Feist−Feist: Theories of
Personality, Seventh
EditionV. Learning Theories 17. Rotter and Mischel:
Cognitive Social Learning
Theory(^550) © The McGraw−Hill
Companies, 2009
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 capable of con-
struing events in a variety of ways, and these cognitive perceptions 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 follows 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 psychologically
meaningful environments. Hence, cognitive social learning theory is more teleolog-
ical,or future oriented, than it is causal. People place positive value on those
events that they perceive as moving them closer to their goals, and they place neg-
ative value on those events that prevent them from reaching their goals. Goals,
then, serve as criteria for evaluating events. People are motivated less by past ex-
periences with reinforcement than by their expectations of future events.
Cognitive social learning theory holds that people move in the direction of
goals they have established for themselves. These goals, however, change as peo-
ple’s expectancies for reinforcement and their preference for one reinforcement over
another changes. Because people are continually in the process of setting goals,
they have some choice in directing their lives. Free choiceis not unlimited, how-
ever, because past experiences and limits to personal competencies partially deter-
mine behavior.
are quite explicit and are a helpful guide to the therapist, but his theory of personal-
ity is not as practical. The mathematical formulas serve as a useful framework for or-
ganizing 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 an-
other, but it provides them with few specific guidelines for action.
Are the theories of Rotter and Mischel internally consistent?Rotter is careful
in defining terms so that the same term does not have two or more meanings. In ad-
dition, separate components of his theory are logically compatible. The basic pre-
diction formula, with its four specific factors, is logically consistent with the three
broader variables of the general prediction formula. Mischel, like Bandura (see
Chapter 16), 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 rel-
atively simple and does not purport to offer explanations for all human personality.
Again, the emphasis on research rather than philosophical speculation has con-
tributed to the parsimony of the cognitive social learning theories of both Rotter and
Mischel.
544 Part V Learning Theories