Social Cognitive Theory*

Originator of Theory: Albert Bandura, Ph.D. Bandura obtained his Ph.D. from the University of Iowa in 1952. In 1953, Bandura was offered a position at tandford University, and he is sti!! there on fa"u!ty today. Approximate Year of Origin: #he o"ia! $o%nitive #heory & $#' stemmed from the o"ia! (earnin% #heory & (#', whi"h has a ri"h histori"a! ba")%round datin% ba") to the !ate 1*++,s. -!bert Bandura first be%an pub!ishin% his wor) on (# in the ear!y 19.+,s. In 19*., Bandura offi"ia!!y !aun"hed the $# with his boo) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Circumstances that led to the development of the Theory: #he $# has its ori%ins in the dis"ip!ine of psy"ho!o%y, with its ear!y foundation bein% !aid by behaviora! and so"ia! psy"ho!o%ists. #he (# evo!ved under the umbre!!a of behaviorism, whi"h is a "!uster of psy"ho!o%i"a! theories intended to e/p!ain why peop!e and anima!s behave the way that they do. Behaviorism, introdu"ed by 0ohn 1atson in 1913, too) an e/treme!y me"hanisti" approa"h to understandin% human behavior. -""ordin% to 1atson, behavior "ou!d be e/p!ained in terms of observable a"ts that "ou!d be des"ribed by stimu!us2response se3uen"es &$rosbie2Brunett and (ewis, 19934 #homas, 199+'. -!so "entra! to behaviorist study was the notion that "onti%uity between stimu!us and response determined the !i)e!ihood that !earnin% wou!d o""ur. in"e this time, the stimu!us2response pathway has been a point of debate amon% behaviorists. #his debate stems over whether there e/ists some mediatin% fa"tor between stimu!us and response that re%u!ates behavior. 5pinions on this have been divided over whether behavior is primari!y %overned "onse3uent!y 2 by rewards or punishments, or ante"edent!y 2 throu%h feedba"). 6arious mediatin% variab!es have been proposed throu%hout the history of behaviorism, in"!udin% 1i!!iam 0ames, habit &!ater adopted by 1atson', 7reud,s instin"t, and #o!man,s "o%nitions &1oodward,19*2'. o"ia! psy"ho!o%ists a!so made important "ontributions to the deve!opment of the (# &$rosbie2 Brunett and (ewis, 1993'. #he ear!iest "ontribution to !earnin% theory was from 1i!!iam 0ames in 1*9+, whose notion of the ,so"ia! se!f, !aid the foundation for the modern (# tenet of the intera"tion between persona! fa"tors and the environment. #his wor) was further deve!oped by the wor) of 8urt (ewin &1*9+2199:', who e/tended ;esta!tist,s fie!d theory by initiatin% a shift in psy"ho!o%y from a fo"us on the individua! to a fo"us on pro"esses between individua!s &$rosbie2Brunett and (ewis, 1993'. Persona!ity theorist -!fred -d!er &1*:+2193:' introdu"ed severa! "on"epts that are uphe!d in the present day (#. -d!er posited that a person,s behavior is purposefu! and motivated by a pursuit of %oa!s. <oreover, he emphasi=ed the importan"e of one,s per"eption of, and attitude toward, the environment as si%nifi"ant inf!uen"es on behavior. In addition, his view that a person,s thou%hts, fee!in%s, and behaviors are transa"tions with one,s physi"a! and so"ia! surroundin%s is a pre"ursor to re"ipro"a! determinism &$rosbie2Brunett and (ewis, 1993'.

