Feist−Feist: Theories of
Personality, Seventh
EditionV. Learning Theories 16. Bandura: Social
Cognitive Theory© The McGraw−Hill^513
Companies, 2009Bandura’s social cognitive theory, of course, emphasizes social factorsmore
than biological ones. However, it recognizes that genetics contributes to the per-
son (P) variable in the triadic reciprocal causation paradigm. But even within this
model, cognition ordinarily gains ascendance, so biological factors become less
important. Moreover, social factors are clearly more crucial to the other two
variables—environment (E) and behavior (B).
We rate Bandura high on freedom versus determinismbecause he believes
that people can exercise a large measure of control over their lives. Although
people are affected by both their environment and their experiences with rein-
forcement, they have some power to mold these two external conditions. To some
extent, people can manage those environmental conditions that will shape future
behavior and can choose to ignore or augment previous experiences. Human
agency suggests that people who have high personal and collective efficacy and
who make efficient use of proxies have a great amount of influence on their own
actions. However, some people have more freedom than others because they are
more adept at regulating their own behavior. Bandura (1986) defined freedom as
“the number of options available to people and their right to exercise them” (p. 42).
Personal freedom, then, is limited; it is restricted by physical constraints such as
laws, prejudices, regulations, and the rights of other people. In addition, per-
sonal factors such as perceived inefficacy and lack of confidence restrict individ-
ual freedom.
On the issue of causality or teleology,Bandura’s position would be described
as moderate. Human functioning is a product of environmental factors interacting
with behavior and personal variables, especially cognitive activity. People move
with a purpose toward goals that they have set, but motivation exists in neither
the past nor the future; it is contemporary. Although future events cannot mo-
tivate people, people’s conception of the future can and does regulate present
behavior.
Social cognitive theory emphasizes conscious thoughtover unconscious de-
terminants of behavior. Self-regulation of actions relies on self-monitoring, judg-
ment, and self-reaction, all of which are ordinarily conscious during the learning
situation. “People do not become thoughtless during the learning process. They
make conscious judgments about how their actions affect the environment” (Ban-
dura, 1986, p. 116). After learnings are well established, especially motor learn-
ings, they may become unconscious. People do not have to be aware of all their ac-
tions while walking, eating, or driving a car.
Bandura (2001) believes that the division of biological and social factorsis a
false dichotomy. Although people are limited by biological forces, they have a re-
markable plasticity. Their social environments allow them a wide range of behav-
iors, including using other people as models. Each person lives in a number of so-
cial networks and is thus influenced by a variety of people. Modern technology
in the form of the World Wide Web and the media facilitates the spread of social
influences.
Because people have a remarkable flexibility and capacity for learning, vast
individual differences exist among them. Bandura’s emphasis on uniqueness,how-
ever, is moderated by biological and social influences, both of which contribute to
some similarities among people.
Chapter 16 Bandura: Social Cognitive Theory 507