CHAPTER THIRTEEN Albert Bandura: Modeling Theory LEARNING OBJECTIVES Describe the life of Bandura. Review modeling and the basis of observational learning. Analyze the processes of observational learning. Trace self-reinforcement and self-efficacy. Outline the developmental stages of modeling and self-efficacy. Illustrate behavior modification. Evaluate assessment and research on Bandura’s theory. OUTLINE The Life of Bandura Bandura was born in Canada and attended the University of British Columbia with a major in psychology. He then earned his Ph.D. and started to work in Wichita, Kansas at a guidance center. Bandura joined the faculty at Stanford University where he received many honors for his work while he compiled an extensive record of publications. Modeling: The Basis of Observational Learning Bandura believed in modeling, which is a behavior modification technique that involves a subject observing behavior of others (the models) and subsequently performing the desired behavior. Bandura believed it is possible, through modeling, to acquire responses that we have never performed of displayed previously and to strengthen or weaken existing responses. Bandura used the famous Bobo doll experiments to show how a person, such as a child, will model behaviors shown to them by an adult. The Bobo doll experiments showed how a model (the adult) could cause the research participant (the child) to elicit aggressive behaviors, actions that were not displayed with the same strength by children who had not observed the models. Additional research compared highly aggressive children and children that were more inhibited. When the parents of these two groups were compared, the parents of the inhibited children were inhibited, and the parents of the aggressive children were aggressive. Research has also shown that behaviors a person usually suppresses or inhibits may be performed more readily under the influence of a model. This is called disinhibition, which refers to the weakening of an inhibition or restraint through exposure to a model. The researchers concluded that modeling affects the research participants’ perceptual responses to stimuli, so modeling can determine not only what the research participants do, but also what they look at and perceive. Bandura concluded that much behavior- good and bad, normal and abnormal- is learned by imitating the behavior of other people. Bandura became an outspoken critic of the type of society that provides the wrong models for its children, particularly with violent shows on television and violent movies and video games. His research clearly shows the effects of models on behavior. In Skinner’s system, reinforcers control behavior, but for Bandura, it is the models who control behavior. Bandura investigated three factors found to influence modeling: the characteristics of the models affect our tendency to imitate them, the characteristics or attributes of the observers also determine the effectiveness of observational learning, and the reward consequences associated with the behaviors can affect the extent of the modeling and even override the impact of he models’ and observers’ characteristics. The Process of Observational Learning Bandura analyzed the nature of observational learning and found four governing mechanisms: (A) the attentional process, where we develop our cognitive processes enough to imitate displayed behavior, (B) the retention process where we remember or repeat the behavior at a later time, (C) the production process which translates the mental images or verbal meanings of the model’s behavior into our own behaviors, and (D) the incentive and motivational processes where we perceive that the model’s behavior leads to a reward. This leads to the belief that we will also get a reward when we successfully learn the modeled behavior. According to Bandura, observational learning will not occur unless the subject pays attention to the model. The more closely we pay attention to a model’s behavior, the more likely we are to imitate it. Attention to modeling behavior varies as a function of the observer’s cognitive and perceptual skills and the value of the behavior being modeled. The more highly developed our cognitive abilities are and the more knowledge we have about the behavior being modeled, the more carefully we will attend to the model and perceive their behavior. We retain information about a model’s behavior in two ways: through an imaginal internal representational system or through a verbal system. In other words, we store information about a model’s behavior through mental images or verbal codes made while observing the behavior. These can be summoned at a later date to influence the replication of the behavior. Translating imaginal and verbal symbolic representations into over behavior requires the production processes, described more simply as practice. Practice of these repeated performances and feedback on their accuracy, is needed to produce the smooth performance of behavior. When incentives are available, observation is more quickly translated into action. Incentives also influence the attentional and retention processes. Our incentive to learn is influenced by our anticipation of the reinforcement or punishment for doing so. Reinforcement can assist in modeling, but is not vital. When reinforcement occurs, it can be given by another person, experienced vicariously, or administered by oneself. Self-Reinforcement and Self-Efficacy Self-reinforcement is much like other theorists’ conscious or superego, but Bandura denies they are identical. A continuing process of self-reinforcement regulates much of our behavior. We learn our initial set of internal standards from the behavior of models, typically our parents and teachers. In Bandura’s system, self-efficacy refers to feelings of adequacy, efficiency, and competence in coping with life. Meeting and maintaining our performance standards enhances self-efficacy; failure to meet and maintain them reduces it. People low in self-efficacy feel helpless and unable to exercise control