In the 193+,s, #o!man promoted the idea that unobservab!e variab!es &or "o%nitions' p!ayed a mediatin% ro!e between stimu!us and response &#o!man, 1932' and introdu"ed the term e/pe"tan"y. #hus, with the introdu"tion of "o%nitions as a drivin% for"e behind behavior, "ombined with the important ro!e of the environment, the three domains of the (# were arti"u!ated at this time. >owever, it was not unti! the 195+,s that a!! three domains were inte%rated into a "omprehensive (#. #he o"ia! (earnin% #heory & (#' was offi"ia!!y !aun"hed in 1991 with <i!!er and Do!!ard,s pub!i"ation of Social Learning and Imitation . #heir (# in"orporated the prin"ip!es of !earnin%? reinfor"ement, punishment, e/tin"tion, and imitation of mode!s. #heir boo) was written to e/p!ain how anima!s and humans mode! observed behaviors, whi"h then be"ame !earned throu%h environmenta! reinfor"ements. In addition, a""ordin% to <i!!er and Do!!ard, human behavior was motivated by drives, and one or%anism,s responses "ou!d serve as stimu!i for other or%anisms. #his wor) e/panded on the re"ipro"a! re!ationship between environment and behavior, whi!e in"orporatin% the be%innin%s of an interna! mediatin% variab!e &in this "ase, drives' into the mode!. 7rom <i!!er and Do!!ard,s wor) "ame a f!ood of different versions of (#. ubse3uent wor) in the behaviorist fie!d "han%ed from a fo"us on the deve!opment of theoreti"a! mode!s, to an emphasis on "ondu"tin% empiri"a! studies &1oodward, 19*2'. Overview of the Current SLT erspective: $urrent!y there e/ists a subset of theories that are based on so"ia! !earnin% prin"ip!es and p!a"e an emphasis on "o%nitive variab!es. 1hereas stri"t behaviorism supports a dire"t and unidire"tiona! pathway between stimu!us and response, representin% human behavior as a simp!e rea"tion to e/terna! stimu!i, the (# asserts that there is a mediator &human "o%nition' between stimu!us and response, p!a"in% individua! "ontro! over behaviora! responses to stimu!i. 1hi!e there are severa! versions of the (# to whi"h resear"hers "urrent!y subs"ribe, they a!! share three basi" tenets &1oodward, 19*24 0ones, 19*94 Perry et.a!., 199+4 #homas, 199+4 $rosbie2Brunett and (ewis, 1993'. Tenet 1: @esponse "onse3uen"es &su"h as rewards or punishments' inf!uen"e the !i)e!ihood that a person wi!! perform a parti"u!ar behavior a%ain in a %iven situation. Aote that this prin"ip!e is a!so shared by "!assi"a! behaviorists. Tenet 2: >umans "an !earn by observin% others, in addition to !earnin% by parti"ipatin% in an a"t persona!!y. (earnin% by observin% others is "a!!ed vi"arious !earnin%. #he "on"ept of vi"arious !earnin% is not one that wou!d be subs"ribed to by "!assi"a! behaviorists. Tenet 3: Individua!s are most !i)e!y to mode! behavior observed by others they identify with. Identifi"ation with others is a fun"tion of the de%ree to whi"h a person is per"eived to be simi!ar to one,s se!f, in addition to the de%ree of emotiona! atta"hment that is fe!t toward an individua!. erspectives of redominant SLT Theorists: #hese three tenets are represented throu%hout the wor) of severa! prominent (# theorists, in"!udin% @otter, ears, <is"he!, -)ers, and Bandura. Julian Rotter 0u!ian @otter fo"used on the app!i"ation of (# to "!ini"a! psy"ho!o%y &@otter, 1959'. he introdu"ed the ideas of !earnin% from %enera!i=ed e/pe"tan"ies of reinfor"ement and interna!B e/terna! !o"us of "ontro! &se!f2initiated "han%e versus "han%e inf!uen"ed by others'. -""ordin% to @otter, hea!th out"omes "ou!d be improved by the deve!opment of a sense of

persona! "ontro! over one,s !ife. #his wor) initiated a "as"ade of resear"h and theory on "ontro! and its app!i"ation to behavior &@otter, 199+41992'. Robert Sears fo"used on the app!i"ation of the (# to so"ia!i=ation pro"esses, and afforded mu"h effort on deve!opin% a theory of how "hi!dren interna!i=e the va!ues, attitudes, and behavior predominant in their "u!ture &;ruse", 1992'. pe"ifi"a!!y, he arti"u!ated the p!a"e of parents in fosterin% interna!i=ation. In addition, he was amon% the first so"ia! !earnin% theorists to offi"ia!!y a")now!ed%e the re"ipro"a! intera"tion on an individua!,s behavior and their environment & ears, 195141953419.5'. In addition, ears a")now!ed%ed that observationa! !earnin% o""urs ear!y in !ife & ears, 19.5'. Walter Mischel <is"he! has made si%nifi"ant "ontributions to the deve!opment of "o%nitive "onstru"ts in the (# &<is"he!, 19.*419:3419:9'. In parti"u!ar, <is"he! has deve!oped a positive pro%ram for the study of person variab!es, whi!e endorsin% a wide ran%e of (# "on"epts 2 su"h as "ompeten"ies, en"odin% strate%ies, e/pe"tan"ies, in"entives, and se!f2re%u!atory systems. In addition, <is"he!,s wor) has fo"used on observationa! !earnin% and mode!in% and emphasi=ed the intera"tion of person and situation. <is"he! is perhaps best )nown for his "o%nitive so"ia! !earnin% mode! of persona!ity that fo"uses on the spe"ifi" "o%nitive variab!es that mediate the manner in whi"h new e/perien"es affe"t the individua!. Ronald A ers -)ers, (# inte%rates the differentia! asso"iation theory of uther!and with the !earnin% of operant "onditionin% & )inner' and observationa! !earnin% &Bandura'. In his theory, -)ers proposes that so"ia! behavior is shaped by a number of pro"esses, in"!udin% differentia! asso"iation, differentia! reinfor"ement, and "o%nitive definitions &-)ers et.a!., 19:94 -)ers 19*5419*94199.4 -)ers and (ee, 199.'