SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY APPLIED TO AGGRESSION

t

Social psychological explanations of human aggression include the frustration-aggression hypothesis, social learning theory as applied to human aggression, and de-individuation

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY:

INTRODUCTION

Social learning theory is the behaviour theory most relevant to criminology. Albert Bandura's theory suggests that violent propensities are not an inherent part of human nature but are instead acquired through a process known as behavioural modelling. This theory posits that individuals often emulate behaviours exhibited by figures they respect or admire, particularly when these behaviours appear to be rewarded or reinforced. Such reinforcements can manifest in various forms, such as alleviating stress, acquiring material gains, or enhancing social standing and self-esteem.

According to Bandura, influential models for behaviour can be found in an immediate social circle and broader cultural and media contexts. A notable example of this phenomenon is the replication of aggressive behaviours within familial settings. Children who observe aggressive interactions, particularly those involving close family members, are more likely to adopt similar methods of conflict resolution. For instance, witnessing a father's abusive behaviour towards a mother might predispose a child to exhibit similar behaviours in adulthood, underscoring the impact of adult behaviour on a child's developmental trajectory. Bandura also emphasized the significance of early identification and intervention in managing aggression. By recognizing and addressing aggressive tendencies during childhood, it may be possible to steer individuals away from potential criminal activities in later life. In essence, Bandura’s social learning theory provides a framework for understanding aggression by examining The mechanisms through which aggressive behavioural patterns are formed. The catalysts that initiate aggressive responses in individuals. The determinants influence the persistence or cessation of aggressive behaviours in subsequent contexts. Bandura's observational learning theory outlines four crucial processes that influence an observer’s behaviour after exposure to a model.

These processes are attention, retention, motor reproduction, and motivation.

ATTENTION: This is the foundational step in observational learning. An individual must first notice and focus on the key aspects of the modelled behaviour. For instance, in the context of aggression, children must observe closely what the aggressor is doing and saying to imitate that behaviour effectively. The Bobo doll experiment demonstrated this, where children observed live or filmed models verbally and physically abusing a Bobo doll.

RETENTION: After paying attention to the behaviour, the individual must be able to remember it. This involves encoding the observed behaviour into long-term memory for later retrieval and, for example, recalling a specific aggressive action seen earlier. The Bobo doll experiment showed that children could retain and later replicate the aggressive behaviours they had observed, indicating that these actions had been successfully stored in their memory.

MOTOR REPRODUCTION: This process involves the observer’s physical ability to replicate the behaviour. After learning behaviour through attention and retention, the individual must have the physical capability to perform it. For instance, children in the Bobo doll experiment had the physical ability to mimic the actions they had seen, such as hitting the doll.

MOTIVATION: The final component is the expectation of rewards or reinforcements for replicating the modelled behaviour. In the Bobo doll experiment, children saw adults receiving vicarious reinforcement for their aggression, prompting them to emulate these actions in anticipation of similar rewards.

This concept extends to broader societal contexts, where violent acts may be glorified or rewarded, as seen in the historical glorification of figures like Bonnie and Clyde. Bandura suggested that such media portrayals can influence children to replicate aggressive behaviours, with long-term impacts on their personality and a potential inclination towards violence in adulthood. These four processes explain how observational learning can lead to acquiring and replicating behaviours, including aggression, influenced by immediate observations and broader societal messages.

Albert Bandura's research on social learning theory highlights the significant role of environmental experiences in shaping children's learning of violent behaviours. He posited that exposure to violence, whether in one's immediate environment or through media, can lead to increased aggression in children. Here's a summary of the key points: Influence of High Crime Environments: Bandura observed that individuals living in areas with high crime rates are likelier to exhibit violent behaviour than those in low-crime areas. This observation suggests that environmental factors play a crucial role in the social learning of violence. Impact of Television and Media: Bandura identified television and films as powerful sources of behaviour modelling. Violent acts portrayed in media, especially when committed by 'heroes' who face no consequences, can be internalized as acceptable by viewers.

This is particularly impactful for children, who may be more impressionable. The frequent depiction of aggression in media can lead to children imitating these aggressive behaviours. Examples of Media Influenced Violence: Several real-world incidents underscore the potential influence of media violence on behaviour. For instance, David Phillips noted a spike in homicide rates following televised heavyweight boxing matches. The attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan by John Hinckley, who was reportedly influenced by the movie "Taxi Driver," and the replication of a violent act from the film "Born Innocent" in a real-life assault case are examples that highlight the potential impact of media violence.