over life events. People who have high self-efficacy believe they can deal effectively with events and situations. Because they expect to succeed in overcoming obstacles, they persevere at tasks and often perform at a high level. According to Bandura, we base our judgment about our self-efficacy on four sources of information: (a) previous success experiences, or performance attainment, provides a direct indication of our level of mastery and competence; (b) having vicarious experiences, which is seeing other people perform successfully, will strengthen self-efficacy; (c) verbal persuasion means reminding people that they possess the ability to achieve whatever they want to achieve, which can enhance self-efficacy; and (d) physiological and emotional arousal can interfere with self-efficacy at high levels. Bandura has helped people enhance self-efficacy in learning to play musical instruments, relate better to persons of the opposite sex, master computer skills, give up cigarette smoking, and conquer phobias and physical pain. Developmental Stages of Modeling and Self-Efficacy According to Bandura, infancy modeling is limited to immediate imitation. The modeled behavior must be repeated several times and must be within the infant’s range of sensorimotor development. By two, children have developed sufficient attentional, retention, and production processes to begin imitating behavior some time after the observation rather than immediately. Parents and teachers influence self-efficacy judgments through their impact on the development of cognitive abilities and problem-solving skills, which are vital to efficient adult functioning. The transitional experiences of adolescence involve coping with new demands and pressures. Bandura noted that the success of this stage typically depends on the level of self-efficacy established during the childhood years. Bandura divided adulthood into two periods: young adulthood and the middle years. Young adulthood involves adjustments such as marriage, parenthood, and career advancement. People with high self-efficacy have successful outcomes of these experiences. The middle years of adulthood are also stressful as people reevaluate their careers and their family and social lives. Self-efficacy becomes difficult in old age. A lowering of self-efficacy can affect physical and mental functioning. To Bandura, self-efficacy is the crucial factor in determining success or failure throughout the entire life span. Behavior Modification Bandura’s goal in developing his social-cognitive theory was to modify or change those learned behaviors that society considers undesirable or abnormal. Bandura applied modeling techniques to eliminate fears and other intense emotional reactions. He used a technique called guided participation which involves watching a live model and then participating with the model. The participants eventually come in contact with what they may fear or avoid. In covert modeling, research participants are instructed to imagine a model coping with a feared or threatening situation; they do not actually see a model. This type of modeling has been used for snake phobias and social inhibitions. Phobias or fears restrict a person’s life where they may have a rapid heartbeat, shortness of breath, and vomiting when confronted with objects, animals, or situations they fear. Relieving these fears expands a person’s environment and increases self-efficacy. Modeling techniques can also be used with groups, saving time and money in treating people with the same problem. Modeling techniques can be helpful with phobias, obsessive compulsive disorders, and sexual dysfunctions, and the positive effects have been reported to last years. The modeling approach can also help with fear of medical treatment. Children were studied for anxiety using direct observation, responses on self-report inventories, and physiological measures. Those children who viewed modeling tapes before hospitalization had fewer problems than the control group. For some college students, test anxiety is so serious that their examination performance does not accurately reflect their knowledge of the material being tested. A model can talk about coping mechanisms to participants and they will perform significantly better. G. Ethical Issues in Behavior Modification Some educators, politicians, and even some psychologists have suggested that behavior modification exploits people, manipulating and controlling them against their will. However, Bandura believed that behavior modification does not occur without the client’s awareness. Bandura emphasized that the client-therapist relationship is a contract between two consenting individuals, not a relationship between a sinister master-controller and a spineless puppet. Many behavior modification techniques have derived from Bandura’s work. They have become increasingly popular alternatives to psychoanalysis and other therapeutic approaches. H. Questions about Human Nature 1. For Bandura, behavior is controlled by the person through the cognitive processes, and by the environment through external social situations. This is called reciprocal determinism. Both people and their environments determine "each other." Later, Bandura introduced the notion of triadic reciprocality, in which three factors - behavior, cognitive processes, and environmental variables - interact. Following Bandura's rules of observational learning, we observe and interpret the potential effects of our actions and determine which behaviors are appropriate for a given situation. Bandura had a viewpoint of self-awareness, self-reinforcement, and other internal forms of the regulation of behavior. He suggests that abnormal behaviors, which are viewed as bad habits, can be changed by behavior modification techniques. Childhood experiences are important to Bandura's theory. Childhood experiences can be unlearned later in life and new performance standards and behaviors established. To Bandura, our ultimate and necessary goal in life is to set realistic performance standards to maintain