Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory

SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY

HISTORY

Before Bandura, Edwin B. Holt and Harold Chapman Brown in 1931 based their work on the perception that all animal action is based on fulfilling the psychological needs of “feeling, emotion and desire”. The most notable component of this theory is that it predicted a person cannot learn to imitate until they are imitated (Chapman, 1931)In 1941, Neal E. Miller and John Dollard presented their book with a revision of Holt’s theory. Miller and Dollard argued that if one were motivated to learn a particular behavior, then that particular behavior would be learned through clear observations. By imitating these observed actions the individual observer would solidify that learned action and would be rewarded with positive

1989, New York: Praeger. In 1986, Bandura published his second book which expanded and renamed his original theory; he called the new theory Social Cognitive Theory. Bandura changed the name of his theory to emphasize the major role cognition plays in encoding and performing behaviors. In this book, Bandura argued that human behavior is caused by personal, behavioral, and environmental influences

This theory is a revision of the social learning theory done albert bandura in 1961-1963. What the theory states is that and individual acquires knowledge from observing others who act as models through interaction with them. The individual observes the behaviour,consequences of that behaviour and remember the sequence of the events and use the information to guide subsequent behaviours. (Bandura, 1986)

Social cognitive theory is applied today in many different areas. Mass media, public health, education, and marketing are just a very few. Examples of the theory in application: The use of celebrities to endorse and introduce any number of products to certain demographics: one way in which social cognitive theory encompasses all four of these domains. In Miller's 2005 study,she found that

The origin of exchange as an economic process is generally attributed to Adam Smith whose 18th century work, the wealth of nations suggested that a nation’s resources are enhanced when market forces function competitively without the interference of government. He believed self-interest to be a driving economic force and that competition could rein in what might otherwise be unbridled greed. Unhindered, the’ invisible hand’ of the competitive free market could best regulate the ebb and flow of exchange to the mutual benefit of all