SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY
SPECIFICATION:
Social Learning Theory, including imitation, identification, modelling, vicarious reinforcement, the role of mediational processes, and Bandura’s Research
ASSUMPTIONS OF SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY:
Social Learning Theory is a way of explaining behaviour that includes both direct and indirect reinforcement, combining learning theory with the role of cognitive factors.
Albert Bandura agreed with the behaviourists that much of our behaviour is learned from experience.
However, his social learning theory (SLT) proposed a different way people learn: through observation and imitation of others within a social context, thus social learning.
SLT suggested that learning occurs directly, through classical and operant conditioning, but also indirectly.
SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY: AN EXPLANATION OF BEHAVIOUR
Social Learning Theory (SLT) is often described as a "bridge" between behaviourism and the cognitive approach, as it recognises that learning involves both stimulus and response and mental processes.
Social Learning Theory (SLT) is a theory that explains how individuals acquire and replicate behaviours through observation and imitation. Developed by Albert Bandura, SLT suggests that behaviour is not solely determined by innate tendencies or direct reinforcement but learned by watching others—mainly when those behaviours appear to be rewarded or reinforced. These reinforcements can take many forms, such as social approval, material gain, stress relief, or enhanced self-esteem.
Bandura suggests that role models—whether found in an individual’s immediate social environment or through media and cultural influences—play a crucial role in shaping behaviour. This concept explains a range of behaviours, including smoking initiation, drug taking, drinking alcohol, disordered eating, criminality, aggression, consumer habits ("keeping up with the Joneses"), and other social trends. For instance, a teenager may start smoking after observing peers who receive social validation for doing so, or an individual might adopt restrictive eating habits after being exposed to idealised body images in the media.
WHO DO WE COPY?
Bandura suggested that who individuals imitate depends on various factors, including age, social class, culture, and gender. However, as a general rule, we are more likely to copy:
People who are admired
Peers and friends
Individuals of the same gender
Those with influence, such as celebrities, influencers, or authority figures
Bandura also emphasised that environment and media play a key role in shaping behaviour. People who grow up in specific social settings are more likely to adopt normalised or reinforced behaviours within that environment.
THE INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL CIRCLES
The people around them strongly influence individuals. If someone's peers engage in certain behaviours—such as substance use, extreme dieting, or materialistic lifestyles—they are more likely to adopt those behaviours due to peer reinforcement and social approval.
MEDIA AS A POWERFUL MODEL
Television, films, and social media provide strong behavioural models. Individuals who see characters, influencers, or celebrities receiving admiration, success, or status for their actions may perceive those behaviours as desirable and worth imitating.
CULTURAL TRENDS AND BEHAVIOURAL SHIFTS
Media also plays a role in shaping societal norms and expectations. Trends such as viral fitness challenges, minimalist lifestyles, or beauty standards gain popularity through repeated exposure and reinforcement in digital spaces.
Ultimately, we are most likely to imitate those we respect, relate to, or see as successful—whether they are friends, celebrities, or cultural icons.
KEY CONCEPT: VICARIOUS REINFORCEMENT
Vicarious means experiencing something indirectly through someone else rather than going through it yourself.or example:
Vicarious enjoyment – Feeling happy or excited while watching someone else succeed, like celebrating when your favourite football team wins.
Vicarious trauma – Feeling distressed after hearing about someone else's traumatic experience, even though it didn’t happen to you
A key concept in Social Learning Theory is vicarious reinforcement. This occurs when an individual learns by observing the consequences of another person's behaviour. If an observed behaviour leads to a positive outcome, such as praise, success, or rewards, the observer is likelier to imitate it. Conversely, if the behaviour results in a negative consequence, they are less likely to repeat it.
This learning happens through mental representation—when an individual observes someone being rewarded for a behaviour, they internally encode this association, making it more likely they will imitate the behaviour in the future. This is particularly important in child development and socialisation, where children watch parents, teachers, and peers to understand what is expected of them. This process is not passive but involves active cognitive engagement, where individuals interpret store, and later apply the information they acquire through observation. It allows for efficient learning, reducing the need for direct reinforcement while meaningfully shaping behaviour.
