where was the bobo doll experiment published

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

Bobo doll experiment

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Academia - Bobo Doll Experiment
• Frontiers - Albert Bandura's experiments on aggression modeling in children: A psychoanalytic critique
• Simply Psychology - Bobo Doll Experiment
• University of Central Florida Pressbooks - Psych in Real Life: The Bobo Doll Experiment
• Verywell Mind - What the Bobo Doll Experiment Reveals About Kids and Aggression

Bobo doll experiment , groundbreaking study on aggression led by psychologist Albert Bandura that demonstrated that children are able to learn through the observation of adult behaviour. The experiment was executed via a team of researchers who physically and verbally abused an inflatable doll in front of preschool-age children, which led the children to later mimic the behaviour of the adults by attacking the doll in the same fashion.

Bandura’s study on aggression—the experiment for which he is perhaps best known—was carried out in 1961 at Stanford University , where Bandura was a professor. For this study he used 3- and 5-foot (1- and 1.5-metre) inflatable plastic toys called Bobo dolls, which were painted to look like cartoon clowns and were bottom-weighted so that they would return to an upright position when knocked down. The subjects were preschoolers at Stanford’s nursery school and were divided into three groups: one group observed aggressive adult behaviour models; another group observed nonaggressive behaviour models; and the third group was not exposed to any behaviour models.

The three groups were then divided by gender into six subgroups in which half of the subgroups would observe a same-sex behaviour model and half would observe an opposite-sex behaviour model. In the first stage of the experiment, the children were individually seated at a table in one corner of an experimental room and presented with diverting activities that had previously been shown to be of high interest to the children (e.g., stickers, pictures, prints) in order to discourage active participation and encourage mere observation. The behaviour model was then taken to the opposite corner—which contained another table and chair, a mallet, a Tinkertoy set, and a 5-foot Bobo doll—and was told he or she could play with these materials. In the aggressive behaviour model groups, the model abused the Bobo doll both physically (e.g., kicked, punched, threw, and assaulted with various objects) and verbally (e.g., made aggressive statements such as “Sock him in the nose” and “Pow” or nonaggressive statements such as “He sure is a tough fella” and “He keeps coming back for more”). In the nonaggressive behaviour model groups, the model ignored the Bobo doll and instead quietly assembled the Tinkertoys. After 10 minutes had elapsed, the behaviour models in both groups left the room.

In the second phase of the experiment, the children were taken individually into a different experimental room, where they were presented with a new group of appealing toys (e.g., train, fire engine, cable car, jet airplane, spinning top , doll with wardrobe, baby crib, and doll carriage). To test the hypothesis that the observation of aggression in others would increase the likelihood of aggression in the observer, the children were subjected to aggression arousal in the form of being told after two minutes that they could no longer play with the toys. The children were then told that they could, however, play with the toys in another room, where they were presented with various toys that were considered both aggressive (e.g., 3-foot Bobo doll, mallet, and dart guns) and nonaggressive (e.g., crayons, paper, farm animals, tea set, ball, and dolls).

In the final stage of the experiment, the children’s behaviour was observed over the course of 20 minutes and rated according to the degree of physically and verbally aggressive behaviour they modeled, the results of which yielded significantly higher scores for children in the aggressive behaviour model groups compared with those in both the nonaggressive behaviour model and control groups. Subsequent experiments in which children were exposed to such violence on videotape yielded similar results, with nearly 90 percent of the children in the aggressive behaviour groups later modeling the adults’ behaviour by attacking the doll in the same fashion and 40 percent of the those children exhibiting the same behaviour after eight months.

Although the study yielded similar results for both genders, it nonetheless suggested at least some difference depending on the degree to which a behaviour is sex-typed—that is, viewed as more common of or appropriate for a specific gender. For example, the data suggest that males are somewhat more prone to imitate physical aggression—a highly masculine-typed behaviour—than are females, with male subjects reproducing more physical aggression than female subjects; there were, however, no differences in the imitation of verbal aggression, which is less sex-typed. Additionally, both male and female subjects were more imitative of the male behaviour models than of the female models in terms of physical aggression but were more imitative of the same-sex models in terms of verbal aggression.

Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment on Social Learning

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

During the 1960s, Albert Bandura conducted a series of experiments on observational learning , collectively known as the Bobo doll experiments. Two of the experiments are described below:

Bandura (1961) conducted a controlled experiment study to investigate if social behaviors (i.e., aggression) can be acquired by observation and imitation.

Bandura, Ross, and Ross (1961) tested 36 boys and 36 girls from the Stanford University Nursery School aged between 3 to 6 years old.

The researchers pre-tested the children for how aggressive they were by observing the children in the nursery and judged their aggressive behavior on four 5-point rating scales.

It was then possible to match the children in each group so that they had similar levels of aggression in their everyday behavior. The experiment is, therefore, an example of a matched pairs design .

To test the inter-rater reliability of the observers, 51 of the children were rated by two observers independently, and their ratings were compared. These ratings showed a very high-reliability correlation (r = 0.89), which suggested that the observers had a good agreement about the behavior of the children.

A lab experiment was used, in which the independent variable (the type of model) was manipulated in three conditions:

• Aggressive model is shown to 24 children
• Non-aggressive model is shown to 24 children
• No model is shown (control condition) – 24 children

Stage 1: Modeling

In the experimental conditions, children were individually shown into a room containing toys and played with some potato prints and pictures in a corner for 10 minutes while either:

• 24 children (12 boys and 12 girls) watched a male or female model behaving aggressively towards a toy called a “Bobo doll”. The adults attacked the Bobo doll in a distinctive manner – they used a hammer in some cases, and in others threw the doll in the air and shouted “Pow, Boom.”
• Another 24 children (12 boys and 12 girls) were exposed to a non-aggressive model who played in a quiet and subdued manner for 10 minutes (playing with a tinker toy set and ignoring the bobo-doll).
• The final 24 children (12 boys and 12 girls) were used as a control group and not exposed to any model at all.

Stage 2: Aggression Arousal

All the children (including the control group) were subjected to “mild aggression arousal.” Each child was (separately) taken to a room with relatively attractive toys.

As soon as the child started to play with the toys, the experimenter told the child that these were the experimenter’s very best toys and she had decided to reserve them for the other children.

Stage 3: Test for Delayed Imitation

• The next room contained some aggressive toys and some non-aggressive toys. The non-aggressive toys included a tea set, crayons, three bears and plastic farm animals. The aggressive toys included a mallet and peg board, dart guns, and a 3 foot Bobo doll.
• The child was in the room for 20 minutes, and their behavior was observed and rated though a one-way mirror. Observations were made at 5-second intervals, therefore, giving 240 response units for each child.
• Other behaviors that didn’t imitate that of the model were also recorded e.g., punching the Bobo doll on the nose.
• Children who observed the aggressive model made far more imitative aggressive responses than those who were in the non-aggressive or control groups.
• There was more partial and non-imitative aggression among those children who had observed aggressive behavior, although the difference for non-imitative aggression was small.
• The girls in the aggressive model condition also showed more physically aggressive responses if the model was male, but more verbally aggressive responses if the model was female. However, the exception to this general pattern was the observation of how often they punched Bobo, and in this case the effects of gender were reversed.
• Boys were more likely to imitate same-sex models than girls. The evidence for girls imitating same-sex models is not strong.
• Boys imitated more physically aggressive acts than girls. There was little difference in verbal aggression between boys and girls.

Bobo doll experiment demonstrated that children are able to learn social behavior such as aggression through the process of observation learning, through watching the behavior of another person. The findings support Bandura’s (1977) Social Learning Theory .

This study has important implications for the effects of media violence on children.

There are three main advantages of the experimental method .

• Experiments are the only means by which cause and effect can be established. Thus, it could be demonstrated that the model did have an effect on the child’s subsequent behavior because all variables other than the independent variable are controlled.
• It allows for precise control of variables. Many variables were controlled, such as the gender of the model, the time the children observed the model, the behavior of the model, and so on.
• Experiments can be replicated. Standardized procedures and instructions were used, allowing for replicability. In fact, the study has been replicated with slight changes, such as using video, and similar results were found (Bandura, 1963).