an adequate level of self-efficacy. Assessment and Research in Bandura’s Theory Like Skinner, Bandura focuses on behavior rather than on internal motivating variables. He did not use assessment measures such as free association, dream analysis, or projective techniques. Assessment of both behavioral and cognitive variables is important in the social learning approach to personality. Bandura favors well-controlled laboratory investigations in the rigorous tradition of experimental psychology. Bandura used large study groups and his research participants display diverse behavioral disorders, such as phobias, alcoholism, fetishism, and sexual dysfunctions. The ages of the research participants range from preschool through adult. In research, self-efficacy differs as a function of gender and age. Men score higher than women in self-efficacy, but this declines in later years. For age, self-efficacy increases through the lifespan and then declines after age 60. People with good physical appearance score high in self-efficacy and there is a significant positive relationship between self-efficacy and academic performance. Career choice and job performance were also linked to self-efficacy studies as with physical well-being and health. In mental health issues, those with low self-efficacy rate high in depression, while enhanced self-efficacy and a sense of control over life events are positively related to the ability to cope with stress and to minimize its harmful effects on biological functioning. A group of people working together in a common enterprise to achieve common goals may develop a sense of collective efficacy. Bandura and many other researchers have demonstrated convincingly that in laboratory situations and the real world, seeing violence begets violence. It does not matter whether the violence is observed on television, in movies, or in our homes, streets, and schools. Studies have frequently found a strong positive correlation between viewed violence and aggressive acts in children and into adulthood. 5. As far as research on Internet self-efficacy, (feelings of confidence in our ability to effectively use the Internet); 8th grade girls from Taiwan ranked higher than boys in self-confidence in communicating online, however, boys were higher in their confidence to explore online. CLASSROOM DISCUSSION TOPICS Lecture Topic 13.1 The instructor may wish to speak about the Bobo Doll study and how the child watched a model doing aggressive movements to the inflatable doll. They also modeled “inhibited” techniques for a child. Have a discussion on whether or not this kind of study can be done with children without breaking the ethical standards of today. If you were to duplicate this study, how would you split the children into control and experimental groups? In performing this behavior modification technique, are the researchers unethical in modeling aggressive behavior for the children to be exposed too? If we used only “inhibited” models, would this study have a different ending? The instructor could give an assignment for groups to write up some ethical rules before the next lecture. The students “rules” and “restrictions” could be compared with APA guidelines for ethical standards with the use of human subjects. Internet sites for Lecture Topic 13.1: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pr0OTCVtHbU http://www.simplypsychology.org/bobo-doll.html Lecture Topic 13.2 The instructor may want to address the issue of aggressive behavior modeling and the media. The instructor could review the concern and exhibit some research that shows how this kind of modeling may very well influence children to be aggressive or more likely to exhibit aggressive behavior. The instructor could use a collection of video games, music, ads from a newspaper, a news report showing violence, a movie, or a television action that contains violent modeling. The instructor could develop a survey to give to students in which they count the number of violent episodes in each of the presented media forms. It could also include a scale with which the student can rate each episode (not violent to extremely violent). The instructor may want to compare the movie and television rating system and then have the students monitor whether or not these rating systems truly reflect restricted viewing. They could make this rating sheet anonymous and each student could rate whether or not they come from a family that exhibited aggression or inhibition. This lecture could easily lead to an assignment for groups or individuals to study different types of media outside the classroom and then make a more formal report in class. Lecture Topic 13.3 How does Bandura’s modeling and behavior modification techniques apply in the classroom today? The instructor may use this question to generate class discussion, or this question could be used as a pop quiz, an online group discussion, or part of an exam. The students may also discuss how Bandura diverges from other theories on personality. STUDENT PROJECTS Student Project 13.1 Students may want to research further the theories of Bandura. Student may want to write a paper on how to behaviorally prepare for stressful classes, exams, and college life, in general. Internet sites for Student Project 13.1 http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-different-types-of-stress-reduction-techniques.htm http://www.melissainstitute.org/documents/stress_inoculation.pdf Child Development, May-June 2003 v74 i3 p769 (14) Role of affective self-regulatory efficacy in diverse spheres of psychosocial functioning. (Empirical Articles). Albert Bandura; Gian Vittorio Caprara; Claudio Barbaranelli; Maria Gerbino; Concetta Pastorelli. Record number A102791824 Annual Review of Psychology, Annual 2001 p1 SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY: An Agentic Perspective. Albert Bandura. Record number A73232700 Student Project 13.2 The following web site will provide the student with resources to further research the theories of Bandura, modeling, and his viewpoint on behavior