🔹 Vicarious Reinforcement: A younger sister watches her older sister being praised for completing her homework on time. Seeing this vicarious reinforcement makes her more likely to adopt the same behaviour to receive similar praise.
However, vicarious reinforcement does not just lead to imitation; it also plays a role in self-regulation and behavioural inhibition. When individuals witness vicarious punishment—seeing someone else face negative consequences—they expect the same sentence to apply to them, making them less likely to engage in that behaviour. This is how societies reinforce rules, moral values, and social norms without requiring everyone to experience the consequences firsthand.
🔹Vicarious Punishment: A boy watches another rider attempt a wheelie on a moped while wearing no helmet. The rider falls, suffers a severe concussion, and is taken to hospital. Seeing this consequence may make the observer less likely to try the stunt themselves.
A helpful way to think vicarious reinforcement and punishment about it is that it is similar to operant conditioning. Still, instead of the reward or punishment happening to the individual, it is observed in another person. This process occurs because humans are social beings who rely on observation and cognitive processing to guide their behaviour. Instead of needing direct reinforcement, individuals can mentally process and evaluate the outcomes they witness in others.
In summary, vicarious reinforcement explains how people learn socially acceptable or undesirable behaviours without directly experiencing the consequences. By observing rewards and punishments, individuals can shape their behaviours based on what they see happening to others.
KEY CONCEPT: THE ROLE OF MEDIATIONAL PROCESSES
People do not automatically imitate a behaviour just because they see it. Instead, they mentally process what they have observed before deciding whether to replicate it. This consideration is known as the mediational process, which acts as a filter between the stimulus (observed behaviour) and the response (imitation or rejection of the behaviour).
SLT identifies four key processes that determine whether an observed behaviour is imitated. These processes are attention, retention, motor reproduction, and motivation. These mechanisms explain how individuals learn, store, and later reproduce observed behaviours, particularly when they perceive rewards or consequences that influence whether the behaviour persists or fades over time.
ATTENTION
For a behaviour to be imitated, it must first capture our attention. We are exposed to countless behaviours daily, but only a few stand out enough to influence us. The more distinctive or engaging the behaviour, the more likely we will notice it.
Example: A teenager scrolling through TikTok might ignore most videos but stop to watch an influencer performing a trending dance challenge. The post's high energy, music, and popularity draw their attention, making it more likely they will engage with the content.
RETENTION
Noticing a behaviour is insufficient; we must retain it in memory to replicate it later. Since social learning is not always immediate, forming a lasting mental representation of the behaviour is crucial. The clearer and more repeated the behaviour, the stronger the memory.
🔹 Example: A child watches their parent tie their shoelaces multiple times. Although they might not attempt it immediately, their ability to recall and mentally rehearse the steps increases their likelihood of successfully imitating the behaviour later.
REPRODUCTION
Even if we have paid attention to and remembered a behaviour, we may lack the physical or cognitive ability to reproduce it. Our skills, strength, or confidence can determine whether we attempt to imitate a behaviour.
🔹 Example: Imagine a 90-year-old woman watching Dancing on Ice. She may admire the skaters’ talent and remember their movements perfectly, but her physical limitations prevent her from attempting to imitate them.
MOTIVATION
The likelihood of imitating a behaviour depends on its perceived rewards and consequences. If a behaviour appears beneficial, we are more likely to imitate it. If the risks or punishments outweigh the benefits, imitation is less likely.
By highlighting the role of social and cognitive factors in learning, Bandura’s theory provides a comprehensive framework for understanding how behaviours are acquired and maintained across various aspects of life.
By incorporating these cognitive factors, SLT explains why not all observed behaviours are imitated and why some are remembered and replicated later rather than immediately.
THE FIRST TWO MEDIATIONAL PROCESSES RELATE TO THE LEARNING OF BEHAVIOUR AND THE LAST TWO TO THE BEHAVIOUR PERFORMANCE.
The first two mediational processes (attention and retention) relate to behaviour learning, while the last two (reproduction and motivation) determine whether the behaviour is performed.