Limitations of the procedure include:

• Many psychologists are very critical of laboratory studies of imitation – in particular, because they tend to have low ecological validity. The situation involves the child and an adult model, which is a very limited social situation and there is no interaction between the child and the model at any point; certainly the child has no chance to influence the model in any way.
• Also, the model and the child are strangers. This, of course, is quite unlike “normal” modeling, which often takes place within the family.
• Cumberbatch (1990) found that children who had not played with a Bobo Doll before were five times as likely to imitate the aggressive behavior than those who were familiar with it; he claims that the novelty value of the doll makes it more likely that children will imitate the behavior.
• A further criticism of the study is that the demonstrations are measured almost immediately. With such snapshot studies, we cannot discover if such a single exposure can have long-term effects.
• It is possible to argue that the bobo doll experiment was unethical. For example, there is the problem of whether or not the children suffered any long-term consequences as a result of the study. Although it is unlikely, we can never be certain.

Vicarious Reinforcement Bobo Doll Study

An observer’s behavior can also be affected by the positive or negative consequences of a model’s behavior.

So we not only watch what people do, but we watch what happens when they do things. This is known as vicarious reinforcement. We are more likely to imitate behavior that is rewarded and refrain from behavior that is punished.

Bandura (1965) used a similar experimental set up to the one outlined above to test vicarious reinforcement. The experiment had different consequences for the model’s aggression to the three groups of children.

One group saw the model’s aggression being rewarded (being given sweets and a drink for a “championship performance,” another group saw the model being punished for the aggression (scolded), and the third group saw no specific consequences (control condition).

When allowed to enter the playroom, children in the reward and control conditions imitated more aggressive actions of the model than did the children in the punishment condition.

The children in the model punished group had learned the aggression by observational learning, but did not imitate it because they expected negative consequences.

Reinforcement gained by watching another person is known as vicarious reinforcement.

Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of models” reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses . Journal of personality and social psychology, 1(6) , 589.

Bandura, A., Ross, D. & Ross, S.A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models .  Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 63, 575-82.

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models . The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 66(1), 3.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Further Information

• Bandura’s Social Learning Theory
• Bobo Doll Study Summary
• BBC Radio 4 Programme: The Bobo Doll
• Bobo Doll Summary PowerPoint

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Albert Bandura's experiments on aggression modeling in children: A psychoanalytic critique

Introduction.

In a series of innovative experiments, Bandura (1925–2021), renowned Psychology Professor at Stanford University, USA, and his collaborators (e.g., Bandura and Huston, 1961 ; Bandura et al., 1961 , 1963 ; Bandura, 1965 , 1969 ) showed that young children exposed to adults' aggression tend to behave aggressively. In these experiments, children observed adults, in vivo or in vitro , as well as cartoons, behaving aggressively toward a large, inflated doll (clown) named “Bobo doll”, for about 10 min. The findings of these studies are considered to support modeling, observational learning, or learning by imitation and provide evidence for Bandura's social learning theory, which belongs to the behaviorism paradigm. In this paper, we offer a psychoanalytic critique of these experiments with the aim of shedding light on the unconscious processes of children's imitation of aggression. Although Bandura ( 1986 ) later formulated the so-called social cognitive theory and focused on less observable processes (e.g., self-regulation, self-efficacy, beliefs, expectations), in presenting these early experiments he clearly opposed the existing psychoanalytic interpretations of aggression.

Key findings of Bandura's experiments on aggression in children

The key findings of Bandura's experiments on aggression in children (Bandura and Huston, 1961 ; Bandura et al., 1961 , 1963 ; Bandura, 1965 , 1969 ) are summarized below.

• Observation of an aggressive model is sufficient to elicit aggressive behavior in the young child. The model does not need to be a familiar or nurturant person. Moreover, there is no need to positively reinforce the aggression of either the adult model or the child. Because punishment does not follow the model's aggressive acts, the child receives the message that aggression is acceptable.
• The virtual world has great power. Children who watch a film showing aggressive people or cartoons tend to imitate this behavior.
• Imitation is inferred by the fact that children show verbal and/or physical aggressive acts that are very similar to those of the model.
• Children not only accurately imitate the observed behaviors but also show ingenuity, manifesting different, novice acts of aggression.
• Children transfer, by means of generalization, aggression into new, different contexts, even when the aggressive model is no longer present (delayed imitation).
• If the adult model is punished for his/her aggressive behavior, the probability that the child will show aggressive behavior is reduced. In contrast, positive reinforcement or no reinforcement of the model leads to increased aggression on the part of the child (vicarious/indirect learning).
• After observing the aggressive model, boys tend to exhibit more physical aggression than girls, whereas no gender difference is found for verbal aggression. Independent of gender, children are more likely to imitate a male physically aggressive model. According to gender stereotypes, this form of aggression is more acceptable for men than for women. In contrast, verbal aggression is more likely to be imitated when manifested by a same-sex model.

Taken together, these results imply that children's aggression can be caused—and probably eliminated—by external manipulations. However, are there interpretations other than this omnipotent behavioristic view?

Psychoanalytic views of children's aggression in Bandura's experiments

In the Bobo doll experiments, after presenting the aggressive model and before placing the child in the room with Bobo doll and other toys with the aim of recording the likelihood of imitation, the experimenters instigated the children's aggression. Specifically, an experimenter led children to another room, where she allowed them to enjoy some attractive toys. After a while, she told them that all toys were hers, that she would no longer let anyone play with them, and that she intended to give them to other children. After experiencing this frustration , the children were accompanied to the room where Bobo doll was.

Bandura (Bandura and Huston, 1961 ; Bandura et al., 1961 ) stated that he was seeking a more concise and parsimonious theoretical explanation than the one provided by identification with the aggressor , that is, the ego defense mechanism described by Anna Freud ( 1946 ), and attempted to outline alternative explanations (Bandura, 1969 ). However, if we look closely at specific aspects and manipulations of these experiments, we may discover that this mechanism may have more explanatory power for what happened in the laboratory than Bandura believed.

At first, it is reasonable to hypothesize that, in the eyes of the children, the experimenters were omnipotent adult figures with authority, prestige, and power. The strange laboratory setting may have elicited in children excessive arousal , associated with tension and anxiety. This overflow of excitation, that needed to be released, is likely to have resulted from the unprecedented experience, and, more specifically, from the following: separation from parents; presence in an unknown place with strange adults; alternation of unfamiliar rooms and buildings; many overwhelming stimuli, such as physical and verbal aggression exhibited by adults, in vivo or in vitro (i.e., film), or by cartoons within a colorful frame, full of imaginary stimuli; presence of new and exciting toys; and frustration and anger caused by adults who deliberately disrupted children's pleasurable play activity with the aim of provoking their aggressiveness. All these conditions imply that the experiments were not only about “observation of cues produced by the behavior of others” (Bandura et al., 1961 ; our emphasis). If only “cues” were given to children, then why it was assumed in another paper (Bandura et al., 1963 ) that vicarious learning had such a “cathartic function”? Indeed, Bandura may have aptly used this expression because catharsis implies release of tension caused by overwhelming vicarious experience such as in ancient Greek tragedy.

Second, identification with the aggressor is a defense mechanism that is typical of 3- to 6-year-old children—the participants' age in Bandura's experiments. Anna Freud ( 1946 , p. 113) argued that “by impersonating the aggressor, assuming his attributes or imitating his aggression, the child transforms himself from the person threatened into the person who makes the threat”. Children may have unconsciously experienced the aggressiveness of adults (quasi parental figures) toward a familiar playful object as a threat of punishment , possibly a threat of castration by proxy , for their own oedipal/incestuous and autoerotic/masturbatory phantasies, which usually prevail in this age period—the phallic phase of libidinal development (Freud, 1953 ). This explanation is further supported by the finding that males were more influential models regarding physical aggression. According to Anna Freud ( 1946 ), identification with the aggressor is the preliminary stage of superego formation, during which the aggressive drive is not yet directed against the subject but against the outer world. Projection of guilt, thus, supplements the immature superego and may interpret, at least partly, children's sadomasochistic relation with the doll.