. -)ers proposed that the same pro"esses invo!ved in !earnin% and "onformin% behavior are invo!ved in !earnin% deviant behavior. >is theory has been app!ied to a ran%e of deviant and "rimina! behaviors. Albert Bandura Bandura has !ed the efforts on "o%nitive (# deve!opment &Bandura and 1a!ters, 19.34 Bandura, 19::a419:*419*.419*9'. Bandura,s (# p!a"es a heavy fo"us on "o%nitive "on"epts. >is theory fo"uses on how "hi!dren and adu!ts operate "o%nitive!y on their so"ia! e/perien"es and how these "o%nitions then inf!uen"e behavior and deve!opment. >is theory was the first to in"orporate the notion of mode!in%, or vi"arious !earnin%, as a form of so"ia! !earnin%. In addition, Bandura a!so introdu"ed severa! other important "on"epts, in"!udin% re"ipro"a! determinism, se!f2effi"a"y, and the idea that there "an be a si%nifi"ant tempora! variation in time !apse between "ause and effe"t. In 19*., Bandura renamed his (#, o"ia! $o%nitive #heory & $#', as better des"ription of what he had been advo"atin% sin"e the 19.+,s &Bandura, 19*.'. #his name "han%e was a!so !i)e!y the resu!t of an effort to further distan"e himse!f and his theory from the behaviorist approa"h. Bandura,s wor) has stimu!ated an enormous amount of resear"h on !earnin% and behavior, and has been e/treme!y fruitfu! in deve!opin% te"hni3ues for promotin% behavior "han%e. In addition, his more re"ent wor) has been redire"ted from deve!opmenta! psy"ho!o%y to the fie!d of hea!th psy"ho!o%y. - !iterature review of (# app!i"ations in pub!i" hea!th revea!ed that Bandura,s (# was the version most "ommon!y used. <oreover, his theory is "hara"teri=ed by a broader and

more %enera!i=ed s"ope than other (# versions. 7or e/amp!e, -)ers, narrowed fo"us on some of the prominent "on"epts from Bandura,s (#.

(# in"orporates a

urpose of Theory: #o understand and predi"t individua! and %roup behavior #o identify methods in whi"h behavior "an be modified or "han%ed. 7re3uent!y used in interventions aimed at persona!ity deve!opment, behavior patho!o%y, and hea!th promotion Overview of the Social Cognitive Theory: #he $# defines human behavior as a triadi", dynami", and re"ipro"a! intera"tion of persona! fa"tors, behavior, and the environment &Bandura, 19::a419*.419*9'. -""ordin% to this theory, an individua!,s behavior is uni3ue!y determined by ea"h of these three fa"tors. 1hi!e the $# upho!ds the behaviorist notion that response "onse3uen"es mediate behavior, it "ontends that behavior is !ar%e!y re%u!ated ante"edent!y throu%h "o%nitive pro"esses. #herefore, response "onse3uen"es of a behavior are used to form e/pe"tations of behaviora! out"omes. It is the abi!ity to form these e/pe"tations that %ive humans the "apabi!ity to predi"t the out"omes of their behavior, before the behavior is performed. In addition, the $# posits that most behavior is !earned vi"arious!y. #he $# ,s stron% emphasis on one,s "o%nitions su%%ests that the mind is an a"tive for"e that "onstru"ts one,s rea!ity, se!e"tive!y en"odes information, performs behavior on the basis of va!ues and e/pe"tations, and imposes stru"ture on its own a"tions &0ones, 19*9'. #hrou%h feedba") and re"ipro"ity, a person,s own rea!ity is formed by the intera"tion of the environment and one,s "o%nitions. In addition, "o%nitions "han%e over time as a fun"tion of maturation and e/perien"e &i.e. attention span, memory, abi!ity to form symbo!s, reasonin% s)i!!s'. It is throu%h an understandin% of the pro"esses invo!ved in one,s "onstru"tion of rea!ity that enab!es human behavior to be understood, predi"ted, and "han%ed. !ey Constructs: "eciprocal #eterminism: #he $# e/p!ains behavior in terms of a triadi", dynami" and re"ipro"a! intera"tion of the environment, persona! fa"tors, and behavior. >owever, this re"ipro"a! intera"tion does not imp!y that a!! sour"es of inf!uen"e are of e3ua! stren%th. #he $# re"o%ni=es that some sour"es of inf!uen"e are stron%er than others and that they do not a!! o""ur simu!taneous!y. In fa"t, the intera"tion between the three fa"tors wi!! differ based on the individua!, the parti"u!ar behavior bein% e/amined, and the spe"ifi" situation in whi"h the behavior o""urs &Bandura, 19*9'. #hus, this mode! of "ausation as proposed by the $# is e/treme!y "omp!e/. #he person2behavior intera"tion invo!ves the bi2dire"tiona! inf!uen"es of one,s thou%hts, emotions, and bio!o%i"a! properties and one,s a"tions &Bandura, 19::a419*.419*9'. 7or e/amp!e, a person,s e/pe"tations, be!iefs, se!f2per"eptions, %oa!s, and intentions %ive shape and dire"tion to behavior. >owever, the behavior that is "arried out wi!! then affe"t one,s thou%hts and emotions. #he $# a!so a""ounts for bio!o%i"a! persona! fa"tors, su"h as se/, ethni"ity, temperament, and %eneti" predisposition and the inf!uen"es they have on behavior.