Unlike traditional behaviourist theories, which suggest that learning and performance happen simultaneously, Social Learning Theory recognises that behaviour can be learned at one time but performed later. An individual may observe and mentally store a behaviour but only reproduce it when circumstances motivate them.
For example, a young girl watches her mother put on lipstick before going out. She then hears her father complimenting her mother’s appearance.
She notices her mother applying lipstick and receiving social approval (attention).
She remembers where the lipstick is kept and how to apply it (retention).
Later, she retrieves this information and successfully applies the lipstick herself (reproduction).
Although she knows she might get in trouble, she values the chance to receive compliments and feel grown up, making her more likely to imitate the behaviour (motivation).
This example highlights that learning and performance are separate processes—Natasha learns by observing her mother but performs the behaviour later when the motivation is strong enough.
REAL-WORLD EXAMPLES OF SOCIAL LEARNING
Numerous real-world cases illustrate how observational learning extends beyond aggression to influence behaviour in diverse ways:
The Influence of Celebrities on Smoking: Studies have shown that teenagers who see celebrities smoking in films or music videos are more likely to start smoking, associating the behaviour with glamour or rebellion.
The Impact of Social Media on Consumer Behaviour: The rise of influencer marketing demonstrates how individuals imitate purchasing habits, fashion choices, or even financial decisions after seeing influencers receive positive reinforcement (e.g., likes, sponsorships, admiration).
Dietary Trends and Social Learning: Exposure to media glorifying extreme dieting or certain body ideals can contribute to disordered eating behaviours, especially among impressionable audiences who see these practices rewarded with praise or societal approval.
Dangerous Social Media Trends: TikTok and YouTube challenges often demonstrate vicarious reinforcement or punishment. Some individuals copy dangerous challenges due to viral attention and peer admiration, while others avoid them after seeing negative consequences happen to others.
CONCLUSION
Social Learning Theory provides a framework for understanding how behaviours are acquired and maintained across various aspects of life. By recognising the impact of role models, media representation, and social reinforcement, SLT explains how individuals develop habits, values, and aspirations based on what they observe and perceive as beneficial. Whether influencing lifestyle choices, social norms, or risk-taking behaviours, observational learning is crucial in shaping human behaviour beyond aggression alone.
RESEARCH STUDIES THAT SUPPORT SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY
KEY STUDY: THE BOBO DOLL EXPERIMENT – BANDURA, ROSS & ROSS (1961)
PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE: (DON’T WRITE ABOUT THIS IN THIS MUCH DETAIL)
36 boys and 36 girls from the Stanford University Nursery School aged between 3 to 6 years old. It was a lab experiment. Children were split up into three conditions:
An aggressive model was shown to 24 children.
A non-aggressive model was shown to 24 children.
No model shown (control condition) – 24 children.
Participants were put into a room one at a time and observed the adult role model’s behaviour (either aggressive or non-aggressive).
The Bobo doll, a hammer, and other toys were in the room. The aggressive model had to hit the Bobo doll with the hammer and shout abuse at it simultaneously.
After witnessing the behaviour for about 10 minutes, the participants were taken down the corridor to another room.
This was known as the ‘aggression arousal’ stage, where the children were told they couldn’t play with the toys in this room as they were for other children but that they could play with the toys in a neighbouring room.
They were then taken into that room with the experimenter and allowed to play with toys.
The room contained a range of toys: the Bobo doll, a mallet, dart guns, and non-aggressive toys such as dolls and crayons. The participants were observed in that room for 20 minutes and rated for how much they imitated the behaviour they had just seen.
RESULTS:
They found the children who had observed aggressive behaviour acted more aggressively when observed and that boys acted more aggressively than girls. There was also a greater level of behaviour imitation if the role model was the same gender as the child.
CONCLUSION:
This study supports Bandura’s social learning theory as correct, as children observe and directly imitate the behaviours. Therefore, it provides support for SLT.
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.
Experimental research on vicarious reinforcement is challenging, primarily due to ethical concerns—for example, exposing children to harmful or antisocial behaviours raises serious moral issues.