Third, we contend that a seduction process of both caretakers and their children had taken place in the university laboratory. With their caretakers' consent, children were brought into an unknown adult place, where they were captivated by adults' passion, namely overt violence against a doll. The violent acts were exhibited in a ritualistic and self-reinforcing manner and in the context of symbolic play. According to Ferenczi ( 1949 ), who was not mentioned by Bandura but whose ideas on this issue inspired Anna Freud, when an adult becomes sexually seductive or violent against a child, a confusion of tongues between the two emerges, in other words, a confusion between child tenderness and adult passion . In these experiments, children experienced an indirect attack with a mild traumatic character: certain adults intruded and impinged on the territory of children's “innocent” play, and then coerced them to observe other adults having little control over their own instinctual (aggressive) drives toward an attractive object. Therefore, it was very likely that children reacted not just with imitation but with anxious identification with the adult. This introjection of the aggressor resulted in children exhibiting the same violent behavior. They seemed to “subordinate themselves like automata to the will of the aggressor” and “could only react in an autoplastic way by a kind of mimicry ” (Ferenczi, 1949 , p. 228, our emphasis), possibly introjecting the adults' unconscious guilt for their abusive behavior.

It is important to note that, contrary to identification with the aggressor, introjection of the aggressor is initially an automatic, organismic reaction to trauma—a mixture of rage, contempt and omnipotence—and only later becomes a defensive, agentic and purposeful process (Howell, 2014 ). In these experiments, children seemed to exhibit this automatic, procedural identification and mimicry. It has also been argued (Frankel, 2002 ) that identification with the aggressor is a universal and very common tactic used by people in mild traumatic situations and, generally, on several occasions where they are in a weak position relative to more powerful others. Although benign, this power may become a real threat: “If the adult got out of control and attacked the doll, could she attack me too?” Identification with the aggressor, then, serves an evolutionary function: survival is ensured if individuals conform to what others expect of them.

In the laboratory setting, children confronted what Lacan ( 1977 ) has called the enigma of the adults' desire : “Why are they behaving this way?”; “What do they want from me?”; “Why are they doing this to me?”. The laboratory setting and the adults' aggression toward the doll can be conceptualized as enigmatic signifiers , the Lacanian notion further elaborated by Laplanche ( 1999 ). These signifiers were verbal and non-verbal messages, doubly compromised and non-transparent to both sides of the communication because of the existence of the unconscious. The young participants found themselves in an asymmetrical relationship while their developmental abilities to metabolize what adults communicated to them were inadequate. They were somewhat helpless. Aggressive behavior was the way with which children attempted to translate adults' “alien” messages and derive meaning from the enigmatic situation.

The ingenuity and novelty—“creative embellishment” as Bandura said when describing the experiment in a short film 1 —which children showed in the aggressive use of toys may be regarded as proof of the playful character of the imitation. Children attempted to transform passivity into activity , to acquire mastery of new and challenging objects and experience pleasure in this play activity, as Freud ( 1955 ) argued, rather than be the subjects of uncanny, mildly traumatic experimental conditions and the spectators of adults' violence. Therefore, children seemed to compulsively repeat the activity in a ritualistic fashion. This view is in line with the emphasis given on transformation in Freud's ( 1946 ) definition of identification with the aggressor.

Bandura's experiments on aggression in children, après-coup

The aggression modeling experiments were conducted at a time when Psychology was striving, by “objective” measurements and laboratory experiments, to establish itself as a discipline. They have received criticism because they certainly raise the ethical issue of children's exposure to violence, with unknown short- and long-term consequences. Ethical concerns have also been expressed for other groundbreaking, or even notorious, experiments in the history of Psychology (e.g., Watson's Baby Albert experiment, Milgram's experiments on obedience to authority).

Despite the ethical and methodological flaws, these aggression experiments and the short films that depict them continue to have a great allure to the scientific community and the society at large. Besides, a degree of seduction, namely optimal seduction (Potamianou, 2001 ), is needed to awaken desire for scientific exploration and facilitate openness to the unknown. They inspired research and interventions and raised public awareness about the effects of children's exposure to violence (e.g., through media). These experiments are still regarded to provide indisputable evidence, by means of a “rigorous experimental design”, for young children's vulnerability to adults' violence. They also illustrate that, from early on, humans are capable of abusive acts, and that these acts can be easily provoked. Therefore, the work of civilization is to undertake every action to protect children from the transmission of violence.

However, the fact that scientists' reservations were not strong enough to prevent them from “using” children in such laboratory experiments, implies, paradoxically, that they believed in children's resilience to violence or trauma. Only a few years after World War II, Psychology seemed to engage in an unconscious attempt at reparation (Klein, 1975 ), perhaps on behalf of the whole humanity, through handling—at last!—violence within a controlled and protected but regressed-to-the-infantile laboratory setting.

Conclusions

This study aimed to approach Bandura's experiments on aggression modeling in children from the psychoanalytic perspective. A variety of psychoanalytic formulations were used to conceptualize the underlying processes and the phenomenology of children's imitation of aggressive acts. These formulations are not supported by research data, a fact that may be regarded also as a limitation of this study. However, they are based on the multitude and richness of clinical observations in the field of Psychoanalysis, which has an undeniably remarkable contribution to the understanding and treatment of human aggression.

Author contributions

EG conceived the idea and drafted the manuscript. KM reviewed key findings of Bandura's experiments and systematically edited the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqNaLerMNOE

• Bandura A. (1965). Influence of model's reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol . 1 , 589–595. 10.1037/h0022070 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A. (1969). “Social-learning theory of identificatory processes,” in Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research , ed D.A. Goslin (Chicago: Rand McNally; ), 213–262. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A., Huston A. C. (1961). Identification as a process of incidental learning . J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol . 63 , 311–318. 10.1037/h0040351 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A., Ross D., Ross S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models . J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol . 63 , 575–582. 10.1037/h0045925 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A., Ross D., Ross S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models . J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol . 66 , 3–11. 10.1037/h0048687 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferenczi S. (1949). Confusion of the tongues between the adults and the child (The language of tenderness and of passion) . Int. J. Psychoanal . 30 , 225–230. (Original work published 1933). [ Google Scholar ]
• Frankel J. (2002). Exploring Ferenczi's concept of identification with the aggressor: Its role in trauma, everyday life, and the therapeutic relationship . Psychoanal. Dialog. 12 , 101–139. 10.1080/10481881209348657 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Freud A. (1946). The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defence . New York, NY: International Universities Press. (Original work published 1936). [ Google Scholar ]
• Freud S. (1953). “Three essays on the theory of sexuality,” in The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud , Vol. 7 , ed Strachey J. (London: Hogarth Press; ), 125–243. (Original work published 1905). [ Google Scholar ]
• Freud S. (1955). “Beyond the pleasure principle,” in The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud , Vol. 8 , ed J. Strachey (London: Hogarth Press; ), 3–64. (Original work published 1920). [ Google Scholar ]
• Howell E. F. (2014). Ferenczi's concept of identification with the aggressor: understanding dissociative structure with interacting victim and abuser self-states . Am. J. Psychoanal . 74 , 48–59. 10.1057/ajp.2013.40 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Klein M. (1975). “Love, guilt and reparation,” in Envy and Gratitude and Other Works 1921-1945. The Writings of Melanie Klein, Vol. I , ed M. Klein (New York, NY: Free Press; ) (Original article published 1937), 306–443. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lacan J. (1977). The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-analysis . London: Hogarth. [ Google Scholar ]
• Laplanche J. (1999). Essays on Otherness . New York, NY: Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Potamianou A. (2001). Le Traumatique: Répétition et Élaboration . Paris: Dunod. [ Google Scholar ]

Learn More Psychology

• Behavioral Psychology

Bandura's Bobo Doll Experiment

Albert bandura's influential bobo doll experiments reveal how children imitate tv violence and the behavior of others..