- bi2dire"tiona! intera"tion a!so o""urs between the environment and persona! "hara"teristi"s &Bandura, 19::a419*.419*9'. In this pro"ess, human e/pe"tations, be!iefs, and "o%nitive "ompeten"ies are deve!oped and modified by so"ia! inf!uen"es and physi"a! stru"tures within the environment. #hese so"ia! inf!uen"es "an "onvey information and a"tivate emotiona! rea"tions throu%h su"h fa"tors as mode!in%, instru"tion, and so"ia! persuasion &Bandura, 19*.'. In addition, humans evo)e different rea"tions from their so"ia! environment as a resu!t of their physi"a! "hara"teristi"s, su"h as a%e, si=e, ra"e, se/, physi"a! attra"tiveness. #he fina! intera"tion o""urs between behavior and the environment. Bandura "ontends that peop!e are both produ"ts and produ"ers of their environment &Bandura, 19::a419*.419*9'. person,s behavior wi!! determine the aspe"ts of their environment to whi"h they are e/posed, and behavior is, in turn, modified by that environment. - person,s behavior "an affe"t the way in whi"h they e/perien"e the environment throu%h se!e"tive attention. Based on !earned human preferen"es and "ompeten"ies, humans se!e"t whom they intera"t with and the a"tivities they parti"ipate in from a vast ran%e of possibi!ities. >uman behavior a!so inf!uen"es their environment, su"h as when an a%%ressive person "reates a hosti!e environment. #hus, behavior determines whi"h of the many potentia! environmenta! inf!uen"es "ome into p!ay and what forms they wi!! ta)e. In turn, the environment part!y determines whi"h forms of one,s behavior are deve!oped and a"tivated &Bandura, 19*9'. Inherent within the notion of re"ipro"a! determinism is the "on"ept that peop!e have the abi!ity to inf!uen"e their destiny, whi!e at the same time re"o%ni=in% that peop!e are not free a%ents of their own wi!!. >umans are neither driven by inner for"es nor automati"a!!y shaped and "ontro!!ed by the environment. #hus, humans fun"tion as "ontributors to their own motivation, behavior, and deve!opment within a networ) of re"ipro"a!!y intera"tin% inf!uen"es. 1ithin this $# perspe"tive, humans are "hara"teri=ed in terms of five basi" and uni3ue "apabi!ities? symbo!i=in%, vi"arious, forethou%ht, se!f2re%u!atory, se!f2ref!e"tive &Bandura, 19*.419*9'. It is these "apabi!ities that provide humans with "o%nitive means by whi"h to determine behavior. Sym$oli%ing Capa$ility: #he $# maintains that most e/terna! inf!uen"es effe"t behavior throu%h "o%nitive pro"esses &Bandura, 19*9'. >owever, Bandura su%%ests that it is symbols that serve as the me"hanism for thou%ht. #hrou%h the formation of symbo!s, su"h as ima%es &menta! pi"tures' or words, humans are ab!e to %ive meanin%, form, and "onti%uity to their e/perien"es. In addition, the "apabi!ity to form symbo!s enab!es humans to store information in their memory that "an be used to %uide future behaviors. It is throu%h this pro"ess that humans are ab!e to mode! observed behavior. ymbo!s provide the me"hanism that a!!ows for "o%nitive prob!em so!vin% and en%a%in% in foresi%htfu! a"tion. It is throu%h foresight that one "an thin) throu%h the "onse3uen"es of a behavior without a"tua!!y performin% the behavior &Bandura, 19*9'. @esear"h indi"ates that indeed mu"h of human thou%ht is !in%uisti"a!!y based, and that there is a "orre!ation between "o%nitive deve!opment and !an%ua%e a"3uisition &Bandura, 1991'. &icarious Capa$ility: 6i"arious pro"esses refer to the human abi!ity to !earn not on!y from dire"t e/perien"e, but a!so from the observation of others. Observational learning a!!ows one to deve!op an idea of how a new behavior is formed without a"tua!!y performin% the behavior

