15% Plagiarize
9% match (Internet from 2/27/12)
6% match (Internet from 10/11/08)
Learning theories affect individual personalities in a variety of ways. The purpose of this essay is to provide an analysis of the strengths and limitations of the Behavioral Analysis, Social Cognitive and Cognitive Social Learning Theories, and to glean from the analysis how these theories, in fact, affect individual personalities.
Behavioral Analysis Theory.
Behaviorism has been the foundation upon which this theory is based. The well known philosopher, Wilfred Sellars writes that a person may qualify as a behavioristif they insist on confirming“hypotheses about psychological events in terms of behavioral criteria.” (1963, p. 22) The assumptions made are that psychology is the science of behavior, not of the mind, behavior can be described and explained sans mental states. The theory is based on the belief that organisms learn as a response to stimuli, not by rule-governed behavior that have been innately or pre-experientially provided with implicit procedures by which to learn, B.F. Skinner, (1953). In other words, for a behaviorist an organism learns, as it were, from its successes and mistakes.“Rules,” says Skinner (Skinner 1983), “are derived from contingencies, which specify discriminative stimuli, responses, and consequences” B.F. Skinner, (1953).
Strengths: The strengths of the Behavioral Analysis Theory are that they can be tangibly tested, analyzed and compiled, leaving little room for various interpretations and dictum. This theory's reliability rests on the popular belief and use of peers, and in the tangible results of study, analysis and application. Simply put, behavior can change by changing one's thinking and responses to the various issues and things in life. There is no covert reason for overt behavior.
Weaknesses: The weaknesses are that there has been great progress made by cognitive scientists who have developed and tested intricate internal information processing models and the like of cognition. For example, with the advances made technologically, scientists, namely neuroscience have the ability to directly study the brain. Its biggest gap in strength is that this theory clings to non-behavioral mental (cognitive, representational, or interpretative) activity.
Social Cognitive Theory.
Most recognize Albert Bandura as the most influential on the social learning theory. In contrast to Skinner's theory, Bandura believed that direct reinforcement could not account for all types of learning. His theory relied in part on social elements. By watching and living with others, Bandura theorized that new information and behavior could be developed. In other words, “modeling” provided many answers to behavior analysis.
Strengths: The strength of this theory is its simplicity. Essentially, there are only three core concepts at the heart of social learning theory. First is the idea that people can learn through observation. Next is the idea that internal mental states are an essential part of this process. Finally, this theory recognizes that just because something has been learned, it does not mean that it will result in a change in behavior, (Cherry, 2012.) The most powerful impact that this theory has had is on education. Today, modeling is one of the key techniques taught to educators, parents, and leaders of all kinds.
Weaknesses: Generally, although Bandura noted that external, environmental reinforcement was not the only factor to influence learning and behavior, and described intrinsic reinforcement as a form of internal reward, such as pride, satisfaction, and a sense of accomplishment, his theory lacks information concerning how an individual attains the proper state of mind. Not all individuals are optimistic, or positive and additionally, many have been emotionally and physically abused. Finally, many have cognitive and deeply mental issues that it seems they are simply born with. So the basis of Bandura's theory is a bit shaky, and certainly does not address the aforementioned issues.
Cognitive Social Learning
Theory. This theory is similar to Social Cognitive Theory in that modeling is at the foundation. Where this theory and the other part ways is the belief that a person's personality, especially their moral development is two fold: Their behavior is learned from their environment; and their behavior from their individual person (cognitively speaking).
Strengths: The strengths in this theory are that it delves more deeply into the functioning of the brain, both overtly and inversely. This theory states that many dynamics are at work when learning, and that no one factor can be isolated. Additionally, just because a person learns does not necessarily means his behavior will change. In 1941, Neal E. Miller and John Dollard, proponents of this theory, identified four key factors that come into play when learning new behaviors: 1) drives, 2) cues, 3) responses, and 4) rewards. Basically, if a person wants to learn a behavior, then he can by observation and imitation.
Weaknesses: The weakness that comes to mind is what I call the Dexter dilemma. Although the television show, Dexter, is only fiction, it still serves as an example of the weaknesses in this theory. A person can learn by observation and be taught how to conduct himself in a socially acceptable manner, but that does not mean that that individual is as he behaves. In the show, Dexter grew up with his dad well aware of his son's sociopolitical tendencies. So his dad taught him how to act correctly, like to smile when pictures are taken, and how to ask and answer in response to different subjects. This Dexter all lacked. His father taught him to only be himself around those criminals who had murdered someone. In other words, his father knew that Dexter had the makings of a serial killer, so he simply taught him how to act in public, and focused his psychosis on bad guys. So Dexter is a serial murderer who only kills bad murderers.