Permalink Print   |  

• Biological Psychology
• Body Language Interpretation
• Cognitive Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Dream Interpretation
• Freudian Psychology
• Memory & Memory Techniques
• Role Playing: Stanford Prison Experiment
• Authoritarian Personality
• Memory: Levels of Processing
• Cold Reading: Psychology of Fortune Telling
• Stages of Sleep
• Personality Psychology
• Why Do We Forget?
• Psychology of Influence
• Stress in Psychology
• Body Language: How to Spot a Liar
• Be a Better Communicator
• Eye Reading: Body Language
• Motivation: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
• How to Interpret your Dreams Guide
• How to Remember Your Dreams
• Interpreting Your Dreams
• Superstition in Pigeons
• Altruism in Animals and Humans
• Stimulus-Response Theory
• Conditioned Behavior
• Synesthesia: Mixing the Senses
• Freudian Personality Type Test
• ... and much more
• Unlimited access to analysis of groundbreaking research and studies
• 17+ psychology guides : develop your understanding of the mind
• Self Help Audio : MP3 sessions to stream or download

Best Digital Psychology Magazine - UK

Best online psychology theory resource.

• Bandura, A., Ross, D. and Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of Aggression Through Imitation of Aggressive Models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 63 , 575-582.
• Bandura, A., Ross, D. and Ross, S. A. (1961). Imitation of Film-Mediated Aggressive Models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 66 (1), 3-11.
• Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of Models’ Reinforcement Contingencies on the Acquisition of Imitative Responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 1 (6), 589.
• Huessmann, L. R., Lagerspetz, K. And Eron, L. D. (1984). Intervening Variables in the TV Violence-Aggression Relation: Evidence From Two Countries. Developmental Psychology , 20 (5), 746-775.

Which Archetype Are You?

Are You Angry?

Windows to the Soul

Are You Stressed?

Attachment & Relationships

Memory Like A Goldfish?

31 Defense Mechanisms

Slave To Your Role?

Are You Fixated?

Interpret Your Dreams

How to Read Body Language

How to Beat Stress and Succeed in Exams

Psychology Topics

Learn psychology.

• Access 2,200+ insightful pages of psychology explanations & theories
• Insights into the way we think and behave
• Body Language & Dream Interpretation guides
• Self hypnosis MP3 downloads and more
• Behavioral Approach
• Eye Reading
• Stress Test
• Cognitive Approach
• Fight-or-Flight Response
• Neuroticism Test

© 2024 Psychologist World. Home About Contact Us Terms of Use Privacy & Cookies Hypnosis Scripts Sign Up

Albert Bandura (Biography + Experiments)

Albert Bandura is perhaps one of the greatest psychologists of all time. He spent most of his career studying and teaching social psychology at Stanford University.

Who is Albert Bandura?

Albert Bandura is best known for developing social learning theory (later called social cognitive theory), his in-depth research on self-efficacy, the Bobo doll experiments, and his groundbreaking books. He is also widely regarded as one of the most influential psychologists of all time.

Bandura’s Early Years

Albert Bandura was born on December 4, 1925, in Mundare, Alberta. Bandura’s father was from Poland and his mother was from Ukraine. He also had five sisters who were all older than him.

Bandura’s parents came to Canada when they were teenagers. His father worked for the local railroad company and his mother was employed at the town’s general store. Once the couple had saved enough money, they bought a homestead on a heavily wooded piece of land. In time, they developed a workable farm after removing enough trees and boulders from the property.

Neither Bandura’s father nor his mother received formal schooling. Nevertheless, they both viewed education as very important. In addition to English, Bandura’s father taught himself to read Polish, German, and Russian. He also played the violin and served on the district school board.

Although Bandura’s family faced many financial struggles during his childhood, they had a very positive outlook on life. They were known to be hardworking, helpful, and festive people.

Bandura’s Educational Background

During Bandura’s early years, there was only one school in town—the Mundare Public School. This single institution provided him with both his elementary and high school education. As you may expect, the school had very limited resources. Nevertheless, Bandura made the most of his circumstances until he graduated in 1946.

At the Mundare Public School, there were a total of eight classrooms that served all the students from grades 1 to 12. The lack of space meant some teachers had to teach two different grades in one room. The high school math syllabus was taught from the school’s single math textbook. The entire high school curriculum was taught by just two teachers.

Although the lack of books and teachers may not have been ideal, it did lead to some positive developments. The students at the Mundare Public School were required to take charge of their own education. For Bandura and many of the other students, the situation actually served them quite well. Bandura himself stated, “very often we developed a better grasp of the subjects than the overworked teachers."

Bandura was often encouraged by his parents to travel outside their small town in the summertime so that he could learn new things. During one summer holiday, he developed carpentry skills after working in a furniture factory in Edmonton. After completing their high school education, almost all of the students from the Mundare Public School were accepted at various universities around the world. Looking back on his school days in Mundare, Bandura was moved to say "the content of most textbooks is perishable, but the tools of self-directedness serve one well over time."

The summer after Bandura left high school, he flew north to the city of Whitehorse in Canada’s Yukon territory. He went there to fill holes in the Alaska Highway, which at the time, was slowly sinking into the surrounding swamp. During his time in the Yukon, Bandura worked alongside many men who had issues with the law. They exposed him to drinking, gambling and new life perspectives. As time went by, Bandura developed a keen interest in the mental health issues that affected the men who were working up north.

After Bandura went home, his parents again encouraged him to broaden his experiences. They gave him two options: (1) stay home, work the farm, and drink at the local bar, or (2) get a higher level of education. After the summer of 1946, Bandura enrolled at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. He supported himself through school by using his carpentry skills at a woodwork plant in the afternoons.

Bandura’s interest in psychology was sparked by accident. When he first arrived at the university, his intention was to major in one of the biological sciences. While wasting time in the library one morning, he casually flipped through a course catalog to find a class to fill his early morning time slot. He chose a course in psychology and after going to his first class, was immediately enthralled by the field.

Where Did Albert Bandura Receive His Bachelor's Degree?

In 1949, just three years after he arrived, Bandura graduated from the University of British Columbia. At his graduation, he was presented with the Bolocan Award in Psychology. As Bandura was eager to pursue graduate studies in psychology, he asked his academic advisor what his next step should be. His advisor encouraged him to enroll at the University of Iowa, which at the time, was considered the epicenter of theoretical psychology.

Before Bandura departed for the University of Iowa, his advisor warned him that many previous candidates had found the doctoral program to be difficult. He encouraged Bandura to show toughness and resilience. At the time, the Department of Psychology was under the direction of Kenneth Spence, a protege of Clark Hull. When Bandura enrolled, he found the Department of Psychology to be challenging, but also hospitable and supportive.

Bandura was interested in social learning. But although the psychology program was focused on social learning, he thought it was too heavily influenced by behaviorism . Bandura completed his Master’s Degree in 1951. He earned his Ph.D in clinical psychology in 1952.

After he received his doctoral degree, Bandura was offered a teaching position at Stanford University in 1953. He accepted the offer, although it meant he had to resign from another position he had previously agreed to fill. Much of his early work on social learning theory and aggression was conducted with the help of Richard Walters—his first doctoral student. Bandura continued to work at Stanford University until his death.

Social Learning Theory

Social Learning Theory was developed by Albert Bandura during his years at Stanford University. It refers to the idea that people learn from each other in three ways: (1) observation, (2) imitation, and (3) modeling. Social Learning Theory is often considered as a bridge between behaviorist learning theories and cognitive learning theories because it involves observable behaviors as well as cognitive processes such as attention, motivation, and memory.

Social Learning Theory suggests that individuals learn by observing other people’s behaviors, attitudes, and the consequences of those behaviors. In fact, Bandura believes most human behavior is learned observationally through modeling. This involves watching another person to get an idea of how to do a particular behavior. The information is then coded and stored by the observer as a guide for future action.

There are three basic types of modeling stimuli—live models, verbal instructions, and symbolic models. Live models involve real people doing the desired behavior. Verbal instructions are detailed descriptions of the desired behavior with steps explaining how to do it. Symbolic modeling uses the media and includes the internet, movies, television, books, or radio.