onese!f &Bandura, 19::a419*.419*9'. #his information "an then be "oded &into symbo!s' and used as a %uide for future a"tion. 6i"arious !earnin% is important in that it enab!es humans to form patterns of behavior 3ui")!y, avoidin% time2"onsumin% tria! and error, as we!! as avoidin% "ost!y and even fata! mista)es. In addition, vi"arious "apabi!ities a!!ows one to e/p!ore situations and a"tivities for the attainment of new )now!ed%e that wou!d norma!!y be out of rea"h due to "onstraints on time, resour"es, and mobi!ity. 7or e/amp!e, #6 has vast!y e/panded the ran%e of mode!s and behaviors one is e/posed to every day, a!!owin% peop!e to trans"end the boundaries of their own environment &Bandura, 19*.'. 5bservationa! !earnin% is %overned by four pro"esses? attentional span retention processes motor reproduction processes and motivational processes &Bandura, 19.9419::419*.419*9'. -ttentiona! span refers to a person,s abi!ity to se!e"tive!y observe a"tions and behaviors in his or her environment. In addition, attentiona! span mediates the spe"ifi" information that is e/tra"ted from ea"h observation. #here are spe"ifi" observer "hara"teristi"s as we!! as mode!ed a"tivity "hara"teristi"s that re%u!ate the type and amount of observation that is e/perien"ed. 7or e/amp!e, the "omp!e/ity and sa!ien"e of a mode!ed a"tivity wi!! inf!uen"e the amount of attention a person %ives to that a"tivity. In addition, the observer is most !i)e!y to selectively attend to, and mode!, behaviors of peop!e that are most !i)e themse!ves and those that they asso"iate with the most. 5bserved behavior or a"tivities "an on!y be mode!ed if they are retained in one,s memory. @etention pro"esses are made possib!e by the human abi!ity to form symbols from observed behavior that are stored in one,s memory. 5n"e symbo!s are formed and stored in one,s memory, they must be "onverted into appropriate a"tion for mode!in% to o""ur. #his pro"ess is referred to as motor reprodu"tion pro"esses. (ast, the de%ree to whi"h a behavior is seen to resu!t in a va!ued out"ome &e!pectancies' wi!! inf!uen"e the !i)e!ihood that one wi!! adopt a mode!ed behavior &the motivational pro"ess'. 'orethought Capa$ility: -""ordin% to the $# most human behavior is purposive and re%u!ated by forethought. 7orethou%ht is a person,s "apabi!ity to motivate themse!ves and %uide their a"tions anti"ipatori!y &Bandura, 19*9'. 1hi!e the $# ho!ds that stimu!i inf!uen"es the !i)e!ihood of a behavior throu%h the predi"tive fun"tion of an out"ome, the stimu!i is not automati"a!!y !in)ed to the response by "onti%uity. Instead, previous e/perien"es "reate e/pe"tations of the out"ome that wi!! o""ur as a resu!t of performin% a behavior, before the behavior is performed. #herefore, e!pectations of behaviora! out"omes, more so than a"tua! out"omes, inf!uen"e the !i)e!ihood that a behavior wi!! be performed a%ain. "!pectancies refer to a person,s eva!uation of the anti"ipated out"ome. #he "apa"ity to re%u!ate one,s behavior based on e/pe"tations and e/pe"tan"ies provide the me"hanism for foresightful behavior. 7oresi%htfu! behavior is possib!e be"ause of the human "apabi!ity to symbo!i=e. It is throu%h the pro"ess of formin% symbo!s that a!!ow a person to represent future events "o%nitive!y in the present. Behavior is then inf!uen"ed when forethou%ht is trans!ated into in"entives and a"tion throu%h the se!f2re%u!atory me"hanism. Self("egulatory Capa$ility: Bandura proposes that self#regulatory systems mediate e/terna! inf!uen"es and provide a basis for purposefu! a"tion, a!!owin% peop!e to have persona! "ontro! over their own thou%hts, fee!in%s, motivations, and a"tions &Bandura, 19*9'. e!f2re%u!ation is an interna! "ontro! me"hanism that %overns what behavior is performed, and the se!f2imposed

