564 Part VI Learning-Cognitive Theories
On the criterion of organizing knowledge, cognitive social theory rates a
little above average. Theoretically at least, Rotter’s general prediction formula and
its components of need potential, freedom of movement, and need value can provide
a useful framework for understanding much of human behavior. When behavior is
seen as a function of these variables, it takes on a different hue. Mischel’s theory
now rates above average on this criterion, because he has continued to broaden the
scope of his theory to include both personal dispositions and dynamic cognitive-
affective units that are able to predict and explain behavior.
Does cognitive social learning theory serve as a useful guide to action? On
this criterion, we rate the theory only moderately high. Rotter’s ideas on psycho-
therapy are quite explicit and are a helpful guide to the therapist, but his theory
of personality is not as practical. The mathematical formulas serve as a useful
framework for organizing knowledge, but they do not suggest any specific course
of action for the practitioner because the value of each factor within the formula
cannot be known with mathematical certainty. Likewise, Mischel’s theory is only
moderately useful to the therapist, teacher, or parent. It suggests to practitioners
that they should expect people to behave differently in different situations and
even from one time to another, but it provides them with few specific guidelines
for action.
Are the theories of Rotter and Mischel internally consistent? Rotter is care-
ful in defining terms so that the same term does not have two or more meanings.
In addition, separate components of his theory are logically compatible. The basic
prediction formula, with its four specific factors, is logically consistent with the
three broader variables of the general prediction formula. Mischel, like Bandura
(see Chapter 17), has evolved a theory from solid empirical research, a procedure
that greatly facilitates consistency.
Finally, is cognitive social learning theory parsimonious? In general, it is rela-
tively simple and does not purport to offer explanations for all human personality.
Again, the emphasis on research rather than philosophical speculation has contributed
to the parsimony of the cognitive social learning theories of both Rotter and Mischel.Concept of Humanity
Rotter and Mischel both see people as cognitive animals whose perceptions
of events are more important than the events themselves. People are capa-
ble of construing events in a variety of ways, and these cognitive percep-
tions are generally more influential than the environment in determining the
value of the reinforcer. Cognition enables different people to see the same
situation differently and to place different values on reinforcement that fol-
lows their behavior.
Both Rotter and Mischel see humans as goal-directed animals who do
not merely react to their environments but who interact with their psycho-
logically meaningful environments. Hence, cognitive social learning theory is
more teleological, or future oriented, than it is causal. People place positive