Modeling is dependent on four factors: (1) attention, (2) retention, (3) reproduction, and (4) motivation. All four factors need to be at a high level for modeling to be effective. This means an individual is more likely to learn if he or she:

• Pays more attention to the model
• Retains or remembers most or all of what was learned
• Is able to reproduce what was learned, depending on his or her cognitive and physical limitations
• Has a good reason to imitate the behavior

When Bandura first began his research, the dominant learning theories at the time were based on a form of psychology called behaviorism. Behaviorists believe all human behaviors are influenced by the environment. However, Bandura claimed this explanation was too simplistic. He agreed that the environment can affect behavior, but behavior can also affect the environment.

Bandura eventually developed a concept called “reciprocal determinism.” This theory suggests there are three factors that influence behavior: (1) the environment, (2) the individual’s cognitive processes, and (3) the behavior itself. These three factors are always interacting with each other. So while it is true that society can influence behavior, a person’s actions, thoughts, feelings, and personal characteristics can also impact the way he or she interacts with society.

To get a better idea of what reciprocal determinism means, it may be helpful to think of a young boy who loves to play soccer. He plays because he believes the sport is fun or soccer may be a popular sport in his community. After a while, he asks his close friends and family members to play soccer and have fun with him. This in turn, encourages him to play soccer even more.

Bandura refined the concept of Social Learning Theory over the course of many years. An important part of his research on Social Learning Theory were the Bobo Doll Experiments (outlined below). By 1977, Bandura had settled on five key principles of Social Learning Theory:

• Learning involves behavioral and cognitive processes in a social context.
• Learning can occur by observing a behavior and the consequences of the behavior.
• Learning involves observation, data processing, and making decisions about the behavior (modeling). This means people can learn new things quite well without ever changing their observable behaviors.
• While reinforcement is important, it is not the only factor that causes learning.
• People are not passive during the learning process. Their environment, cognitions, and behaviors all interact and influence each other (reciprocal determinism).

The Bobo Doll Experiments

Behaviorists claim people learn only after being rewarded or punished for a behavior. However, Bandura did not believe the reward and punishment framework was a good explanation for many common human behaviors. Social Learning Theory suggests people learn mainly from observing, imitating, and modeling. Rather than perform a behavior themselves, Bandura thought people can learn by simply watching someone else get rewarded or punished.

In 1961 and 1963, Bandura conducted a series of studies called the Bobo Doll Experiments to test his Social Learning Theory. He noted how children responded after they watched an adult punch, kick, throw, hit, and scream at a Bobo doll. A Bobo doll is a large, light-weight toy with a round bottom that gets back up after it is knocked down. One notable version of the experiment measured the children’s behavior after they saw the adult get rewarded, get punished, or experience no consequence for abusing the Bobo doll.

Bandura and Walters worked with a total of 72 children—36 boys and 36 girls between the ages of 3 to 6 years old.  Twenty-four children were paired with an aggressive adult; the second group of 24 children was paired with a non-aggressive adult, and the remaining 24 children served as the control group. Each group was made up of 12 boys and 12 girls. However, each child was studied individually so that he or she would not be distracted or influenced by the other children in the group.

Results of the Bobo Doll Experiment

What did Bandura’s Bobo doll experiments reveal? Children who observed an aggressive model were more likely to show aggressive behavior toward the Bobo doll. Boys were much more likely to imitate physical aggressive behaviors such as punching and kicking than girls. Children were more strongly influenced by models of the same gender. The kids who were exposed to an aggressive model were more likely to show verbal aggression than those who were not paired with an aggressive model.

The experiments clearly highlighted that the behavior of young children is strongly influenced by the actions of adults. They also showed that young children are able to learn by observing the behavior of other people and the consequences of those behaviors. When the aggressive models were rewarded, the children were more likely to abuse the Bobo doll. But when the aggressive models were punished, the children stopped hitting the doll immediately.

Criticism and Praise of Bobo Doll Experiment

Of course, a number of criticisms have been aimed at the Bobo Doll Experiments. Some people question its validity because the majority of the children were from high-class, white families. Other people questioned the ethics of intentionally exposing young children to violence. But despite these controversies, most people laud the Bobo Doll Experiments as one of the most important psychological studies in history. Albert Bandura was awarded the National Medal of Science from President Barack Obama in 2016 for the experiment.

Social Cognitive Theory and Bandura’s Impact on Education

At 60 years old, Bandura was still heavily involved in groundbreaking research. By the mid-1980s he had begun to focus more on the role of human cognition in social learning. In 1986, he changed the name of the Social Learning Theory to Social Cognitive Theory. By applying some of the principles of Social Cognitive Theory, Bandura was able to help many people in the field of education.

A few of the key elements of Social Cognitive Theory that are applied in education include self-efficacy, observational learning, self-regulation, and reciprocal determinism. In an educational or school setting, self-efficacy is the confidence a teacher or student has to do what it takes to reach his or her academic goals. Bandura believes that seeing other people work hard to complete a task raises self-efficacy. According to Bandura, observers will reason if these other people can work hard and find success, I can work hard and be successful too.

Applications of Social Cognitive Theory

Bandura’s work on Social Cognitive Theory has been applied to many other fields besides education. Some of the more popular applications include:

• Psychotherapy - to increase confidence and treat anxiety issues
• Management - to increase motivation in employees
• Criminology - to explain the emergence of aggressive and deviant behaviors
• Media - to influence viewers to perform a desired behavior or to explain how certain types of entertainment may contribute to problem behaviors.
• Developmental Psychology - to help children with gender-role development
• Technology - to optimize computer learning algorithms

Albert Bandura’s Awards and Achievements

Albert Bandura has accomplished much in his long and distinguished career in psychology. In addition to the doctoral degree he earned at the University of Iowa, he has also been awarded more than sixteen honorary degrees from institutions around the world. These institutions include:

• The University of British Columbia
• Alfred University
• The University of Ottawa
• The University of Athens
• The University of Rome
• The University of New Brunswick
• Leiden University
• The University of Alberta
• The Graduate Center of the City University of New York
• Freie Universität Berlin
• The University of Lethbridge
• University of Catania
• Universitat Jaume I
• Penn State University
• The University of Salamanca
• Indiana University

Other notable awards and accomplishments include:

• 1974 - Elected president of the American Psychological Association
• 1980 - Elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
• 1980 - Award for Distinguished Scientific Contributions from the American Psychological Association
• 1980 - Distinguished Contribution Award from the International Society for Research on Aggression
• 1986 - Scientific Achievement Award in the Field of Behavioral Medicine from the Society of Behavioral Medicine
• 1989 - William James Award from the American Psychological Society
• 1989 - Elected to the National Academy of Medicine
• 1998 - Distinguished Lifetime Contributions Award from the California Psychological Association
• 1999 - Thorndike Award for Distinguished Contributions of Psychology to Education from the American Psychological Association
• 2001 - Lifetime Achievement Award from the Association for the Advancement of Behavior Therapy
• 2002 - Healthtrac Award for Distinguished Contributions to Health Promotion
• 2003 - Lifetime Achievement Award from the Western Psychological Association
• 2004 - Outstanding Lifetime Contribution to Psychology Award from the American Psychological Association
• 2004 - James McKeen Cattell Award for Distinguished Achievements in Psychological Science from the American Psychological Society
• 2004 - McGovern Medal for Distinguished Contribution to Health Promotion Science
• 2004 - Honorary Fellow of the World Innovation Foundation
• 2005 - Distinguished Achievement Alumni Award from the University of Iowa
• 2005 - Award for Distinguished Health Behavior Research from the American Academy of Health Behavior
• 2006 - Gold Medal Award for Distinguished Lifetime Contribution to Psychological Science from the American Psychological Foundation
• 2006 - Distinguished Lifetime Achievement Award for Advancement of Health Promotion through Health Promotion Research from the American Academy of Health Behavior
• 2007 - Everett M. Rogers Award from the Norman Lear Center for Entertainment and Society
• 2008 - Grawemeyer Award from the Grawemeyer Foundation
• 2009 - Interamerican Psychology Award from the Interamerican Society of Psychology
• 2012 - Lifetime Career Award from the International Union of Psychological Science
• 2015 - Order of Canada from the Governor-General of Canada
• 2015 - Sustained Distinguished Contributions Award from the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies
• 2016 - National Medal of Science, bestowed by President Barack Obama

Albert Bandura's Books and Publications

Albert Bandura was a prolific author of books and articles throughout his career. His first paper  was published in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology in 1953. It was titled "'Primary' and 'Secondary' Suggestibility." Many of his publications are considered as classics in the field psychology. Some of his most impactful books and articles are listed below:

Social Learning Theory (1977) - This book has been credited as changing the direction of psychology from a behavioral focus to a cognitive focus. It highlighted how people learn through observation and modeling.

Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change (1977) - This article introduced the concept of self-efficacy. It was published in Psychological Review and became an instant classic.

Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory (1986) - A landmark book that expands upon Social Learning Theory and introduces Social Cognitive Theory.

Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. (1997) - This book has been published in English, French, Chinese, Italian and Korean. It is widely cited in the professional literature of sociology, psychology, medicine, and management.

Bandura’s other books include:

• Adolescent Aggression (1959)
• Social Learning through Imitation (1962)
• Social Learning and Personality Development (1963)
• Principles of Behavior Modification (1969)
• Psychological Modeling: Conflicting Theories (1971)
• Aggression: A Social Learning Analysis (1973)
• Analysis of Delinquency and Aggression (1976)
• Moral Disengagement : How People Do Harm and Live with Themselves (2015)

Albert Bandura is the most cited psychologist alive today. He is also the fourth most cited psychologist of all time, behind only B.F. Skinner, Sigmund Freud, and Jean Piaget.

Personal Life

Albert Bandura married his wife, Virginia, in 1952. They first met at the University of Iowa, where Virginia was an instructor at the College of Nursing. They have two daughters, Carol and Mary, and identical twin grandsons named Timmy and Andy. In 2011, Virginia Bandura passed away peacefully at the age of 89.

Is Albert Bandura Alive Today?

Albert Bandura died from congestive heart failure in 2021 at the age of 95. Up until his death, Bandura enjoyed hiking in the Sierra Mountains, walking through the coastal regions of California, dining at restaurants, going to the San Francisco Opera, and drinking a good bottle of wine.

Related posts:

• Albert Bandura's Bobo Doll Experiment (Explained)
• 40+ Famous Psychologists (Images + Biographies)
• Observational Learning
• Albert Ellis Biography - Contributions To Psychology
• The Little Albert Experiment

Reference this article:

About The Author

Famous Psychologists:

Abraham Maslow

Albert Bandura

Albert Ellis

Alfred Adler

Beth Thomas

Carl Rogers

Carol Dweck

Daniel Kahneman

David Dunning

David Mcclelland

Edward Thorndike

Elizabeth Loftus

Erik Erikson

G. Stanley Hall

George Kelly

Gordon Allport

Howard Gardner

Hugo Munsterberg

Ivan Pavlov

Jerome Bruner

John B Watson

John Bowlby

Konrad Lorenz

Lawrence Kohlberg

Leon Festinger

Lev Vygotsky

Martin Seligman

Mary Ainsworth

Philip Zimbardo

Rensis Likert

Robert Cialdini

Robert Hare

Sigmund Freud

Solomon Asch

Stanley Milgram

Ulric Neisser

Urie Bronfenbrenner

Wilhelm Wundt

William Glasser

PracticalPie.com is a participant in the Amazon Associates Program. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow Us On:

Youtube Facebook Instagram X/Twitter

Psychology Resources

Developmental

Personality

Relationships

Psychologists

Serial Killers

Psychology Tests

Personality Quiz

Memory Test

Depression test

Type A/B Personality Test

© PracticalPsychology. All rights reserved

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

• List of Theories
• Privacy Policy
• Opt-out preferences

bandura’s-bobo-doll-experiment

Social cognitive theory is developed by the renowned Canadian psychologist Albert Bandura. He is well known for the classic “Bobo doll experiment”.

Related Posts:

• Bloom's Taxonomy | Domains of Learning with Examples
• Concept of IKIGAI-To Know The Purpose Of Life
• Catharsis in Psychology - History and Therapy
• Wheel Of Life - A Motivation Guide By Paul J Meyer

Leave a Comment

• Advertising, Public relations, Marketing and Consumer Behavior
• Business Communication
• Communication / General
• Communication Barriers
• Communication in Practice
• Communication Models
• Cultural Communication
• Development Communication
• Group Communication
• Intercultural Communication
• Interpersonal Communication
• Mass Communication
• Organisational Communication
• Political Communication
• Psychology, Behavioral And Social Science
• Technical Communication
• Visual Communication

Communication Theory

Just Gabbing…

Rhetoric and Civic Life '2023-24

The Bobo Doll Experiment

In today’s passion blog, we dive into another of Stanford’s distinguished experiments: the Bobo Doll experiment conducted by Professor Albert Bandura, a Canadian-American psychologist at Stanford University. Bandura, celebrated for his Social Learning Theory, joined Stanford in 1953, focusing on adolescent aggression and the power of vicarious learning, modeling, and imitation. The Social Learning Theory emphasizes the significance of observational learning, imitation, and modeling in forming new behaviors.

In 1961, Bandura initiated the Bobo Doll study. Using a Bobo doll, a blow-up toy resembling a life-sized bowling pin, Bandura and his colleagues aimed to investigate whether witnessing acts of aggression would incentivize children to become aggressive and imitate these behaviors. They carefully selected 36 boys and 36 girls aged 3 to 6 from the Stanford University nursery, dividing them into three groups of 24.

The first group observed adults behave aggressively toward the Bobo doll, using hammers or any available object to hit it. The next group observed adults playing with the Bobo doll in a non-aggressive manner, while the final group had no models to observe and were simply shown the doll. After witnessing these actions, each group was escorted to a room with toys, specifically designed according to what they had seen.

In one room, aggressive toys were provided to mimic the violence observed, while the other room contained non-aggressive toys. Remarkably, the first group of children who witnessed the violence began to imitate the behavior of the adult subjects. Bandura and his colleagues were surprised to find that female children acted more physically aggressive after watching male subjects and became verbally aggressive after watching female subjects.

Bandura’s Bobo Doll experiment departed from the ideologies of B.F. Skinner, believed that behavior is influenced by reinforcement and punishment. In Bandura’s experiment, the children were not rewarded or punished for imitating the observed behavior. Instead, they simply imitate the behavior displayed to them. According to an article published by Kendra Cherry titled “Albert Bandura’s Biography,” Bandura termed this phenomenon observational learning and characterized the elements of effective observational learning as attention, retention, reciprocation, and motivation.

Bandura’s work had a profound impact on psychology, particularly during the cognitive revolution of the 1960s. His research significantly influenced various areas of psychology, including personality psychology, cognitive psychology, psychotherapy, and education. Despite receiving numerous awards for his accomplishments, concerns persisted regarding the exposure of children to aggressive models.

While the children in Bandura’s experiment were not directly harmed, witnessing aggressive behavior could have serious implications, leading to aggressive behavior or heightened anxiety. Like many other experiments, Bandura’s study came with risks, doubts, and concerns from adults. However, without such experiments, advancements in the field of psychology would not be possible.

Bandura’s Bobo Doll experiment showed how watching others can affect how we behave, which changes how we think about learning. It teaches us that people around us can influence our actions, not just our own experiences. Bandura’s work keeps psychologists and researchers curious, making them want to understand people better. And while we think about what Bandura did, let’s also keep in mind the importance of doing research the right way, with a focus on ethics, so we can keep learning responsibly. print

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Chapter 1 . MODELING: LEARNING BY OBSERVATION

LEARNING BY OBSERVATION

Thomas E. Ludwig, Hope College

More than four decades ago, Albert Bandura and his colleagues conducted their now-classic experiments on observational learning and aggression. In this activity, you will view video clips from Bandura’s original Bobo experiments that show a model engaged in aggressive actions and children imitating the model. After observing the children’s behavior, you will identify the specific aggressive actions imitated by the children. The activity concludes with a discussion of Bandura’s findings on the general arousing effect of viewing aggression.

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575–582.

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 3–11.

