social learning theory Research Essay

The premise of the social learning theory is that people gain knowledge from their encounters with others in a social setting. As a result, a person develops comparable characters by observing the behaviors of others. However, they primarily copy or assimilate the behavior, particularly if it is accompanied by incentives or other favorable experiences. Additionally, the theory has grown to be one of the most important frameworks for learning and development tasks. Because it incorporates motivation, memory, and focus, Murro and Jeffrey (2008) see it as a link between cognitive learning models and learning theories. The social learning paradigm has thus been used in a variety of academic fields. However, despite providing a detailed report on the social learning theory and its perspectives, this paper will also focus on its application on the criminology field.

Social learning model theorists

The emergence of the social learning model is dated back to the twentieth century whereby a group headed by Robert Sears attempted to combine stimulus-response and psychanalytic learning theory into an extensive description of human behavior. However, Albert Bandura, perceived as the father of the social learning theory, stressed on focusing on the information processing and cognitive capacities rather than psychoanalytic and drive features of the model. Eventually, Bandura’s approach was mostly used by other theorists for it had a robust theoretical beginning. However, other individuals contributed to the emergence of the social learning theory.

According to another theorist, Sutherland, a person learns two definition kinds with regard to executing a specific behavior. The individual can either learn unfavorable definitions that would probably reduce the likelihood that he would commit a behavior or he or she can learn a favorable definition thus increasing their probability of engaging in the behavior. Despite gaining much attention, Sutherland’s theory was criticized by Burgess and Akers pointing out that it had failed to get significant empirical support and saw a need for modification in response to some of its weaknesses. Similarly to Sutherland, Akers believed that friends and family were the most significant groups in influencing an individual to undertake an unfavorable action. He also stated that such groups affect a person mostly in their early childhood years.

The principles of the theory

The perspective of the social learning theory is that most human behavior is learned observationally through modelling. Moreover, the primary principles of the framework are modelling, imitation, and observation. As such, learning can take place without a need for a permanent modification in behavior. Besides, according to the learning theorists, the process can occur through observation alone and not necessarily be observed in one’s performance (O’Rorke, 2006). Nevertheless, there are various conditions which affect the modelling process. For instance, the first one is a person’s attention which can be affected by functional value, complexity, prevalence, affective valence, and distinctiveness. An individual’s characteristics like past reinforcement, perceptual set, and sensory capacities can also influence their degree of attentiveness. Moreover, remembrance of what one paid attention to, retention, is also necessary for efficient modelling. Retention can be in the form of motor and symbolic rehearsal, cognitive organization, mental images, and symbolic coding. Reproduction, consisting of reproduction of the image, is also a key aspect of the modelling procedure. The last condition is motivation which is made of vicarious, promised, and past motives. The theory is also based on reciprocal determinism. Bandura, the pioneer of the social learning framework, was certain that “a person’s behavior and the world cause each other” (McLeod, 2016).

The social learning theory concepts

The model has three concepts, including modelling process, intrinsic reinforcement, and observational learning. For verification of the latter, Bandura carried out the Bobo doll experiment. His results showed that the children observed the activities that people carried out around them. Later on, these young people would start imitating the behaviors they viewed regardless of whether they were “gender appropriate” or not. However, he realized that there were factors that would determine the likelihood of the reproduction of the observed character. Firstly, they are likely to copy behavior from individuals that they perceive as similar to themselves. Their probability of copying a behavior is also based on the consequences associated with the same, especially reinforcement. The reinforcement can either be internal or external and adverse or positive. However, regardless of the type of reinforcement, there will be a little effect if it does not match the person’s needs. Also, whether the reinforcement is negative or positive, it usually results in an alteration of one’s behavior. Lastly, Bandura realized that the children took into consideration of what takes place, that is the consequences, to other individuals before deciding on whether to imitate their actions or not. However, reinforcement is not the only factor that shapes behavior for punishment also contributes to the same.