More importantly, strict experimental control is challenging to attain. In an actual experiment, all extraneous variables must be controlled to ensure that the only factor influencing behaviour is what participants observe. However, ensuring that participants in each condition have identical life experiences is practically impossible. Factors such as upbringing, personality, and social context inevitably vary, making it difficult to isolate the effects of observational learning alone.
Due to these challenges, researchers in this field tend to rely on non-experimental methods, such as correlational studies and natural observations, which, while valuable, cannot establish definitive causal relationships.
DESPITE THIS THERE ARE SOME EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES SUCH AS:
BUSSEY & BANDURA (1999) – SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY OF GENDER DEVELOPMENT: Experiment: Tested how children internalise gender roles by observing same-sex models and experiencing reinforcement.
WILLIAMS (1986) – THE NOTEL STUDY (TV AND GENDER STEREOTYPES): Natural Experiment: Compared gender role beliefs before and after TV introduction in a previously isolated town.
BIGLER ET AL. (1995) – GENDER-NEUTRAL LANGUAGE IN SCHOOLSExperiment: Manipulated teachers using gender-neutral vs. gendered language to assess changes in children’s gender attitudes.
FAGOT (1985) – PARENTAL REINFORCEMENT OF GENDER BEHAVIOURExperiment: Observed how parents reacted to gendered vs. non-gendered behaviour in young children. Parents were unaware their behaviour was being studied, making it a controlled observational study within an experimental setup.
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.
ADDICTION: VAPING, SMOKING, AND ILLICIT DRUGS:
AKERS ET AL.’S SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY OF ALCOHOL AND DRUG BEHAVIOUR (1979): This study applied SLT to alcohol and drug use, suggesting that substance use behaviours are learned through the same social processes as other behaviours. The study emphasised the role of peer influence, imitation of drug-using behaviours observed in others, and reinforcement of substance use through social interactions.
KANDEL’s RESEARCH ON PEER INFLUENCE IN ADOLESCENT DRUG USE (1978): Denise Kandel's work on adolescent drug use highlighted the significant role of peer groups in the initiation and continuation of drug use. Her research demonstrated that adolescents are more likely to start using drugs when they have friends who are drug users, consistent with SLT's emphasis on the influence of observational learning and peer modelling.
EATING DISORDERS
THE FIJI TELEVISION STUDY (BECKER ET AL., 2002): This landmark study investigated the impact of the introduction of Western television on body image and eating attitudes in Fijian adolescent girls. It found that after television exposure, there was a significant increase in symptoms of eating disorders. The study highlights how exposure to media and the consequent observational learning of body ideals can influence eating behaviours and attitudes. Family Influence on Eating Disorders
COOLEY ET AL., 2018, showed that family dynamics and parental attitudes towards weight and diet can influence the development of eating disorders in children. Observational learning within the family context, such as imitating parents' eating habits or internalising their attitudes towards food and body image, plays a significant role.
PEER INFLUENCE AND BODY IMAGE.
(JONES ET AL., 2004): This study explored how peer groups influence body dissatisfaction and eating disorders. The findings suggested that individuals often compare themselves to their peers and may adopt disordered eating behaviours that they observe within their social circles.
GENDER ROLES AND GENDER CRITICAL THEORY:
BUSSEY AND BANDURA (1999): In their study on gender role socialization, Bussey and Bandura expanded on SLT to explain how children acquire gender-typed knowledge and behaviours. They emphasised the role of modelling and reinforcement in learning gender roles, showing how children imitate the behaviour of same-sex models and how parents and peers differentially reinforce their gender-typed behaviours. .
MARTIN, WOOD, AND LITTLE (1990): This study focused on early gender role development in preschool children. It highlighted how children as young as three years old have well-established gender stereotypes and prefer gender-typed toys, which they likely learned through observational learning and reinforcement.
THE IMPACT OF TELEVISION ON GENDER ROLE DEVELOPMENT:
Several studies have focused on how television and media exposure influence children's perception of gender roles. For instance, research by Williams et al. (1986) on television and children's gender role socialisation found that children who watch a lot of television have more stereotypical views of gender roles, likely due to the gendered behaviours and roles often depicted in media content.