modification. Student may wish to create their own modeling situation, such as observing the behavior of their siblings before and after they play various video games which may be non-aggressive or aggressive in content. Internet site for Student Project 13.2 http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/bandura.html Student Project 13.3 The issue of self-efficacy can be interchangeable with self-esteem and/or self-concept. Students may desire to research into the specifics of Bandura’s self-efficacy as they compare and contrast self-esteem and self-concept in an opinion paper on the subject. Internet site for Student Project 13.3 http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/self-efficacy.html CHAPTER FOURTEEN Mini-Theories LEARNING OBJECTIVES Review Julian Rotter’s locus of control. Outline Marvin Zuckerman’s sensation seeking. Summarize Martin E. P. Seligman’s learned helplessness. Evaluate Martin E. P. Seligman’s positive psychology. OUTLINE Locus of Control, Sensation Seeking, Learned Helplessness, Optimism/ Pessimism, Positive Psychology, and Happiness and Success Julian Rotter: Locus of Control Rotter became a social-learning theorist, who sought explanation for behavior and personality outside and inside the organism. In his research, Rotter found that some people believe that their reinforcers depend on their own actions whereas other people believe that their reinforcers are controlled by other people and outside forces. Rotter called this concept locus of control. A person who is self-controlled is considered as having internal locus of control, while a person who thinks that other people, fate, or forces beyond their control has an external locus of control. Rotter developed self-report inventories to assess locus of control, with a scale to measure Internal-External (I-E) beliefs. There are self-report instruments for this type of scale for adults, children, and even pre-school children. Research variants cover locus of control and its relationship with factors such as successful dieting and weight loss. Studies have shown that girls score significantly higher than boys on internal locus of control, while internal control increases as we grow older and reaches its peak in middle age. Test performances of lower social classes and minority groups showed an external locus of control. When African groups were compared with American groups, the Africans scored higher in external locus of control than Americans. Asians also tended to be higher in external locus of control, which may be linked to their cultural influences. Internally oriented people daydream more about achievement and have fewer dreams about failure. This group of people acquires and processes more information in different situations, experiences greater personal choice, and is more popular. Internally oriented people cope better with stress, have less anxiety and depression, and are less likely to commit suicide. Internally oriented people may be physically healthier than externally controlled people. One study found four aspects of locus of control as it relates to physical health: self-mastery, illness prevention, illness management, and self-blame; with self-mastery most closely associated with physical well-being. Locus of control is developed and learned in early childhood and is related to parental behavior. The research shows that children reared by single mothers are more likely to have external locus of control, while parents who possessed an internal locus of control were more supportive, quicker to offer praise, and consistent in their discipline. As adults, the children of these parents continue to develop an internal orientation. Research has been found that suggests locus of control can be generalized over many situations, whereas Bandura’s concept of self-efficacy tends to be more specific to a particular situation. Studies have continued to give Rotter’s theories considerable empirical support and locus of control has become one of the most studied variables in psychology. Marvin Zuckerman: Sensation Seeking In the 1970s, Marvin Zuckerman conducted research on personality called sensation seeking. He described this trait in people by a desire for the sensational, to have intense sensations and experiences, and the willingness to take a physical, social, legal, or financial risk for the sake of having the experience. Zuckerman created a method to measure this trait called the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS), a 40 page paper-and-pencil questionnaire. When Zuckerman was developing the test, he administered it to those who fit his definition of sensation seekers; for example, those whose jobs involve physical danger, like firefighters or policemen. He then compared these results with those from people who chose to avoid novel or risky activities. Zuckerman identified four components using factor analysis to identify sensation seeking. They are, thrill and adventure seeking, experience seeking, disinhibition, and boredom susceptibility. Research shows that high sensation seekers were more likely than low sensation seekers to experiment with illicit drugs, alcohol use, marijuana use, as well as the behaviors of drug selling and shoplifting. The high sensation seekers were more likely to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, drive fast, have more car accidents and convictions for reckless or drunken driving, and engage in frequent sex, according to a study of groups in the United States. Physical risk-taking behavior has been related to sensation seeking. Other research suggests that those who are seen as antisocial risk takers or as adventurous risk-takers scored high on sensation seeking even over those who took risks for a living, such as firemen and policemen. High sensation seekers do not relate to other people in a dependent or nurturing way. However, high sensation seeking was not correlated with abnormal or neurotic behavior. Those low in this scale may have neuroses such as phobias and obsessive-compulsive behaviors. High scorers openly