Introduction

More than four decades ago, Albert Bandura and his colleagues conducted their now-classic experiments on observational learning and aggression. These experiments used Bobo dolls—large inflatable dolls weighted with sand at the bottom—as the targets of aggression.

In Bandura’s initial experiment, some young children watched an adult model hit the Bobo doll in a variety of ways and make aggressive remarks to the doll. Other young children saw the doll but were not exposed to the model’s aggressive behavior. Later, the researchers intentionally frustrated the children by removing the toys that they had been playing with. The researchers then left the frustrated children alone with the Bobo doll and filmed their behavior through a one-way mirror.

Click to enlarge the following flow chart, which summarizes the results of Bandura's experiment.

Results from Bandura’s Experiment

Can you guess what happened? Those children who had seen the model act aggressively (the experimental group) were much more likely to display aggressive behaviors toward the doll than were the other children (the control group). Even more interesting, the two groups differed in the type of aggression that they displayed. When children in the control group acted aggressively, they usually hit or punched the doll with their fists. When the children in the experimental group showed aggression, they often imitated the model’s specific aggressive remarks as well as the model’s specific and unusual aggressive behaviors.

These results show that direct rewards and punishments are not necessary for learning. Children can learn from modeling—that is, they learn to act aggressively just by watching another person’s behavior and can even learn specific novel behaviors from the model.

A Closer Look at Bandura’s Experiment

Let’s break Bandura’s experiment into its components. First, you will examine the actions of the model in a video clip that is part of the original footage from Bandura’s research. As you watch the video, pay close attention to the model’s behavior.

Question 1.1

After watching the video, list the specific behaviors in the response fields below. Be sure to enter one behavior in each of the five answer boxes.

Behavior 1:

Behavior 2:

Behavior 3:

Behavior 4:

Behavior 5:

A Closer Look at Bandura's Experiment (continued)

Screenshot Credits: Courtesy of Albert Bandura © Worth Publishers

How well did you do? Did you notice each of the specific actions illustrated?

Here is the list of behaviors that you observed:

1.) No response entered.

2.) No response entered.

3.) No response entered.

4.) No response entered.

5.) No response entered.

Observing the Children Who Observed the Model

You have seen the model's actions. Now let’s see how the children interacted with the Bobo doll after watching the model.

The next video shows more of the original video footage from Bandura's research. In this clip, you will see a young boy who participated in the experimental condition (exposed to the aggressive model). Pay close attention to his specific behaviors, and then list those behaviors in the response fields below.

Question 1.2

Be sure to enter one behavior in each of the five answer boxes.

The Boy’s Actions

Observing Another Child

Perhaps you were not surprised that the little boy imitated Bandura’s aggressive model, but would little girls do the same when put into a room with the Bobo doll? The next video clip, also from Bandura’s original footage, shows a young girl who participated in the experimental condition. Pay close attention to her specific behaviors, and then list those behaviors in the response fields below.

Question 1.3

The girl’s actions.

Inventing Novel Behaviors

It was clear from Bandura’s initial experiment that children could learn specific aggressive behaviors by watching a model, but Bandura also demonstrated that exposure to an aggressive model has a general arousing effect on the child leading the child to invent his or her own novel forms of violent behavior and display actions that go beyond mere imitation of the model.

In this final video, you will see one more clip of Bandura’s original video footage of children in the experimental group. Pay close attention to their specific behaviors.

These children did not see a model throw an object at the doll or point a gun at the doll. Nevertheless, the model’s aggression stimulated the children to initiate these new forms of violence on their own. Bandura concluded that children learn at least two things from observing an aggressive model: (1) how to perform the specific actions demonstrated by the model, and (2) the general point that aggression is an acceptable (and perhaps even enjoyable) form of behavior.

Assessment: Check Your Understanding

Question 1.4, question 1.5, question 1.6, question 1.7, question 1.8.

Activity results are being submitted...

Sell Your Unwanted Gadgets For Cash

Sell your gadgets today, looking to sell your unwanted gadgets, zarax ltd pays top dollar for your working or non-working electrical items*.

Are you thinking “Where can I  sell my gadgets  today?”  Do you leave cash lying around the house? Probably not; but it has been estimated that most of the population will have unwanted items gathering dust at home, packed away in the attic or sitting in the back of a cupboard. While these gadgets may be of no use to them, someone else would buy them in an instant!

These items could be worth hundreds or even thousands of pounds – so why leave them lying around the house? We buy a wide range of electrical items that include:

Sell My Computer

Is your computer collecting dust? Sell it to us! We buy all types of computers, regardless of age or condition.

Sell My Computer Now

Sell My Laptop

Laptops old, broken, or new? We’ll buy your laptop from you! Plus, we’ll always pay you more for it.

Sell My Laptop Now

Sell My MacBook

Upgrade time? Sell your MacBook to us for top dollar. We accept all models, whether they’re working or not.

Sell My MacBook Now

Sell My MacBook Pro

Turn your old MacBook Pro into cash. We buy all models and conditions, offering the best prices around.

Sell My MacBook Pro Now

Sell My Phone

Phones of any make, model, or condition wanted! Get top dollar for your old or new phone with us.

Sell My Phone Now

Sell My Smartwatch

Smartwatch out of style? We buy all smartwatches and offer you the best price for your device.

Sell My Smartwatch Now

Sell My Games

Got games you don’t play? We buy video games of all genres and platforms. Get cash for your collection today.

Sell My Games Now

Sell My PS5

Got a PS5 you no longer need? We’ll give you a great price for it. Fast, easy, and hassle-free!

Sell My PS5 Now

Sell My PS4

Your PS4 is still worth good money. Sell it to us and get a fair deal, regardless of its condition.

Sell My PS4 Now

Sell My PlayStation 3

Ready to part with your PlayStation 3? We’re ready to buy it. Get quick cash for your old console today.

Sell My PlayStation 3 Now

Sell My Xbox One

Selling your Xbox One has never been easier. We offer competitive prices and a straightforward process.

Sell My Xbox One Now

Sell My Xbox 360

Don’t let your Xbox 360 gather dust. Sell it to us and get a great deal, no matter its condition.

Sell My Xbox 360 Now

Sell My Nintendo Switch

Switching to a new console? Sell your Nintendo Switch to us for the best price available.

Sell My Nintendo Switch Now

Sell My Vacuum Cleaner

Your old vacuum cleaner can still be valuable. Sell it to us and get a great deal, no matter its condition.

Sell My Vacuum Cleaner Now

Upgrading your TV? We’ll buy your old one, working or broken, and offer you a great price.

Sell My TV Now

Sell My Broken TV

Even broken TVs have value! Sell your damaged or non-working TV to us for a fair deal.

Sell My Broken TV Now

Sell My Camera

Whether you are (or were) an amateur or professional photographer, we want to buy your used cameras.

Sell My Camera Now

Sell My Refrigerator

Need to get rid of your old refrigerator? We buy all types and offer the best prices for your used appliances.

Sell My Refrigerator Now

Sell My Washing Machine

Sell your washing machine to us for a quick and easy transaction. We accept all makes and models.

Sell My Washing Machine Now

Sell My Microwave

Microwave not in use? Sell it to us and get cash fast. We buy all conditions, even non-working ones.

Sell My Microwave Now

Sell My Air Conditioner

Cool off with extra cash by selling your old air conditioner. We offer the best prices for any condition.

Sell My Air Conditioner Now

What Our Customers Say About Us

Absolutely fantastic service.

My PS3 stayed with me to the very end, but the end had come because I wanted to buy a PS4.  Anyway I sold my PS3 to Zara, it was a really easy process and with the unexpectedly large amount of cash they gave me, I bought my PS4.

Efficient, Quick and Easy

My PS3 stopped reading discs. But I didn’t really want to wait to get it repaired so I just sold it and got a PS4. Zarax not only bought it even though it wasn’t working they gave me more than I expected for it. PS4 was really expensive so the cash helped a bunch.

Great Service All Round!

Thank you for buying my ps3 so quickly and with such great service

Great Service!