BOBO DOLL EXPERIMENT APFC

Albert Bandura's Bobo doll experiment is a seminal study in psychology, particularly in understanding how children learn and imitate aggressive behaviours. Here's a detailed overview of the experiment: AIMS Primary Objective: Bandura aimed to demonstrate that children would imitate aggressive behaviour witnessed by an adult model. This was based on his hypothesis that aggression in children is learned through observation and imitation.

METHODOLOGY Participants: The study involved 72 children (36 boys and 36 girls) aged between 37 and 69 months, with a mean age of 4 and 4 months. Role Models: One male adult and one female adult were models for aggressive behaviour. Pre-Existing Aggressiveness Assessment: To ensure a balanced and fair experiment, children were matched based on their levels of aggression. This assessment was done by observing the children in a nursery setting and rating their aggressive behaviour using four 5-point scales. Matched Pairs Design: This approach ensured that children with similar levels of aggression were placed in each experimental group, making it a controlled and balanced study.

PROCEDURES: Positive Reinforcement Condition: In this scenario, children observed an adult model being rewarded (or receiving positive reinforcement) for aggressive behaviour towards the Bobo doll. Punishment Condition: The adult model was punished for displaying aggressive behaviour towards the Bobo doll. This condition was intended to study the effects of negative consequences on imitating aggression. Control/Neutral Group: This group served as a baseline, where children were not exposed to any specific model behaviour towards the Bobo doll.

KEY FINDINGS: Key findings of the experiment include Higher Aggression in Positive Reinforcement Condition: Children exposed to models rewarded for aggression (positive reinforcement condition) exhibited more aggressive responses than those who saw models punished for aggression. Gender Differences in Aggression: Boys generally showed higher levels of aggression than girls in the positive reinforcement condition.

Notably, boys were more aggressive when the model was male, while girls exhibited more physical aggression when the model was male and more verbal aggression when the model was female. An interesting deviation was observed in how often they punched the Bobo doll, where the gender effects were reversed. Support for Social Learning Theory:

The results support Bandura's Social Learning Theory, which posits that children learn social behaviours like aggression through observational learning, i.e., by watching others. Factors Influencing Imitation of Aggression: Vicarious Reinforcement: Observing a model being rewarded for aggressive behaviour increases the likelihood of the observer imitating that behaviour.

For example, a child is more likely to imitate aggression if they see another child getting their way through aggression. Similarity to the Model: Models similar to the observer (e.g., in terms of gender) are more likely to be imitated. Admiration of the Model's Status: Models admired for their status (e.g., successful personalities like athletes) are more likely to be imitated than less admired figures. Bandura's Bobo doll experiment was a cornerstone in demonstrating the role of observational learning in the development of aggressive behaviour, emphasizing the influence of external models and the conditions under which aggressive behaviour is learned and reproduced.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY: Influence on Psychological Theories: The experiment played a crucial role in shaping the understanding of social learning theory, emphasising the importance of observational learning in children. Implications for Media and Aggression: The findings also had broader implications for understanding how children can be influenced by aggression portrayed in media and their environment.

CONCLUSIONS: The findings seem to support Bandura's Social Learning Theory.  Children learn social behaviour, such as aggression, through observation and watching another person's behaviour. Bandura's series of Bobo doll experiments revealed several factors determining whether observed aggressive behaviour is imitated: Vicarious reinforcement – if the model is followed to use aggression. The outcome is desirable; it increases the likelihood that the behaviour will be imitated, e.g., if a child sees another child get their way by hitting someone, they are more likely to imitate the aggressive behaviour. Models are more likely to be imitated if they are similar to the observer, e.g., of the same sex.

A model is more likely to be imitated if the observer admires their status, e.g., children are more likely to imitate successful football players like David Beckham than less successful players like Wayne Rooney. Bandura's Bobo doll experiment demonstrated that aggressive behaviour could be learned through observation and imitation, a fundamental concept in the study of child development and psychology. The experiment highlighted how children's behaviour can be shaped by the models they observe in their environment, leading to significant discussions and further research in developmental psychology, education, and media studies.

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN AGGRESSION

Bandura’s research revealed gender differences in aggressive behaviour, with boys displaying more aggression than girls. Social Learning Theory (SLT) explains this through differential reinforcement and observational learning, suggesting that boys are more likely to be encouraged or rewarded for aggressive behaviour. At the same time, girls may be discouraged from acting aggressively.