express their emotions and act independently of social conventions and other people’s needs and attitudes. High sensation seekers were found to recognize symbols and figures more quickly and preferred greater visual stimulation than did low sensation seekers. However, tests of creativity and originality revealed that high sensation seekers have a greater capacity for original thinking, but do not always express it in their schoolwork. Zuckerman suggested that because high sensation seekers continually search for novel experiences, if they cannot find them in external situations they look inward and create a fantasy world. High sensation seekers prefer stimulating and varied experiences and scored high in scientific interests and negatively with clerical interests. The high sensation seekers of both sexes preferred risky, cutting-edge jobs such as crisis intervention work or paramedic duty on emergency response teams. Studies of twin comparisons show a strong hereditary basis for a sensation-seeking personality factor; however Zuckerman recognized the influence of situational or environmental factors. Scores of first-borns and only-borns rate high in sensation seeking. This may be the fact that first-borns and only-borns may receive greater stimulation and attention from parents at an early age. Sensation-seeking theory is easy to accept in that people tend to differ in their need for excitement and risk, change and adventure. Martin E. P. Seligman: Learned Helplessness and the Optimistic/Pessimistic Explanatory Style. Seligman began research in the mid-1960’s on a limited-domain aspect of personality he calls learned helplessness. Seligman observed this phenomenon in the laboratory with dogs. Using aversive high pitched sounds with electric shock, he conditioned the dogs. However, when he did the experiment where the dogs had to jump a low wall to avoid the shock, the dogs did not cross to escape the shock. The dogs lay down, whimpered, and made no effort to escape. The dogs were conditioned to the first shock of the experiment and may not have jumped the barrier because they sensed they would be shocked anyway. This learned reaction probably generalized to the second part of the experiment, even though a means of escape was available. Seligman demonstrated learned helplessness in not only dogs, but with people. The experimental participants of the study were given some loud tones in which they were to press a series of buttons in the correct order to stop the tones. However, there was no correct sequence that they could push to stop the loud tones. In the control group, there was a relatively easy sequence to follow to turn off the tones. In the next experiment, both groups were placed in a situation where they could learn a new sequence with their hands to turn off the tones. The control group rapidly learned the sequence but the experimental research participants sat passively, making no effort to turn off the irritating noise. Learned helplessness effects have been found in adult men and women, college students, adolescents, children, elderly persons, and patients in psychiatric hospitals. Learned helplessness has been observed in the elderly. A study of elderly residents in a nursing home who were given more freedom and more choices to run their daily lives were happier and more physically active than those residents who had no personal influence or responsibility over their daily lives. Even after 18 months, the differences persisted. There have been widespread findings on the beneficial effects of having control over one’s life in marital satisfaction, personal adjustment, and increased feelings of being in control of their lives. Seligman and his associates studied rats with tumors. They conditioned some of the rats for learned helplessness and other rats for some measure of control over their own behavior. The rats that had some level of control had better rates of survival from the tumors. Learned helplessness was also shown to weaken the rat’s immune system. These findings may provide a physiological explanation for the result that the helpless rats were unable to reject their tumor. Explanatory style is a way of explaining to ourselves our relative lack of control over our environment. An optimistic explanatory style prevents helplessness, while a pessimistic explanatory style spreads helplessness to all facets of life. According to Seligman, people who are optimistic tend to be healthier, where pessimists tend to believe that their actions are of little consequence. Findings of research also show that optimists live longer than pessimists. An optimistic style is helpful in coping with AIDS, because the person feels more in control of their life. However, an optimist may believe that they may not get AIDS because of their attitudes about life. This belief system may not keep them from having this disease, but this optimistic thinking may help patients cope better and minimize depression over a major illness, such as AIDS. Optimism has been found with intensity of one’s own religious beliefs. Fundamentalists scored higher on measures of optimism and had “more hopefulness and less hopelessness.” American research participants had higher scores of optimism than their Asian counterparts. Americans could predict that positive things would happen to themselves, while Asians predicted positive things would happen to other people. Those scoring high in optimism have less stress and depression, and in student populations, earn better grades. Optimism may affect our cognitive functioning. Optimists may have unrealistic views about their invulnerability to the effects of their behavior. However, when facing adversity like a serious illness, the pessimist may tell themselves they will not be able to cope or overcome the situation. Seligman’s research found several similarities between the symptoms of depression and the characteristics of learned helplessness. Depression is associated with poor health and puts people at risk for physical illness by reducing the effectiveness of the immune