Social learning theory in understanding of crime

The framework’s validity and generality have made it applicable in the field of criminology. As a result, the model in conjunction with strain and control theories have been named the central approaches in explaining criminal behavior (Morris & Higgins, 2010). It also describes where people get involved in deviance and crime, their reason to continue offending, why they decide to call a halt from criminal involvement, why they specialize or generalize and why they decrease or escalate. However, his notion that criminals learn from others before becoming involved in illegal actions was criticized by other theorists who stated that they might engage in such activities without any teachings. Another criticism is that if no one was born knowing crime then who participated in the first illegal action. However, some truth has also been found in Sunderland’s concept for some older criminals impart knowledge regarding the activities to the younger ones.

According to Sutherland, one of the theorists to contribute to social learning theory, criminal behaviors are learnt just like other conventional activity (Salkind, 2004). Based on his approach, one can deduce that any individual can indulge in criminality upon being exposed to attitudes favorable to lawbreaking. Also, he pinpointed that the procedure of learning illegality is similar to that of a legal activity. On the other hand, Akers and Burgess also built on the social learning approach. In 1966, they developed the differential association theory which consisted of nine suggestions. They proposed that criminal behavior is learned, it is learned through interactions during a communication process with other individuals and according to the operant conditioning process. They also claimed that the critical section of the learning process took place within intimate personal groups. Moreover, the behaviors are also learned both in nonsocial contexts that are discriminative or reinforcing (Warr, 2002). The learning, according to the two theorists, comprised of the particular direction of attitudes, rationalizations, drives, and motives as well as the methods of committing the crime. Moreover, they also stated that differential association differs in intensity, priority, duration, and frequency. Akers and Burgess also argued that criminal behavior is not explained by general values and needs despite being an expression of the same. Lastly, they mentioned that all the procedures that are integrated into various learnings are also found in the learning of criminal behavior through association with anti-criminal and criminal patterns.

Akers claimed that the vital factor in understanding a criminal’s behavior was gaining knowledge on their environment. He also stated that the social structure comprised of an organizing aspect that has an indirect impact on the carrying out of an illegal activity by a lawbreaker (Crossman, 2017). As a result, he concluded that social structure’s four dimensions are a framework for showing that the learning procedure occurs. The elements include differential social location, theoretically defined structural variables, differential location in the social structure, and differential social organization. Furthermore, Akers argued that the latter concentrated on the socio-demographic factors, people’s roles in organizations, the standing of individuals, marital status, race and ethnicity, gender, and class, among others. He also stated that other elements such as patriarchy, social disorganization, class oppression, and anomie, contribute to carrying out of criminal activities. On the other hand, differential social location denotes social group’s membership. Such groups can be inclusive of family, gangs, and other peer groups.

Social learning theory in prevention of crime

Based on the assumption that crime is learned through the social learning model, alteration and control of the behavior can be attained. As a result, the framework has been applied in the practical application in crime avoidance efforts. An example is the Highfields alternative treatment program which permitted boys to take part in regular work, school, and outside activities provided that they stayed at the facility. Within the facility, the correspondents were mainly exposed to Guided Group Interaction sessions involving adult figure-heads who would guide them in discussions concerning the creation of a group atmosphere fostering pro-social behaviors and attitudes as well as common issues (Akers & Jennings, 2009). At the end of the program, the boys were discovered to have developed more law-abiding attitudes. However, the results were more recognizable and modest within the black community.

Another semi-residential alternative placement program is the Empey’ delinquency treatment experiment. In this experimentation, they positioned felons in a group home facility and provided them with duties such as formulating opinions regarding when a resident is ready to be released, determination of the proper punishment for rule breaking, the creation of rules, the orientation of new residents, and formation of groups. However, in the current world, contemporary prevention programs have also been developed in the inhibition of criminal activities. These programs are based on some factors of the social learning framework. For instance, the Teens, Crime, and the Community and Community Works adopts a risk-factor technique. This program was designed by the Street Law, Inc. in cooperation with the National Crime Prevention Council. Furthermore, it attempts to decrease victimization and juvenile wrongdoings through concentrating on particular protective and risk factors attributed to its happening.

Strengths of the theory

The social learning model has several strengths. For instance, its emphasis on the environment can help explain a change in an individual’s character in the real world. As such, it is flexible in describing differences in a child’s learning or behavior (McLeod, 2016). Furthermore, despite that the framework focuses more on people acquire behaviors and gain knowledge through environmental effects, bringing about the idea of the availability of various modes of learning, is one of its fundamental strengths. According to Bandura, a person can either learn through observation or direct experiences.