However, biological and evolutionary psychologists offer an alternative explanation, attributing these differences to hormonal influences and evolutionary adaptations. Higher testosterone levels in males are linked to increased aggression. At the same time, evolutionary theory suggests that male aggression may have historically played a role in competition for resources, status, and mate selection, making it an adaptive trait for survival and defence.

IS HITTING A DOLL AGGRESSION?

One of the biggest criticisms of Bandura’s experiment is whether attacking a Bobo doll is a valid measure of real aggression. Unlike real people, Bobo dolls do not cry, feel pain, retaliate, or display emotions. The fact that none of the children hit each other suggests that they may have recognised the difference between attacking a toy and harming a person. Durkin (1995) argues that Bandura failed to distinguish between real aggression and play-fighting, and since three- to five-year-olds likely understand that the doll is inaccurate, their behaviour may not reflect genuine aggression.

Additionally, Cumberbatch (1990) found that children unfamiliar with Bobo dolls were five times more likely to imitate aggression than those who had played with them before. This suggests that novelty effects may have influenced the results, making the children more likely to copy the aggression simply because the doll was new and unusual.

HOW LONG DO THE EFFECTS LAST?

A major issue with Bandura’s study is the lack of long-term follow-up. Even if children imitated aggression in the moment, there was no evidence that this behaviour persisted over time. Once they left the experiment, they might have never hit a doll again and never harmed another person. Alternatively, there is the possibility of delayed effects—children may have appeared unaffected during the study but later displayed aggression in real-life situations, such as hitting a peer in the playground. Without long-term observation, we cannot know if exposure to aggression had a lasting impact.

SLT CAN NOT EXPLAIN ALL FORMS OF AGGRESSION

One major limitation of SLT is that it does not explain why non-aggressive individuals sometimes act aggressively in certain situations. For example:

• Situational aggression – People not usually aggressive may become violent in specific environments (e.g., riots, road rage).

• Institutional aggression – Certain settings, such as prisons or military environments, may encourage aggression regardless of prior social learning.

• Deindividuation – When individuals are anonymous (e.g., in a crowd or wearing a uniform), they may display heightened aggression, which is better explained by deindividuation theory than SLT.

LACK OF MUNDANE REALISM

The study lacks ecological validity because it does not reflect real-life situations. In everyday life, children do not typically see adults attacking dolls in front of them. This makes the scenario highly artificial and unexpected. Furthermore, Bobo dolls are designed to be hit—they do not fall, they bounce back, and their ridiculous smiling face may invite aggression rather than provoke real frustration. This raises the question of whether the children were genuinely learning aggression or simply engaging with the toy as intended.

ETHICAL CONCERNS

There are several ethical issues in Bandura’s experiment:

• Psychological harm – Watching adults behave aggressively may have frightened some children or, even worse, taught them to be aggressive.

• Lack of informed consent – Although parents gave consent, they were unlikely to have known that the footage of their children would later be publicly accessible on the internet, potentially causing embarrassment.

• Social sensitivity – The children who displayed aggression could be recognised by their friends and family, which might have led to judgment or negative consequences later in life.

DEMAND CHARACTERISTICS

Since some children were already known to be aggressive, they may have continued acting aggressively simply because they were used to receiving attention. Additionally, the experiment’s artificial setup may have led to demand characteristics—children may have hit the Bobo doll because they believed that was expected of them rather than because they had genuinely learned aggression.

CULTURAL AND AGE BIAS

• Sample bias – The study only used American children aged 3–5, meaning the findings may not apply to other cultures, age groups, or backgrounds.

• Developmental factors – According to Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, children at this age have a less developed sense of morality. Their immature frontal cortex may also result in reduced empathy and increased impulsivity, meaning their aggressive responses could be more age-related than socially learned.

NOTE OF CAUTION WHEN USING THE BOBO DOLL EXPERIMENT

APPLIED TO A01

While Bandura’s Bobo Doll experiment is strong supporting evidence for Social Learning Theory (SLT), it must be used correctly in exam responses. If a question asks for a description of the research, it is appropriate to outline the study’s Aim, Procedure, Findings, and Conclusion (APFC).

However, if the question requires an explanation of Social Learning Theory, simply describing the experiment is not enough. The focus must be on Bandura’s theory, including key concepts such as mediational processes (attention, retention, reproduction, motivation), vicarious reinforcement, and modelling. The study can be used as supporting evidence, but the leading explanation must centre on the theory.