system, suppressing NK cell activity, and altering white blood cell count. Seligman’s research supports his hypothesis that learned helplessness leads to depression in people with a pessimistic explanatory style. According to Seligman, some people appear to give up, become depressed, and experience health problems, while others, facing similar circumstances, recover over a period of time. Seligman proposed a cognitive explanation for these differences, a revised concept of learned helplessness called the attribution model. Attribution suggests we attribute our failures to our lack of control over ourselves. Pessimists attribute failure to internal, stable, and global causes whereas optimists attribute failure to external, unstable, and specific causes. If you can’t change the cause of your failure, it is stable, while if you make a global attribution, you are saying that whatever caused you to fail that course is likely to cause you to fail in other courses. Overall, researchers concluded that the pessimists responded to negative events and problems passively and made few attempts to alter their circumstances. Seligman believed we are more vulnerable to feelings of learned helplessness in infancy and early childhood. Infants begin in total helplessness, but mature to cry for their needs and to exercise control. A child will have numerous interactions with helplessness and their ability to control and overcome these feelings. If they do not have successful outcomes, there may be an increase in overall feelings of learned helplessness. Learned helplessness can be learned later in childhood by brutality by peers, a harsh school environment, or other negative experiences. Other factors, such as race or poverty or how a student is treated as less intelligent or less skilled can lead to learned helplessness. Positive Psychology Positive psychology deals with happiness, excellence, and optimal human functioning. Psychologists have labeled the happy personality in terms such as subjective well-being or life satisfaction and define it as the cognitive evaluation of the quality of one’s own life experience and the possession of positive affect. Research shows that an adequate income to fund basic needs is a necessary, though not sufficient prerequisite for happiness. Health appears to be a necessary but not sufficient condition for subjective well-being. In research, there is a strong positive relationship between life satisfaction and an orientation toward the future. Also, studies show that subjective well-being does not decline with age. The elderly who had stronger social networks and supportive friends reported higher levels of happiness than those who were more socially isolated. Married people report higher levels of happiness than people who are divorced, separated, widowed, or who have never married. Those people who had experienced discrimination reported lower levels of life satisfaction than those who had experienced no discrimination. There has been research done on the personality correlates of the happy personality, particularly with the Big Five Factors and with Eysenck’s three personality factors. In several studies in different countries, the researchers found that low neuroticism and high extraversion correlated significantly with national levels of subjective well-being. Self-efficacy and internal locus of control are positively related to life satisfaction. A meta-analysis which includes six variables associated with the happy personality was done with over 148 studies and 42,000 research participants. The findings show (a) if a person does not deny that negative experiences can happen to them, they will have a higher score in their subjective well-being; (b) people who score high in trust report greater life satisfaction; (c) those who have an internal locus of control score high in well-being. A person, who is (d) hardy, tends to minimize the effects of stressful events by adapting to and evaluating them in optimistic terms, while a person who rates high in emotional stability, positive affect and self-esteem scores high in subjective well-being. Two large studies found significant differences in the ways in which happy and unhappy people perceive, judge, or construe events in their lives. E. Comment 1. When studying a group of college students, Seligman and a colleague found that some students were identified as happy, others as unhappy. The happier students were more extroverted and agreeable, less neurotic, and more social than were the unhappier students. Happier students were highly satisfied with their lives and experienced more positive emotions daily than negative ones. His research has shown that the pursuit of meaning and engagement were much more strongly correlated with happiness than the pursuit of pleasure. Coursework on positive psychology is now offered at many colleges, and dozens of books and hundreds of journal articles exist on the subject. In less than a decade, positive psychology has come to be a vital approach to the study of personality. LECTURE TOPICS Lecture Topic 14.1 The instructor may wish to lecture on Rotter’s internal versus external locus of control and compare this theory with Freud’s superego and the id. The struggle between the superego and the id could very well serve as a basis for Rotter’s locus of control. Divide the students in the class in half, if manageable; and have one half of the students construct an example of a fictitious person who is struggling between the control factors of the id and the superego. The other half of the students would construct a fictitious person struggling with the issues of internal and external locus of control. The outcome of this lecture and exercise will be to compare, contrast, and analyze the psychoanalytic dimensions and Rotter’s assessment of the personality. Lecture Topic 14.2 With this topic, the instructor may desire to compare and contrast Eysenck’s conceptualization of introversion and extroversion to that of Jung AND Rotter’s internal versus external locus of control theory. Have the students