Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Behaviourism and the Social-Cognitive Approach (Social-cognitive) - Coggle…
Behaviourism and the Social-Cognitive Approach (Social-cognitive)
Behaviourism: Study of observable behaviour rather than motives and non-observable factors
Environment is the main cause of behaviour; changing the environment would change behaviour
Classical conditioning
Stimulus-response theory: S-R associations are involved in personality development
Operant conditioning: Responses from the organism has an effect on the environment, which would either reduce or reinforce the behaviour (it's an association made between a behavioural response and an outcome rather than between two stimuli)
Shortcomings
Ignores other important subjects (e.g. cognition)
Principles of learning may be over-simplistic
Ignores observational learning
Humans are not just passive recipients of the environment and can alter their own environments
Social learning/cognitive theories
Julian Rotter
Expectancy Value Theory
: Reward is not enough.
Beliefs about the outcome likelihood
is more important, or the probability that the enactment of a behaviour will lead to the attainment of a particular outcome
Beliefs are called
expectancies
: The extent to which a person expects that a certain outcome will follow after certain behaviour
LOC: There are individual differences in generalised expectancies
Internal: High generalised expectancies (their behaviour will change outcomes)
External: Low generalised expectancies (their behaviour won't change anything)
Albert Bandura: People are active, self-organising, and self-regulating in their environments
People can anticipate future events and monitor their behaviour and progression towards goals
Reciprocal determinism: The self, environment, and behaviour influence one another
Bandura's Self-efficacy
: The extent to which an individual believes they are able to execute certain behaviours to achieve a goal
High: More effort and persevere on difficult tasks and perform better than low self-efficacy
Relationship between self-efficacy and performance is
bi-directional
Self-efficacy fosters human agency
Walter Mischel: **Theory of cognitive-affective personality system (CAPS)
Personality is an organisation of cognitive and affective processes that influence how people respond to certain kinds of situations
Expectancies and beliefs: Stimulus-outcome expectancies, behaviour-outcome expectancies, self-efficacy beliefs, other beliefs about the self
Goals and values: Subjective values placed on goals
Competencies and self-regulatory plans/strategies
Competencies: Person's knowledge of their own abilities and skills
Self-regulatory plans: Ability of the person to initiate plans, strategies, and behaviours to pursue goals
Emotion and affect: Affect have a motivating or demotivating effect on the entire process
Encoding strategies and personal constructs: Individual's subjective interpretation of external events
If... Then... Contingency Behavioural Signatures: Replacing personality traits as unit of analysis for personality
Stability of personality traits emerge from the stability of these contingencies
Treats variance as meaningful and systematic that needs to be accounted for (vs trait approach sees variance as random errors to be eliminated through aggregation
Chronic accessibility: Certain self-schemas are salient and are activated easily and frequently in the person's experience with the external environment
Individual becomes habitual in the way they process social information (through chronic accessibility) and this mode of thinking becomes part of their stable personality
Stable construal and appraisal have important consequences for subsequent thought, emotion, and behaviour
Experiment found that different children differ in their level of aggression across different situations. One child is more aggressive towards and adult warning compared to being teased by their peers. But another child had the opposite behavioural pattern
Rejection Sensitivity
: Tendency to think that significant others are on the verge of socially rejecting oneself; they anxiously expect, readily perceive, and intensely react to possible social rejections
High in RS are hyper-vigilant for potential rejection cues even when the behaviour exhibited by significant others are ambiguous and respond to rejection with greater negativity
Chronic accessibility: Anxious expectations of social rejections are salient
CAPS theory: If no cues of possible rejection, then caring and friendly. If cues of possible rejection, then hurtful and hostile
Stems from anxious and ambivalent attachment (attachment theory)
Mindsets (growth vs fixed)
Judgement and Development goals
Judgemental goals
: Motivation to prove to themselves and others about their own abilities
In times of failure, they give up because failure does not validate their own ideas about their abilities
Development goals
: Interested in improving themselves by putting in more effort or employing better strategies so they might learn something
In times of failure, they respond with master-oriented behaviours that enable them to try harder next time
Implicit theories: Two different mindsets arise from implicit theories that people hold
Entity theorists
: Personal characteristics are fixed and unchangeable; nothing they can do is going to change those characteristics
Performance goal orientation: Goal to gain positive judgement/avoid negative judgement
High perceived ability
Behaviour: Mastery oriented
Low perceived ability
Behaviour: Helpless and avoidance of challenges
Incremental theories
: Personal characteristics are malleable and can be changed with effort over time; goal to keep improving
Learning goal orientation: Goal to increase competence
High or low perceive ability
Behaviour: Mastery oriented
Math grades of high school students improved consistently over two years compared to entity theorists
Training students to adopt growth mindset: Experiment conducted on students with deteriorating math grades
Experimental group: Told they can grow their own intelligence
Managed to increase their math grades from the decline and stopped decline in math grades
Control group: Memory reading
Strategies: What people use to get to end-states
Optimists: Assume the best and pursue their goals cheerfully and confidently
Individualistic cultures
Defensive pessimism
: Pursue their goals by avoiding the worst possible scenario
Students who are defensive pessimists often do equally well on academic performance compared to optimists
Outcome is usually not as bad as they thought --> relief
Motivated by fear of failure: Take on gloomy outlook to anticipate and lessen the impact of the worst if it actually happens
Motivated to avoid the worst case and works hard, resulting in good performance
Downsides: Not happy and confident as optimists, even though successful. Annoying to others with negativity
More adaptive for collectivistic cultures (do not value self-enhancement as much as interpersonal relations)
Some defensive pessimists are worse off if they are forced to change their strategy to be more optimistic
Pessimists: Just don't pursue their goals
Commonalities in social-cognitive approach
"Doing" of personality rather than "having"
"Middle level" unit of analysis: More narrow in focus, more focus on processes
Processes conceptualised as specific cognitive, affective, and motivational variables contextualised in place, time, and social roles
More malleable to change compared to personality traits