APPLIED TO A03

Students often make the mistake of evaluating only the Bobo Doll study instead of the theory itself. While it is acceptable to discuss methodological issues with the experiment (e.g. demand characteristics, artificial setting), this should not be the sole focus of an evaluation.

A stronger evaluation would consider whether SLT adequately explains all behaviour, its real-world applications, or whether it accounts for biological influences. The theory can also be evaluated for its ability to explain complex behaviours, such as why some observed behaviours are imitated while others are not.

The Bobo Doll experiment should be used as supporting evidence for SLT, but responses must ensure that the focus remains on the theory rather than just the study.

NON EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES

Most studies cited in support of Social Learning Theory (SLT) are observational or correlational rather than experimental, which presents significant limitations regarding the interpretation of results.

MEDIA VIOLENCE ON TELEVISION:

• Research indicating a spike in violent attacks following major boxing events suggests a potential link between the observation of violence in media and aggressive behaviour in real life. This is in line with the concept of social learning, where witnessing violence could lead to imitative aggressive behaviour.

• BANDURA’S SNAKE PHOBIA EXPERIMENT (1961): In this study, Bandura demonstrated how children could overcome the fear of snakes through observational learning. Children who observed a model interacting fearlessly with a snake were more likely to overcome their phobias, showing the power of social models in changing behaviour.

• CHARLTON ET AL: STUDY ON CHILDREN IN ST. HELENA (1999): Investigating the introduction of television to the island of St. Helena, this study found that despite increased exposure to media violence, there was no corresponding increase in aggressive behaviour among children. This provided insights into the complexity of how media violence affects behaviour and the moderating role of community and parental influences.

• LIEBERT & BARON’S STUDY ON TELEVISION AND AGGRESSION (1972): This study found that children who watched violent episodes of a police drama exhibited more aggressive play afterwards than those who watched a non-violent sporting event, supporting the idea that observed behaviour can influence actions.

• WALTERS & THOMAS’ RESEARCH ON DELINQUENT ADOLESCENT BOYS (1963): This study showed that delinquent boys often imitate aggressive and criminal behaviours observed in family members, supporting SLT’s premise that behaviour can be learned through observation of close models.

• HUESMANN ET AL.’S STUDY ON TV VIEWING AND AGGRESSION (2003): A longitudinal study found that childhood exposure to TV violence predicted aggressive and violent behaviours in adulthood, suggesting long-term effects of observed behaviours during childhood.

EVALUATION OF SLT THEORY

Correlational and do not establish a cause-and-effect relationship. While they support the idea that vicarious reinforcement might be associated with changes in behaviour, they cannot conclusively prove them. For example, it could be that the reason that aggressive ramps up in boxing matches is because people drink alcohol at boxing matches, and alcohol can make people violent. In other words, it might not be vicariously reinforced by boxing. Thus, other factors might also contribute to the observed increase in violence, and these factors must be considered when interpreting the results.

IGNORING OTHER FACTORS: REDUCTIONISM

Although SLT plays a role, Bandura’s theory ignores other vital influences on aggression, such as:

• Personality and emotions – Not all children reacted aggressively, suggesting individual differences play a role.

• Biological factors – Research into the MAOA-L gene ("warrior gene") has shown that some children are only aggressive if they have both a genetic predisposition and an abusive upbringing. This highlights how nature and nurture interact, rather than aggression being purely learned.

• Gender differences – Boys were found to be more aggressive than girls, which SLT alone cannot fully explain. Biological and evolutionary explanations, such as testosterone levels and adaptive survival behaviours, may also contribute.

PSYCHOLOGY AS A SCIENCE: WHY IS AGGRESSION DIFFICULT TO STUDY?

Despite its criticisms, Bandura’s study remains one of the best experimental investigations of aggression because aggression is brutal to study scientifically. Other methods, such as:

• Correlations (e.g., linking TV violence to real-world aggression),

• Case studies (e.g., studying violent criminals’ backgrounds),

• Interviews (e.g., asking people about aggressive experiences),

all fail to establish cause and effect.

APPLICATIONS OF SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY TO AGGRESSION

Despite its limitations, Social Learning Theory (SLT) has valuable real-world applications, particularly in understanding and managing aggressive behaviour.

THERAPY & CHILD MANAGEMENT

SLT suggests that aggressive behaviour can be learned through observation, meaning that modelling prosocial behaviour can help reduce aggression in children. This has been applied in:

• Parenting strategies – Encouraging parents to act as positive role models and reinforce non-aggressive conflict resolution.

• School interventions – Anti-bullying programmes use positive reinforcement and non-aggressive role models to encourage prosocial behaviour.