formulate opinions through group discussion and further full class discussions on the similarities and contrasts of the three theorists presented. Internet sites for Lecture Topic 14.2: http://www.trans4mind.com/personality/EPQ.html http://philosophy.lander.edu/ethics/jung.html http://wilderdom.com/psychology/loc/LocusOfControlWhatIs.html STUDENT PROJECTS Student Project 14.1 Have groups of students create a poster, a PowerPoint demonstration, or a video tape simulation of how Rotter’s locus of control becomes an issue in an adolescent. The students could use the mediums listed above to demonstrate the internal and external control factors that the adolescent might struggle to resolve. How much internal locus of control can an adolescent have over their own life, considering the many externally controlling factors that parents or society may impose? The students could follow the adolescent through a dilemma of being internally controlled and allowing the external controls to be applied to their lives. What would be the outcome for this adolescent? Another twist to this project is to apply Zuckerman’s ideas about sensation seeking. Does this adolescent have a sensation seeking personality and how do these characteristics affect their lives in comparison to Rotter’s theories? Internet sites for Student Project 14.1: http://wilderdom.com/psychology/loc/Measures.html http://wsm.wsu.edu/s/we.php?id=200 Student Project 14.2 Many students struggle with an eating disorder. This problem could be framed in the context of Rotter’s internal and external locus of control factors. Students could develop internal locus of control reinforcement strategies for a person struggling with an eating disorder. Is this person internally controlling themselves or are external controls creating the environment for this eating disorder to thrive? Is the ‘control’ they are using over their body really “internal” or being controlled by “external” controls, such as getting back at her parents in a covert manner by having an eating disorder, rather than displaying overt aggression? Internet Site for Student Project 14.2: http://www.workhealth.org/risk/rfblocus.html Student Project 14.3 Have students consider how Rotter’s locus of control theory can come into play with regards to education. This can generate a discussion about their own approach to schoolwork, and how a particular locus of control can lead to different reactions to success and failure. Find some resources below. High School Journal, Oct-Nov 2003 v87 i1 p39 (12) Effects of locus of control on African American high school seniors' educational aspirations: implications for preservice and inservice high school teachers and counselors. Lamont A. Flowers; H. Richard Milner; James L. Moore III. Record number A111012065 Education, Spring 2003 v123 i3 p548 (5) Locus of control and at-risk youth: a comparison of regular education high school students and students in alternative schools. Christi Allen Miller; Trey Fitch; Jennifer L. Marshall. Record number A100806945 Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, March 2003 v74 i1 pA-13(1) Relations of physical fitness, body image, locus of control, depression, and self-reported exercise in college women and men. (Health). Daniel D. Adame; Sally A. Radell; Thomas C. Johnson; Stephen P. Cole. Record number A99492632 Student Project 14.4 The following are Web Links for further student research. Students could design their own survey for sensation seeking, locus of control or learned helplessness by Seligman. The student could write a paper comparing their family of origin and whether or not they had issues of internal or external locus of control in the area of parenting practices. Internet sites for Student Project 14.4: http://psych.fullerton.edu/jmearns/rotter.htm http://shamimkhaliq.50megs.com/Psychology/Personality/rotter.htm http://allpsych.com/personalitysynopsis/learned_helplessness.html PERSONALITY IN PERSPECTIVE LEARNING OBJECTIVES Describe the genetic factor. Analyze the environmental factor. Define the learning factor. Illustrate the parental factor. Describe the developmental factor. Summarize the conscious and unconscious factors. OUTLINE Personality in Perspective The Genetic Factor There is strong evidence in research that many personality traits or dimensions are inherited. However, we can’t explain personality fully and totally by heredity. Whether our genetic predispositions are ever realized depends on social and environmental conditions, particularly those of childhood. The Environmental Factor Each personality theorist in this text has discussed the importance of the social environment. Adler spoke about the importance of a person’s birth order and their position in the family, while Horney believed that the culture and time period in which we are reared shows its effects. She spoke of female inferiority developing from a male-dominated culture. Fromm looked to the influence of past history which he believed shapes different personalities or character types appropriate to the needs of that era. Allport and Cattell, who were trait theorists, agreed on the importance of the environment. Allport believed genetics were the basis of personality and that social environment added onto it. Erikson’s eight stages of psychosocial development are innate, but the environment determines the ways in which those genetically based stages are realized. Maslow and Rogers recognized self-actualization as innate but believed that environmental factors could inhibit or promote the self-actualization need. The time and place where you are born can influence your personality, such as a study showing those born in the 1980s as a group of people having substantially higher anxiety and neuroticism than people in other time periods. Our jobs can influence personality. Those in high-status jobs have higher levels of positive emotionality and lower levels of negative emotionality. Ethnic background and whether you are part of a minority or a majority culture affects such variables as sensation seeking, locus of