SAQ marking: Social Cognitive Theory
Below you will find three sample SAQs for the question: Explain social cognitive theory with reference to one study.
For each sample, refer to the rubric to award marks 1 - 9. After each sample, there is a predicted grade as well as feedback on the strengths and limitations of the sample.
SAQ rubricSAQ 1
Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) argues that behavior is learned solely through observation and imitation. According to the theory, individuals mimic others’ actions without considering personal or environmental factors. SCT primarily focuses on copying behaviors seen in role models. We imitate a role model’s behavior if that person is someone we know or an authority figure. The theory assumes that everyone learns the same way.
A relevant study is Charlton et al.’s St. Helena television study (2000), which examined the impact of introducing television to a remote community. Researchers hypothesized that children exposed to violent TV programs would show higher levels of aggression. They observed children’s behavior before and after television was introduced to the island. Over two years, they found that aggression increased significantly among children who frequently watched violent shows, confirming that violent media directly causes aggressive behavior. Additionally, they found no differences based on age or gender, suggesting the effects of media violence are universal.
The study can be evaluated as partially supporting SCT. While it shows that observation can influence behavior, the results might not fully support the theory since not all children who watched violent programs became aggressive. Furthermore, the study lacks consideration of alternative explanations, like parental guidance or cultural norms, which could have influenced the children’s behavior. The assumption that everyone learns the same way is reductionist. This shows why more research needs to be done.
242 words
The SAQ starts with an incorrect statement. SCT explains only some human learning and behavior. The explanation of the theory is limited. Although it does explain that role models are imitated, the key mechanisms of the theory (e.g. attention, retention, motivation, and self-efficacy) are not addressed. The study is described with errors. The findings are not correctly stated. The final paragraph does not explain how the study demonstrates the theory. Instead, it attempts to evaluate the study. This is not relevant to the question. 3 marks
SAQ 2
Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) explains how people learn behaviors through observation, imitation, and modeling. A key concept within SCT is observational learning, which occurs when individuals acquire new behaviors by watching others and the consequences of their actions. Bandura argued that we learn by first paying attention to a model. We then need to be able to remember the actions (retention) and have the motivation to imitate them. This imitation is the result of vicarious reinforcement – we see that the person is rewarded for their behavior, and we want the same reward. The theory also highlights the role of self-efficacy, or one’s belief in their ability to succeed.
One study that demonstrates SCT is Bandura’s famous Bobo doll experiment (1961). In this study, 72 children (36 boys and 36 girls) aged 3 to 6 years were divided into three groups: one observed an adult acting aggressively toward a Bobo doll, another observed an adult behaving non-aggressively, and a third (control group) was not exposed to a model. After observing the model, children were placed in a room with toys, including a Bobo doll. Researchers observed whether the children imitated the aggressive behaviors they had witnessed, such as hitting, kicking, or verbal aggression. The results showed that children who observed the aggressive model were significantly more likely to imitate those aggressive actions compared to the other groups.
The Bobo doll experiment illustrates SCT. The children acquired new behaviors by watching the adult model and mimicked these behaviors without direct reinforcement, supporting the idea that learning can occur vicariously. Overall, this study validates Bandura’s claim that learning is not solely dependent on direct experience but can also occur through observation.
278 words
The theory is well explained, outlining the key mechanisms of social learning. The study is clearly described, although the aspect of gender in the original study is not addressed. The link is explained - that is, the study shows the children could learn without receiving a reward or punishment. 7 marks
SAQ 3
Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) focuses on how people learn behaviors by observing others. It suggests that learning happens when individuals watch and imitate the actions of role models in their environment. The theory also highlights that people are influenced by rewards and punishments they see others receive.
One study related to SCT is Bandura’s experiment on aggression. In this study, children watched adults interacting with a doll. Some adults were friendly and played games with the doll, while others acted aggressively by throwing it across the room. The children were later asked to interact with the same doll, and their behavior was recorded. Bandura found that boys were less aggressive than girls and that children who saw aggressive models tended to avoid the doll. The study concluded that observing aggression made children feel less confident about expressing their feelings.
This study illustrates SCT because it shows how people sometimes copy behaviors they see. For instance, the children might have been influenced by the adult models, even though the results were a little unclear. It also shows the idea of rewards and punishments. Overall, the study proves that observation can influence behavior.
192 words
There is a basic description of the theory, but it lacks appropriate terminology. The first paragraph could have been better developed. There is a basic understanding of the study, but there is a lack of detail and accuracy. A link between the study and the theory is attempted, but not well developed. The idea that the results were not clear is not correct. The use of the word “prove” in the final sentence is problematic. 5 marks