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.
APPLICATIONS OF SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY
Despite its limitations, SLT has practical applications, particularly in:
Therapy & child management – Encouraging positive role models to promote prosocial behaviour.
Understanding media influence – The theory explains the cycle of violence, where children who grow up in violent households or consume violent media may develop aggressive tendencies.
The social learning approach considers cognitive processes and acknowledges their role in determining whether a behaviour is imitated. By incorporating mediational processes, Social Learning Theory (SLT) offers a more comprehensive explanation of human learning than traditional behaviourist theories, which focus solely on stimulus-response associations.SLT effectively explains the initiation of specific behaviours, as demonstrated by real-world examples, such as why someone might start smoking after observing peers or role models engaging in the behaviour. However, learning theory is not a complete explanation for all behaviours. One major limitation is its inability to account for behaviours that arise without an observable role model. For instance, in cases where one individual in a family displays psychopathic behaviour while no one else exhibits similar traits, SLT fails to explain where this behaviour has been learned. This suggests that other factors, such as biological or cognitive influences, must also be considered.
BETA AND ALPHA BIAS IN BANDURA’S THEORY
One criticism of Bandura’s theory is its beta bias, which minimises or ignores gender differences by assuming that the same learning processes apply equally to males and females. In contrast, an alpha-biased approach would acknowledge and explore these differences, recognising that biological, psychological, and social factors contribute to variations in gender aggression.
NOVEL BEHAVIOURS
Although Social Learning Theory (SLT) effectively explains how outward behaviours (e.g., smoking, aggression, or language use) are learned through observation and imitation, it struggles to account for the learning of abstract concepts such as fairness, justice, and morality, which cannot be directly observed.
Unlike tangible behaviours, these abstract ideas often require internal cognitive processing, reasoning, and reflection, which SLT does not fully address. The development of moral understanding is better explained by cognitive-developmental theories, such as Piaget’s and Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, which emphasise how individuals actively construct their sense of morality rather than simply imitating observed behaviours.
Thus, while SLT provides valuable insights into social and behavioural learning, it does not fully explain the acquisition of complex, abstract beliefs and values, which often require higher-order thinking, social discourse, and personal interpretation rather than direct imitation.
WHAT PROCESSES?
Although Social Learning Theory (SLT) emphasises thought processes more than traditional behaviourist approaches, it does not explain these cognitive mechanisms. Instead, it primarily focuses on observational learning and external influences, leaving the underlying mental processes—such as memory, perception, and decision-making—to be explored by cognitive psychologists.
While SLT acknowledges the role of mediational processes in learning, it does not fully account for how individuals internally process, store, and retrieve information. This limitation highlights the need for an integrated approach, combining social learning and cognitive psychology insights to develop a more comprehensive understanding of behaviour.
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 impacted our understanding of social behaviour and learning.
In the context of SLT, mirror neurons may provide a neurological basis for observational learning—the foundation of Bandura’s theory. When we watch someone else acting, our mirror neurons fire in a way that mirrors their behaviour, as if we were acting ourselves. This mechanism facilitates learning by imitation, reinforcing that people can acquire behaviours simply by observing others.
Beyond learning, mirror neurons are thought to play a key role in empathy. When we see someone experiencing an emotion, such as pain or joy, our mirror neurons respond as if we are feeling the same emotion. This process helps us to connect with others emotionally and understand their experiences, 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 studies on Botox, a cosmetic treatment that paralyses facial muscles to reduce wrinkles. Research suggests that Botox may weaken a person’s ability to mimic facial expressions, reducing the activation of mirror neurons responsible for empathic responses. Since mimicry is a crucial part of how mirror neurons function, individuals unable to replicate expressions physically may experience a reduced emotional ability to connect with others.
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 likened 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, spreading within a group and 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. A more comprehensive and nuanced understanding emerges by integrating insights from SLT, biological psychology, evolutionary theory, and sociocultural influences. 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.