My iPod stopped working about three years ago. I was going to get it fixed but I keep all my music on my phone now. So I sold it to Zarax and let me just say wow. Just wow! Great service, great money, great experience! I am so happy I found you guys. I will definitely use your services again and I have recommended you to all my friends! Even ones who have working gadgets – just to tell them, when they want to sell, to do it through you guys haha.

Wow, this process was almost too easy. The quote took around two minutes to fill out. They emailed me within half an hour and I sent them my iPod. Only a day later, they had it, and they deposited the money into my PayPal.

Will be back again!

Third time using Zarax – first for an old laptop, then an old phone, then an iPod. Maybe it is starting to become an addiction?! I am happy with the service, and of course, very happy with the money

Speedy Service

Such great service and so much faster than I was expecting! Plus they gave me cash for my iPod. Eventually I bought some really nice shoes with it. Great service, will definitely recommend!! (Zarax – not the shoes! The shoes are good too)

Best Gadget Buy Back Company Around

I’m a professional photographer so I always have to trade out for the best equipment. I’ve sold my old cameras to a few places before and have had mixed experiences. Most have been okay at best. eBay was an absolute nightmare though with all the fees they charged. For best value, best service, quickest times, and just leaving me the happiest, no one compares to Zarax. I’ve been using their services for about five years now and sold about fifteen cameras. I’ll keep coming back as long as they keep being the best at gadget buyback.

Couldn’t be Happier

Great price offered for my broken camera. I hadn’t used it in months and finally decided to replace it rather than getting it fixed somewhere. Zarax handed me cash for my broken camera within days of when I filled out the quote! Couldn’t be happier with the service I received!

Highly recommended, good fast service

Really is better than ebay.

Love using Zarax! I can ship them all my used phones and I get the money really quickly! I didn’t believe when they said I could get more than on ebay so I looked at what my phone was selling for. It’s the truth though. There were people selling their phones for what Zarax was going to give me but no one was actually buying them for that price.

Perfect for phone upgrades

I get a phone upgrade every year or 2 with my phone company. So each time I take my old phone to Zarax. One of them had a crack on the case and they still bought it. One of them had water damage and they still bought it. If you’re going to do it just make sure you keep the box and manuals and stuff. That way they can give you a higher price.

So Quick and Easy!

Great staff, great service.

The staff at Zarax are great. Really friendly, plus such a fast turnaround time. I still can’t believe they came to pick up my laptop at my house. I thought for sure I’d have to pay for p&p to get it there, or drop it off myself. Thanks for the amazing experience.

Highly Recommended

I have used Zarax more times than I can count. Why? …….. because they’re great! Always get good, fast service through them. I’ve recommended them to so many friends who have also sold their laptops with Zarax. It’s the perfect way to get money to buy better laptops!

Great to get rid of games too

I sold my son’s Xbox 360 to Zarax a few months ago because he went off to college. It was a really fast and easy experience. So when I found his collection of old Xbox games in his room, I checked Zarax first. Turns out they do buy them and my experience selling his games was just as good as the first experience. I’m a very happy customer!

Really Pleased

I’ve been a Zarax customer for years and I didn’t know you bought used games. You offered me so much for my old games,  much more than I was getting selling off of eBay! Thank you!

Quick service and so helpful

I had to downsize to move into a flat and couldn’t take as much stuff with me. So I had to sell my used games because they took up too much space. Zarax was so fast with giving me a quote and I had my money just days later. Helped me get some furniture for my flat too.

Great for Unwanted Presents

I bought my son an Xbox as a gift and he didn’t really take to it. So I decided to sell it instead and just gave him the money for it. He ended up liking that better (I wish they weren’t so hard to shop for) and I was glad the process was so easy.

Don’t Throw Away Your Broken Gadgets!

When my Xbox broke, I heard some companies might buy broken electronics. I did a few web searches and the most professional looking site by far was Zarax.co.uk.  I answered their questions about my Xbox’s condition and accessories. I submitted them and ten minutes later, I had an email with a quote. I shipped my Xbox the same day and they called me when they received it, transferring the money right into my bank.

Amazing speed and amazing prices!

I’m so happy with the deal I got in selling my Xbox, and the money came really quickly too. Thank you!

Great Service and Polite Staff

Very happy with the service I received when I sold my TV to Zarax. I had a lot of questions so I called them. Answered right away, very polite on the phone, very patient with me… and I got the money directly transferred to my bank account.

Happy Customer

I know everyone is saying the same thing in the testimonials but Zarax is amazing! They came to pick up my TV the very next day – no extra fee or anything and they gave me so much cash for it. I am a very happy customer. Thanks!

I searched around for a long time to find the best company to sell my TV to and finally decided on Zarax, I’m so glad I did!. Zarax was very fair to me. I recommend them to anyone looking for a nice, fair and reliable deal on their TV. I get the money in my bank and they have my old LG TV that I no longer needed. Everyone wins!!!

When I upgraded my PS3 I was going to sell it on eBay as that is what I have always done. I decided to give Zarax a try though and I’m really pleased. They gave me far more than I thought I would get, and I didn’t have to worry about selling it myself either. Would definitely use again

Perfect service from start to finish

When my old camera broke I was going to throw it away but a friend recommended Zarax to me. I’m so glad she did! I got an email back with a quote on really quickly and I had the money for the old camera within days. So pleased and will definitely spread the word

Great service every time

I have been using Zarax for a while to get rid of all my old electronics. I’m so happy with the service, it’s helped me declutter my house and the money has also come in really handy too! I have recommended it to loads of my friends and family and they are all really pleased too.

The Environmentally Friendly Option!

I used to just throw away my old broken phones and cameras, I didn’t realise that there were companies that would buy them off you! I’m so happy with the service from Zarax, quick and polite service, plus it’s so much better for the environment … and my bank balance!

Great way to get rid of the rubbish (and his Xbox!)

My ex left me his Xbox when he went, so I wasted no time as I was never going to use it, sold it to Zarax and pocketed the cash!

Fantastic Service

Great for an upgrade

My son wanted to sell his old PS4 and use the money for the new PS5. Zarax paid him almost £300 which went towards his new device. It was so easy – they even delivered the cash to my door.

Sell old PS4

I couldn’t believe how simple it was to sell my old PS4. The payment hit my bank in minutes – so happy!

Fast Payment

Zarax sent my payment instantly. Brilliant!

Easier than selling the kids

My kids smashed the TV screen, making it useless. Thought I’d have to throw it away until a friend mentioned Zarax. I contacted them and they gave me money for my broken TV. This arrived within minutes. I couldn’t believe how easy it was.

When my TV stopped working, it was typical that the warranty had expired. Zarax offered me a great payment for it, and so I decided to take their offer. They came down and collected it, and I used the cash to buy a new TV. V v happy 10/10

Great Price

The amount Zarax offered me for my PS5 seemed too good to be true, but they came, picked it up, and very quickly gave me a generous price which I snapped up. Really happy with the service, and the money!

Fantastic service

Fantastic service!

I tried several online buyers to get best quote and Zarax gave the most money. V v good.

Nintendo Switch Sale

My daughter got bored with her Switch so we decided to sell it and get her something she really wanted with the money. Zarax gave us £250 for the console. It’s fantastic to be able to shop around for something for her without worrying too much about the cost!

Zarax bought my Switch. It was easy and I got the cash really quickly. Really happy.

MacBook Great Price

Working from home has meant that I’ve had to invest in a more powerful machine than my Macbook. Zarax gave me a great price for the Mac, and the money went a very long way towards my new laptop.

Upgrade to my Mac

I needed a better computer for my college work, but couldn’t afford one. By selling my Mac, I was able to get a decent upgrade. Thanks Zarax!

Easy service

Easy service and received my money instantly – 11/10

Brilliant price

I wanted to sell my Macbook Pro, and Zarax gave me the best price for it – brilliant!

Fantastic service, and a great price. Five stars!

I needed to get a better, faster computer and wanted to sell my old one to do this. Zarax bought it and gave me a large amount of money, so I was able to buy a much better computer.

Best Quotes Around!

I shopped around to get the best quote for my old computer, and Zarax were by far the best and offered a really simple service. Brilliant!

Paid promptly. Great service.