• Anger management therapy – Techniques like role-playing and modelling teach individuals how to respond to frustration non-aggressively.

UNDERSTANDING MEDIA INFLUENCE ON AGGRESSION

SLT helps explain the cycle of violence, where individuals who grow up in violent households or are exposed to aggressive role models in media may develop aggressive tendencies. Research has linked violent media consumption to an increase in aggressive thoughts and behaviours, particularly in children.

• Bandura’s findings support concerns about media violence, leading to debates over the impact of violent films, TV shows, and video games.

• Public policies – Understanding SLT has led to age restrictions on violent content to limit children's exposure to aggressive role models.

COGNITIVE PROCESSES & MEDIATIONAL FACTORS IN AGGRESSION

Unlike behaviourist theories, SLT recognises the role of cognitive processes in deciding whether a behaviour is imitated. Mediational processes (attention, retention, reproduction, and motivation) help explain:

• Why some individuals imitate aggression while others do not – For example, a child may observe aggression in films but choose not to imitate it if they perceive negative consequences (vicarious punishment).

• How aggression can be reinforced – If a child sees aggressive behaviour rewarded (e.g., through social approval), they may be more likely to imitate it.

LIMITATIONS OF SLT IN EXPLAINING AGGRESSION

SLT does not account for all forms of aggression, particularly cases where aggression arises without an observable role model. For example:

• Psychopathic aggression – In families where only one individual exhibits extreme aggression, SLT fails to explain where this behaviour was learned.

• Biological and cognitive influences – Aggression can also result from genetic predispositions, brain structure differences (e.g., amygdala activity), or cognitive biases, which SLT does not fully address

BETA AND ALPHA BIAS IN BANDURA’S THEORY

One criticism of Bandura’s Social Learning Theory (SLT) is its beta bias, which minimises or ignores gender differences by assuming that males and females learn aggression similarly. SLT suggests that all individuals are equally likely to imitate aggression, provided they are exposed to aggressive role models and perceive reinforcement. However, research shows gender differences in aggression, which SLT does not fully explain.

In contrast, an alpha-biased approach would acknowledge these differences, recognising that biological, psychological, and social factors all contribute to variations in aggressive behaviour between genders. For instance:

• Biological explanations point to hormonal differences, such as higher testosterone levels in males, which may contribute to greater physical aggression.

• Evolutionary psychology suggests that males may have developed aggression as an adaptive survival strategy. In contrast, females may be more likely to use indirect forms of aggression (e.g., social exclusion and verbal attacks).

• Social reinforcement may encourage different expressions of aggression in boys and girls, with boys being more likely to receive social approval for physical aggression. In contrast, girls may be discouraged from acting aggressively.

While SLT remains valuable in explaining learned aggression, it would benefit from integrating gender-specific factors to provide a more comprehensive understanding of aggression across different groups.

NOVEL BEHAVIOURS: CAN SLT EXPLAIN ABSTRACT LEARNING?

Although SLT effectively explains the learning of outward behaviours (e.g., smoking, aggression, language acquisition), it struggles to account for abstract concepts such as fairness, justice, and morality, which cannot be directly observed.

Unlike tangible behaviours, these complex ideas require internal cognitive processing, reasoning, and reflection, which SLT does not fully address. Instead, the development of moral understanding is better explained by cognitive-developmental theories, such as:

• Piaget’s theory of moral development suggests that children construct their understanding of fairness and justice through interaction and reasoning rather than simple imitation.

• Kohlberg’s stages of moral development argue that morality evolves through logical reasoning and social discussion rather than passive observation.

Thus, while SLT provides insights into behavioural learning, it does not fully explain the acquisition of abstract beliefs and values, which often require higher-order thinking, social discourse, and personal interpretation rather than direct imitation.

WHAT PROCESSES? SLT AND COGNITIVE MECHANISMS

Although SLT emphasises cognitive processes more than traditional behaviourist approaches, it does not explain the specific cognitive mechanisms involved in learning. Instead, it focuses primarily on observational learning and external reinforcement, leaving the underlying mental processes—such as memory, perception, and decision-making—to be explored by cognitive psychologists.

For instance, SLT acknowledges the importance of mediational processes (attention, retention, reproduction, and motivation). Still, it does not explain how individuals internally process, store, and retrieve information when deciding whether to imitate behaviour.

This limitation suggests that a more integrated approach—combining social learning and cognitive psychology insights—is needed to develop a comprehensive understanding of behaviour. By incorporating cognitive theories, researchers can better understand how observed behaviours are mentally processed and translated into actions.

