominates how a person behaves o Clear expectations  tend to see generally the dominanceof situational variables of expectations in behaviour - What is the relationship between the situation and person in shaping behaviour? Powerful concept- reciprocal determinism o In a situation, first thing they dois to evaluate/assess the situation: where am I, what sort of behaviour is expected here, what behaviour will lead to what outcomes, what do I want to happen, what do I need to do o Individual chooses behaviour o Decision often changes the situation (e.g. go into classroom, can choose to sit down and take notes or yell “fire, everyone leave”  different consequences. Or having an argument with someone, can choose to agree or argue against)- clear that the options lead to different outcomes, and the process from then on depends on what you say/do o Once you behave, situation changes depending on behaviour  now you have to re-evaluate  Re-evaluate new situation, what now should I do, thenmake another behaviour choice, situation changes  cycle o There’s a constant reciprocal interaction: not just situation shapes behaviour or person variable shapes behaviour  both things are happening simultaneously- behaviour choices affects situation  Situation is affecting you and your choices, you are also affecting the situation  Continues in cycle - We create the environment which affects us- particularly true in interpersonal relationships (when interacting with 1+ people) o How people treat us is dependent on how we behaved towards them o End up in self-fulfilling prophecy very easily o E.g. person believe that people are out for themselves, don’t care for others, distrusts  effect: they get what they expect- people treat them with dishonesty, distrust  thinks experience justifies beliefs (but in fact, they produced that situation themselves) o What you believe leads to how you act, which in turn leads to how your experience is  seem like you’re living in two different worlds due to own behaviour (created the environment themselves) o We are largely responsible for own environment, and thus for the influence it has on our behaviour (we get back what we expect- self-fulfilling) o Widely taught in counselling, education  you get from people what you expect from them (people will meet your expectations) - Also applies to how we see ourselves o See ourselves as confidence, assured, intelligent etc.  this is how others will see us and treat us o What you believe  how you behave  how others treat you o We shape our experiences - Another example- study o Had young man make phone call to women. Had a picture in-front of them. Half of the men had a picture of a attractive woman, other half had
More Less

Related notes for PSYCH 2B03

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.