control, and the need for achievement. The Learning Factor Learning plays a major role in influencing almost every aspect of behavior. Skinner taught learning variables in shaping what others call personality, but which he described as simply an accumulation of learned responses. Bandura believed in models (observational learning) and learning through vicarious reinforcement. Research has documented that learning will influence self-efficacy (Bandura), locus of control (Rotter), learned helplessness, and optimism versus pessimism (Seligman). The Parental Factor Most theorists have included parental influences on the formation of personality. Adler focused on a child feeling loved or rejected by his or her parents, while Horney wrote from her own experience about how a lack of parental warmth and affection can undermine a child’s security and result in feelings of helplessness. Fromm believed the more independent a child is from the primary tie with the parents, the more insecure that child becomes. Allport considered the infant’s relationship with the mother as the primary source of affection and security, while Cattell saw infancy as the major formative period, with the behavior of parents and siblings shaping the child’s character. Maslow believed the parents need to provide safety and physiological needs in the first two years of life, while Rogers spoke of parents’ supplying unconditional positive regard to their children. Parents can be examples for their children and this can determine specific aspects of personality, such as the need for achievement, self-efficacy, locus of control, and learned helplessness or optimism. Parental behaviors influence sensation seeking, and uncaring parents can stifle emerging traits such as extraversion, sociability, agreeableness, and openness to experience. There is evidence that the type or style of parenting can influence personality and that praise can promote a child’s sense of autonomy, realistic standards and expectations, competence, and self-efficacy. The Developmental Factor Research suggests that our basic foundation of enduring personality dispositions remains stable over many years. However, some research has shown that we are not “fixed” at a certain age in terms of changing our personalities. A theorist that believes more in genetics may suggest that change is independent of environmental factors. Other theorists believe in environmental and social influences and in the adaptations we make to them. Changes in jobs, cultural, and personal challenges have an impact on personality. McAdams suggested that personality can be described on three levels: (A) dispositional traits, which are inherited traits that remain stable and relatively unchanged from about 30 on, (B) personal concerns that refer to conscious feelings, plans, and goals, and (C) life narratives, which involve shaping the self, attaining an identity, and finding a unified purpose in life. The Conscious and Unconscious Factors Almost every theory in this text has described conscious (cognitive) processes. Freud and Jung focused on the unconscious but still addressed the ego or conscious mind that perceives, thinks, feels, and remembers, enabling us to interact with the real world. Allport believed those who were not neurotic would function in a conscious, rational way, while Kelly argued that as we form constructs about our environment and other people, we make predictions about them based on these constructs. Bandura believed that people have the ability to learn through example and vicarious reinforcement. There is widespread agreement that consciousness is an influence on personality. Freud introduced the notion that thoughts and memories are repressed in the unconscious, and that repression may operate at the unconscious level. Contemporary researchers focus on unconscious cognitive processes and describe them as more rational than emotional. The rational unconscious is often referred to as the nonconscious, to distinguish it from Freud’s unconscious. Studies have shown that the unconscious may have both a rational and an emotional component. The unconscious remains an ongoing topic in psychology, today. LECTURE TOPICS Lecture Topic 15.1 The instructor may want to lecture on the various factors that influence personality development. The students could respond by developing a fictitious person who is influenced by these various factors. Each group of students could take a factor, such as the Learning Factor and perceive how this factor may influence a person across the life span. Each group of students should regard their factor as the most influential of them all in personality development for the assignment. This lecture could also be done as a debate between different groups and the factors they have chosen. Does the Learning Factor overlap into other influencing factors? Does each group believe in the genetic factor influencing personality across the age span? How much does culture play a factor later on in life compared to parenting? Are we “fixed” at birth or at five years of age in our personality, or do we have enough evidence showing that change takes place across the life span? STUDENT PROJECTS Student Project 15.1 Students may want to research the different factors that seem to influence personality for a debate, a research paper or for further group or class discussion. The students may want to concentrate on a specific factor that they believe contributes most to influencing the personality, such as the genetic or learning factor. Does the parenting factor play a role in a person’s personality later on in life? These factors may be customized around a particular personality theory, such as trait theory. The student could ask whether each of these factors could be influential in the theory of behaviorism, humanism, or in individual personality development. Internet site for Student Project 15.1: http://pages.uoregon.edu/sanjay/bigfive.html Instructor Manual for Theories of Personality Duane P. Schultz , Sydney Ellen Schultz 9781111834531
Download
Close
Close