MIRROR NEURONS AND SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

Social Learning Theory (SLT) and the concept of mirror neurons are closely linked to learning, empathy, and social understanding. Mirror neurons are specialised brain cells that activate when we act and observe someone else performing the same action. This discovery has significantly advanced our understanding of social behaviour and learning.

In the context of SLT, mirror neurons may provide a neurological basis for observational learning, which is central to Bandura’s theory. When we watch someone act, our mirror neurons fire as we act ourselves. This mechanism facilitates imitation, reinforcing that people can acquire new behaviours simply by observing others.

Beyond learning, mirror neurons are thought to play a crucial role in empathy. When we see someone experiencing pain or joy, our mirror neurons respond like we feel the same emotion. This process helps us emotionally connect with others, highlighting the biological foundation of social bonding and communication.

THE ROLE OF FACIAL EXPRESSION AND EMPATHY

An intriguing implication of mirror neuron function is seen in research on Botox, a cosmetic treatment that paralyses facial muscles to reduce wrinkles. Studies suggest that Botox may weaken a person’s ability to mimic facial expressions, which could reduce the activation of mirror neurons responsible for empathy. Since mimicry is essential for social bonding, individuals unable to replicate facial expressions physically may experience a reduced ability to connect with others emotionally.

This intersects with SLT, as mirror neurons and social learning theory emphasise the importance of observation and imitation in shaping behaviour and understanding social cues. The idea that physical alterations like Botox could influence neural processes, social learning, and emotional empathy highlights the complex interplay between biological mechanisms and social experiences.

HORIZONTAL EVOLUTION AND SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

Social Learning Theory (SLT) can be compared to a form of "horizontal evolution" in cultural and behavioural development. This analogy is particularly relevant when considering the rapid advancement of Homo sapiens and other primates, such as chimpanzees.

In traditional Darwinian evolution, change occurs vertically, meaning that genetic traits and behaviours are passed down from parents to offspring over generations. This process, driven by natural selection, is slow and gradual, as advantageous traits take time to spread through a population.

In contrast, horizontal evolution, as seen in SLT, refers to the rapid spread of behaviours, ideas, and knowledge among individuals within the same generation. This type of learning occurs through observation, imitation, and social interaction, allowing individuals to acquire new skills and behaviours almost instantly without waiting for genetic adaptation.

THE IMPACT OF HORIZONTAL EVOLUTION ON CULTURE AND BEHAVIOUR

• Human cultural and technological advancements – The ability to learn from others has been a key driver of rapid progress in human societies. Innovations such as language, tool use, and social norms have spread quickly due to observational learning rather than genetic inheritance.

• Behavioural transmission in primates – Observational learning enables chimpanzees and other primates to pass on new tool-using techniques, hunting strategies, and social behaviours, which then spread within a group, contributing to cultural evolution.

• Faster adaptation compared to biological evolution – Unlike genetic evolution, which requires multiple generations for a trait to become widespread, SLT enables individuals to adapt in real-time by learning from others, allowing societies to evolve much faster.

The concept of horizontal evolution through SLT helps explain the rapid progress of human civilisation. It highlights how social learning and cultural transmission allow for swift behavioural adaptations, far outpacing the slow pace of biological evolution. This perspective emphasises the crucial role of social learning in shaping human development, reinforcing the idea that knowledge and behaviour can evolve culturally, not just genetically.

AN ECLECTIC APPROACH TO UNDERSTANDING AGGRESSION

To fully explain gender differences in aggression, a multi-perspective approach is necessary. Social Learning Theory (SLT) provides one explanation, highlighting the role of observation and reinforcement, but other biological, evolutionary, and sociocultural factors must also be considered.

• SLT and social influences – SLT suggests that aggression is learned through role models and reinforcement. Boys, for example, may be rewarded for aggressive behaviour, while girls are more likely to be discouraged from acting aggressively.

• Biological psychology – Hormonal differences, such as higher testosterone levels in males, may contribute to greater physical aggression.

• Evolutionary theory – From an evolutionary perspective, males may have developed aggression as a survival strategy, particularly in competition for resources or status.

• Sociocultural influences – Different cultures reinforce or discourage aggression differently, affecting how individuals express aggression.

This eclectic approach acknowledges that human behaviour is complex and shaped by multiple interacting factors rather than being solely determined by social learning or biology alone. Integrating SLT with other psychological perspectives provides a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of aggression.