Other aspects of the theory have also been verified in various settings. For instance, a study by Phillips in 1986 discovered that there was a rise in the United States’ daily homicide levels following a significant boxing match. This finding implied that the viewers had a tendency of copying what they observed thus showing that social learning also applied to adults. Another advantage of the theory is that it focuses on significant theoretical issues such as the stability of behavior and the role played by a reward in the learning process. Besides, it is an evolving theory that allows for modification.

Weaknesses

Regarding crime, the social learning framework does not take individual differences into consideration but rather how a person is impacted by social factors. As such, the biological aspects are not taken into account in the description of how people adopt criminal actions. Moreover, the theory does not incorporate the understanding opportunistic crime which has not been learnt and observed first in its explanation. Therefore, the social learning model primarily applies to light crimes like aggression and theft but leaves behind illegalities such as rape and murder. Furthermore, the framework also has ignored the standard milestones involved in other learning models. As such, it does not explain the progression of growth and learning that is age dependent or chronological (O’Rorke, 2006). Also, the social learning framework does not consider that a factor that an individual might view as a reward might be a punishment to another nor does it take into account description of behavioral differences. Moreover, it does not consider all behavior that or the mental and physical changes.

On the other hand, the social learning theory does not explain regarding why a person would continue being involved in an illegal activity even upon the removal of the model. Furthermore, ethical issues serve as a barrier for the testing of the framework experimentally. Subjecting of children to aggressive behavior knowing well that they may adopt it brings about ethical problems regarding the need to protect the partakers of the test from physical and psychological harm. Therefore, experimental undertakings like Bandura’s Bobo doll studies are no longer permitted to be carried out. As such, testing of the hypothesis concerning social learning is difficult.

Conclusion

The social learning theory is among the most used models in explanation of any alteration of behaviors among individuals. The theory has been in use since the twentieth century whereby theorists like Sutherland, Akers and Burgess contributed to the model before Bandura, the father of social learning theory, took over and built upon the weaknesses of the previous studies. The perspectives of the theory involve explaining the approaches through which learning occurs whereby the environment is perceived to be of significant impact to the same. Moreover, according to the theory, individuals get involved in criminal activities through learning from others. As such, the framework explains the behaviors of criminals, how they acquire them, reasons behind their adoption or abstinence from illegal undertakings. It also helps give details regarding how illegal activities can be prevented as well as presents different studies associated with the topic. Furthermore, it has several strengths based on its stress on the environment which has been found by other topics to be a significant contributing factor to the process of learning. However, despite having advantages, the theory has few limitations from which most of its criticisms are founded. For instance, it does not describe the development process of behavior before an individual practices it nor does it consider other aspects that may lead to the adoption of criminal undertakings. In my opinion, I view the social learning theory as a more theoretical model rather than a practical one, and thus I believe that it has limited applications in the real world. I also believe that the theory cannot function properly without combining it with other frameworks and thus its validity is narrow, particularly in the field of criminology for a criminal’s actions are influenced by multiple factors and not the environment alone.

References

Akers, R., & Jennings, W. (2009). The Social Learning Theory of Crime and Deviance (pp. 103-120).

Crossman, A. (2017). How Social Learning Theory Explains Society’s Effect on Identity. ThoughtCo. Retrieved 26 November 2017, from https://www.thoughtco.com/social-learning-theory-definition-3026629

McLeod, S. (2016). Albert Bandura | Social Learning Theory | Simply Psychology. Simplypsychology.org. Retrieved 26 November 2017, from https://www.simplypsychology.org/bandura.html

Morris, R., & Higgins, G. (2010). Criminological theory in the digital age: The case of social learning theory and digital piracy. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(4), 470-480.

O’Rorke, K. (2006). Social Learning Theory & Mass Communication. ABEA Journal, 25, 72-75.

Salkind, N. (2004). Introduction to Theories of Human Development (pp. 197-226). Thousand Oarks: Sage publishers.

Warr, M. (2002). Companions in crime: The social aspects of criminal conduct. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.