"onse3uen"es for that behavior. e!f2re%u!ation is e/treme!y important be"ause it a!!ows the %radua! substitution of interna! "ontro!s for e/terna! "ontro!s of behavior. e!f2re%u!ation o""urs throu%h the interp!ay of se!f2produ"ed and e/terna! sour"es of inf!uen"e, in"!udin% motivationa! standards and so"ia! and mora! standards. #he emp!oyment of motivationa! standards as a %uide for behavior is a pro"ess of discrepancy production &%oa! settin%' and discrepancy reduction &wor) to attain a %oa!' &Bandura, 19::a419*.419*9'. Peop!e "ontinua!!y %o throu%h the pro"ess of settin% %oa!s for themse!ves and then "omparin% that %oa! to their persona! a""omp!ishments. In doin% so, standards "an motivate a person to wor) harder or modify their behavior in order to meet a %oa! or standard. <otivation "an o""ur e/terna!!y, su"h as a promised monetary reward for re"eivin% an ,-, in a "!ass, or interna!!y, su"h as when a person fee!s se!f2pride when a standard is rea"hed. #hree fa"tors seem to determine the de%ree of se!f2motivation that o""urs &Bandura, 19*.419*9'. 7irst, a person,s self#efficacy for a %iven behavior dramati"a!!y effe"ts their se!f2motivation for performin% that behavior. If a person fee!s they are "apab!e of a"hievin% the %oa!, then they are !i)e!y to wor)er harder and %ive up !ess easi!y "ompared to a person who has !ow se!f2effi"a"y. - se"ond essentia! fa"tor for se!f2 motivation is feedbac$. #hrou%h feedba"), a person is ab!e to "ontro! or adCust their efforts and %oa!s to ma)e them more feasib!e and rea!isti". In addition, re"eivin% feedba") on performan"e a""omp!ishments wi!! improve a person,s se!f2effi"a"y for the behavior. #he third fa"tor that inf!uen"es se!f2motivation is the anticipated time to goal attainment . Pro/ima! %oa!s are more effe"tive than dista! %oa!s in en!istin% se!f2motivation. o"ia! and mora! standards a!so re%u!ate behavior. #he re!ationship between thou%ht and "ondu"t is mediated throu%h the e!ercise of moral agency &Bandura, 19*.419*9'. #hrou%h eva!uative self#reactions, su"h as se!f2approva! or se!f2reprimand, interna!i=ed mora!s and standards "an re%u!ate "ondu"t &Bandura, 19*.41991'. 7or e/amp!e, if a person interna!i=es the notion that stea!in% is bad, then they wi!! impose se!f2san"tions in order to )eep their "ondu"t in !ine with this interna! standard. #herefore, if a person is fa"ed with a de"ision of stea!in% or not stea!in%, he or she wou!d anti"ipate that this a"tion wou!d vio!ate their interna! standards and resu!t in se!f2 "riti"ism. -s a resu!t, they wou!d se!f2re%u!ate their own behavior by de"idin% not to stea!. #he deve!opment and nature of a mora! a%en"y has been the topi" of mu"h resear"h. In %enera!, it is thou%ht that peop!e deve!op mora! standards from a variety of inf!uen"es, su"h as dire"t instru"tion, feedba") on behaviors from si%nifi"ant others, and mode!in% of mora! standards by others &Bandura, 19*.419*941991'. tandards are a!so deve!oped from institutiona!!y or%ani=ed systems, su"h as edu"ation, media, re!i%ion, po!iti"a!, and !e%a! a%en"ies. Bandura "ontends that observation of behavior often outwei%hs verba! instru"tion as an inf!uen"e on "hi!dren,s interna!i=ation of mora!s and standards. >owever, the fa"t that peop!e often differ in the standards that they mode! &su"h as "han%in% standards in different so"ia! settin%s', the impa"t of mode!in% on the deve!opment of persona! standards is redu"ed &Bandura, 19*941991'. Peop!e do not passive!y absorb a!! the standards of behavior to whi"h they are e/posed. Instead, the standards that are interna!i=ed are dependent on the de%ree to whi"h the mode! is !i)e onese!f, the va!ue of an a"tivity, and one,s per"eption of their de%ree of persona! "ontro! over the behavior &locus of control'. It is throu%h the pro"ess of se!f2re%u!ation that proso"ia! behavior "an be interna!!y maintained &Bandura, 19*9,1991'.

