Learning Through Observation

  Early behavior theory focused on direct experience as a central source for learning. However, Bandura (1977b) noted that individuals can learn vicariously as well as from direct experience. A wealth of research has documented that both associative and operant learning can also happen through observation. A classic set of studies demonstrated that even monkeys can learn to associate fear with a stimulus (in this case, a snake when a lab-reared monkey had no prior experience with snakes) by observing another monkey respond to this stimulus with fear (M. Cook, Mineka, Wolkenstein, & Laitsch, 1985). The monkeys could also be inoculated against the fear learning if they observed a monkey responding nonfearfully to a snake before their exposure to the fearful model, suggesting that modeling can also inoculate against fear learning (Mineka & Cook, 1986). These findings (and consistent findings in the human literature) indicated that individuals may learn to fear specific contexts and cues because of modeling from their parents or other influential people in their lives, and they may also learn not to fear cues and contexts if people in their lives model approach behavior toward potentially threatening cues and contexts.

Bandura’s classic Bobo doll studies revealed that operant learning can be observational as well. In one study (Bandura, 1965), children watched a film in which a model behaved aggressively toward a Bobo doll and was reinforced or punished or no contingency was presented. In a subsequent free-play period, children were more likely to imitate the aggressive behavior if they had observed the model being reinforced and were less likely to do so if they had observed the model being punished for the behavior. These findings are often considered evidence that witnessing aggressive behavior may lead to aggressive behavior for some individuals. More broadly, an individual’s ability to learn from watching other people leads to these people potentially having a significant influence on the behavioral patterns developed by the individual. Observational learning also explains one mechanism for socialization influences because media influences provide models of behavior that will be reinforced, behavior that will be punished, and characteristics that are associated with having more control over reinforcers in society.

Verbal Learning

  Although many behavioral principles can be studied in both animals and humans, language is clearly an important aspect of human experience, and its role in learning also needs to be addressed. Humans can learn about associations and consequences by simply having them described by someone they trust. This rule-governed learning can lead individuals to exhibit behaviors they might not have engaged in on their own and also to refrain from exhibiting other behaviors, without ever experiencing any contingency-based learning. Although this ability to learn from instruction is clearly adaptive—one can learn not to cross the street without looking both ways without ever experiencing the consequence of being hit by a car or witnessing someone else being hit by a car—it also presents some potential challenges.

Rule-governed learning is particularly likely to be insensitive to contingencies so that one can continue to be guided by beliefs about contingencies when one has not experienced those contingencies and, in fact, the contingencies may be inaccurate (for a review of this research, see S. C. Hayes, Strosahl, & Wilson, 1999). If these rules have taught an individual not to exhibit certain behaviors, the person may never have the direct experience of how satisfying these behaviors might be. Often, a target of therapy is helping clients to recognize that they are behaving in ways that they were taught but that do not match their own experience of contingencies. For instance, when he was growing up, Dominic’s parents explicitly taught him that emotional vulnerability would be punished by other people and should be avoided. As a result, he developed a pattern of concealing his emotional distress from people in his life. He was reinforced for his “emotional strength” through praise and increased affection from his parents any time something upsetting happened and he did not communicate an emotional reaction to it. In adulthood, Dominic struggled to develop close interpersonal relationships, and his partners and friends often said they found him to be distant or unaffected in a way that made them feel less close to him. In therapy, Dominic expressed a strong desire for emotional intimacy and was puzzled by other people’s responses to him. However, when he began to identify his patterns of responding during times of distress, he was able to see that he repeatedly had thoughts such as “People don’t like to be around people who are an emotional wreck” or “No one wants to see me break down.” These were rules his parents had taught him, and they were continuing to guide his behavior, even when people around him were clearly indicating that they might no longer apply. As he became more aware of this, he was able to try out new behaviors, such as sharing his emotional responses with people in his life. These new behaviors were reinforced by increased intimacy, which helped him further develop and solidify these new, more adaptive behavioral patterns.

Although rule-governed behavior can be problematic because it can become rigid and nonresponsive to changing contingencies, verbal instruction can play a useful role in changing patterns of responding and establishing new, more flexible patterns. In therapy, clients and therapists may come up with hypotheses regarding behavior changes that might be more adaptive and satisfying for the individual. This verbally derived hypothesis can help the client to implement new behaviors or refrain from habitual behavioral responses to specific cues. To be maintained and to be adaptively flexible, such changes will eventually need to be reinforced by the environment, but verbal instruction can be very beneficial in initiating behavior change.