Self("eflective Capa$ility: Self#refection enab!es peop!e to ana!y=e their e/perien"es, thin) about their own thou%ht pro"esses, and a!ter their thin)in% a""ordin%!y. 5ne of the most important types of se!f2ref!e"tion is self#efficacy. e!f2effi"a"y has re"eived an enormous amount of attention in hea!th2re!ated resear"h in the !ast five years. In fa"t, se!f2effi"a"y has be"ome a "entra! fo"us of Bandura,s resear"h, as he "ontends that se!f2effi"a"y is a maCor determinant of se!f2re%u!ation. e!f2effi"a"y is a type of se!f2ref!e"tive thou%ht that effe"ts one,s behavior &Bandura, 19::b419*9'. -""ordin% to the $#, peop!e deve!op per"eptions about their own abi!ities and "hara"teristi"s that subse3uent!y %uide their behavior by determinin% what a person tries to a"hieve and how mu"h effort they wi!! put into their performan"e &Bandura, 19::b'. - person,s se!f2effi"a"y deve!ops as a resu!t of their history of a"hievement in a parti"u!ar area, from observations of others su""esses and fai!ures, from the persuasion of others, and from one,s own physio!o%i"a! state &su"h as emotiona! arousa!, nervousness, or an/iety' whi!e performin% a behavior &Bandura, 19::b'. o"ia! "omparison of one,s own performan"e to the performan"e of others, espe"ia!!y peers or sib!in%s, a!so serves as a stron% sour"e of se!f2effi"a"y. In addition, s"hoo!s are "onsidered a stron% sour"e of se!f2effi"a"y. #his is an important "onsideration in today,s so"iety where s"hoo!s are based on the eva!uation of students by "omparin% individua! performan"e to the %roup,s performan"e. 7or those students who !a% behind or have troub!e with a"ademi"s, this type of eva!uation "an resu!t in severe defi"ien"ies in se!f2effi"a"y &@osenho!t= and @osenho!t=, 19*1'. )sefulness of Theory in u$lic *ealth: #he $# has been used to study a wide ran%e of hea!th prob!ems, from medi"a! therapy "omp!ian"e, to a!"oho! abuse, to immuni=ations. 5ne parti"u!ar!y fruitfu! area of investi%ation to whi"h the $# has been emp!oyed is the study of mora! and va!ue interna!i=ation amon% "hi!dren. In fa"t, it has been ar%ued that the %reatest "ontribution of the $# is its aid in understandin% how "hi!dren are so"ia!i=ed to a""ept the standards and va!ues of their so"iety &0ohnston et.a!, 199:'. Indeed, this is a topi" to whi"h Bandura himse!f devoted e/tensive resear"h efforts &Bandura and <"Dona!d, 19.34 Bandura, 19*9419914 Bandura and 0ordan, 1991'. - number of $# te"hni3ues are "urrent!y used in interventions? <ode!in% )i!! #rainin% &reasonin%' 2 psy"ho motor and so"ia! s)i!!s &refusa! s)i!!s' 2 behaviora! rehearsa! e!f2<onitorin% 2 a "ontra"t with onese!f $ontra"tin% 2 "ontra"tin% with others4 a reward may be invo!ved4 spe"ifi" behaviors4 %oa!s4 si%natures Limitations: #he theory,s "omprehensiveness and "omp!e/ity ma)e it diffi"u!t to operationa!i=e <any app!i"ations of the $# fo"us on one or two "onstru"ts, su"h as se!f2effi"a"y, whi!e i%norin% the others.

"eferences -)ers @(. &19*5' -do!es"ent mariCuana use? - test of three theories of deviant behavior. %eviant &ehavior, .&9'?323239. -)ers @(. &19*9' o"ia! !earnin% theory and a!"oho! behavior amon% the e!der!y. Sociological 'uarterly, 3+&9'?.252.3* -)ers @(. &199.' - !on%itudina! test of so"ia! !earnin% theory? -do!es"ent smo)in%. (ournal of %rug Issues, 2.&2'?31:2393 -)ers @(, 8rohn <D, (an=a28adu"e (onn, and @odosevi"h <. &19:9' o"ia! !earnin% and deviant behavior? - spe"ifi" test of a %enera! theory. American Sociological )evie*, 99?.3.2.55. -)ers @( and (ee ;. &199.' - !on%itudina! test of so"ia! !earnin% theory? -do!es"ent smo)in%. (ournal of %rug Issues, 2.&2'?31:2393. Bandura - and <"Dona!d 70. &19.3' #he inf!uen"e of so"ia! reinfor"ement and the behavior of mode!s in shapin% "hi!dren,s mora! Cud%ements. (ournal of Abnormal and Social +sychology , .:?2:922*1. Bandura - and 1a!ters @>. &19.3' Social Learning and +ersonality %evelopment. Aew Dor)? >o!t, @inehart, and 1inston. Bandura -. &19::a' Social Learning Theory. En%!ewood $!iffs, Aew 0ersey? Prenti"e >a!!. Bandura -. &19::b' e!f2effi"a"y? #oward a unifyin% theory of behaviora! "han%e. +sychological )evie*, *9? 1912215. Bandura -. &19:*' #he se!f2system in re"ipro"a! determinism. American +sychologist, 33?3992 35*. Bandura -. &19*.' Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory . En%!ewood $!iffs, A0? Prenti"e >a!!. Bandura -. &19*9' o"ia! $o%nitive #heory. IA? -nna!s of $hi!d Deve!opment &6o! ., p12.+. &6asta @, ed'. ;reenwi"h, $#? 0ai Press (#D. Bandura -. &1991' o"ia! "o%nitive theory of mora! thou%ht and a"tion. IA? ,andboo$ of -oral &ehavior and %evelopment. 8urtines 1< and ;erwit= 0( &eds'. &6o! 1, p 9521+3'. >i!!sda!e, A0? Er!baum. Bandura - and 0ourden 70. &1991' e!f2re%u!atory me"hanisms %overnin% so"ia! "omparison effe"ts on "omp!e/ de"ision ma)in%. (ournal of +ersonality and Social +sychology, .+? 9912951. $rosbie2Brunett < and (ewis E-. &1993' #heoreti"a! "ontributions from so"ia! and "o%nitive behaviora! psy"ho!o%y. IA? Sourceboo$ of Family Theories and -ethods: A Conte!tual Approach. Boss P;, Dohetry 10, (a@ossa @, "humm 1@, and treinmet= 8 &Eds'. P!enum Press? Aew Dor). 0ohnston (, 5,<a!!ey P, and Ba"hman 0. &1999' .ational Survey )esults on %rug /se from the -onitoring the Future Study 0123#0114. 5ol I Secondary School Students. @o")vi!!e, <D? Aationa! Institute on Dru% -buse. 0ones 01. &19*9' Persona!ity and epistemo!o%y? $o%nitive so"ia! !earnin% theory as a phi!osophy of s"ien"e. 6ygon, 29&1'?2323*. <i!!er A and Do!!ard 0. &1991' Social Learning and Imitation. Aew >aven, $#? Da!e University Press. <is"he! 1. &19.*' +ersonality and Assessment. Aew Dor)? 1i!ey. <is"he! 1. &19:3' #owards a "o%nitive, so"ia! !earnin% re"on"eption of persona!ity. +sychological )evie*, *+? 25222*3.

<is"he! 1. &19:9' 5n the interfa"e of "o%nition and persona!ity. American +sychologist. 19:9, 39? :9+2:59. Perry $(, Baranows)i #, and Par"e! ; . &199+' >ow individua!s, environments, and hea!th behavior intera"t? o"ia! !earnin% theory. IA? ,ealth &ehavior and ,ealth "ducation . ;!an= 8, (ewis 7<, and @imer B8 &Eds'. 0ossey2Bass? an 7ransis"o. @osenho!t= 0 and @osenho!t= >. &19*1' Classroom organi7ation and the perception of ability. Sociology of "ducation, 59?132219+. @otter 0@. &1959' Social Learning and Clinical +sychology. Aew Dor)? Prenti"e2>a!!. @otter 0B. &199+' Interna! versus e/terna! "ontro! of reinfor"ement? - "ase history of a variab!e. -meri"an Psy"ho!o%i"a! -sso"iation? Distin%uished "ientifi" $ontributions -ward -ddress &19**, -t!anta, ;eor%ia'. American +sychologist, 95&9'? 9*92993. @otter 0B. &1992' $o%nates of persona! "ontro!? (o"us of "ontro!, se!f2effi"a"y, and e/p!anatory sty!e? $omment. Applied and +reventive +sychology 1&2'?12:2129. ears, @@. &1951' - theoreti"a! framewor) for persona!ity and so"ia! behavior. American +sychologist, .?9:.29*3. ears @@, 1hitin% 01A, Aow!is 6, and ears P . &1953' ome "hi!d2rearin% ante"edents of dependen"y and a%%ression in youn% "hi!dren. 8enetic +sychology -onographs, 9:?1352239. ears @@, @au (, and -!pert @. &19.5' Identification and Child )earing. tanford, $-? tandford University Press. #homas, @<. &199+' o"ia! (earnin% #heory. IA? #he En"y"!opedia of >uman Deve!opment and Edu"ation? #heory, @esear"h, and tudies. #homas, @< &Ed'. Per%amon Press? Aew Dor). #o!man E$. &1932' +urposive &ehavior in Animal and -en. Aew Dor)? -pp!eton2$entury2 $rofts. 1oodward 1@. &19*2' #he Fdis"overyF of so"ia! behaviorism and so"ia! !earnin% theory, 1*:+2 19*+. American +sychologist, 3:&9'?39.291+. *+ritten $y: Dani"e tone, Do"tora! tudent, University of outh 7!orida, Deparment of $ommunity and 7ami!y >ea!th &7a!! 199*'