Feist−Feist: Theories of
Personality, Seventh
EditionV. Learning Theories 17. Rotter and Mischel:
Cognitive Social Learning
Theory(^540) © The McGraw−Hill
Companies, 2009
This theory does not suggest that behaviors are an outgrowth of stable, global
personality traits. If behaviors were a result of global traits, then there would be lit-
tle individual variation in behavior. In other words, Mark would react in much the
same manner to provocation, regardless of the specific situation. However, Mark’s
long-standing pattern of variability attests to the inadequacy of both the situation
theory and the trait theory. His pattern of variability is his behavioral signature of
personality,that is, his consistent manner of varying his behavior in particular situ-
ations (Shoda, LeeTiernan, & Mischel, 2002). His personality has a signature that
remains stable across situations even as his behavior changes. Mischel (1999) be-
lieves that an adequate theory of personality should “try to predict and explain these
signatures of personality, rather than to eliminate or ignore them” (p. 46).
Behavior Prediction
In Chapter 1, we advocated that effective theories should be stated in an if-then
framework, but Mischel (1999, 2004) is one of only a few personality theorists to do
so. His basic theoretical position for predicting and explaining is stated as follows:
“If personality is a stable system that processes the information about the situations,
external or internal, then it follows that as individuals encounter different situations,
their behaviors should vary across the situations” (p. 43). This theoretical position
can generate a number of hypotheses about behavior outcomes. It assumes that per-
sonality may have temporal stability andthat behaviors may vary from situation to
situation. It also assumes that prediction of behavior rests on a knowledge of how
and when various cognitive-affective units are activated. These units include encod-
ings, expectancies, beliefs, competencies, self-regulatory plans and strategies, and
affects and goals.
Situation Variables
Mischel believes that the relative influence of situation variables and personal qual-
ities can be determined by observing the uniformity or diversity of people’s re-
sponses in a given situation. When different people are behaving in a very similar
manner—for example, while watching an emotional scene in an engrossing movie—
situation variables are more powerful than personal characteristics. On the other
hand, events that appear the same may produce widely different reactions because
personal qualities override situational ones. For example, several workers may all be
laid off from their jobs, but individual differences will lead to diverse behaviors, de-
pending on the workers’ perceived need to work, confidence in their level of skill,
and perceived ability to find another job.
Early in his career, Mischel conducted studies demonstrating that the interac-
tion between the situation and various personal qualities was an important determi-
nant of behavior. In one study, for example, Mischel and Ervin Staub (1965) looked
at conditions that influenced a person’s choice of a reward and found that both the
situation and an individual’s expectancy for success were important. These investi-
gators first asked 8th-grade boys to rate their expectancies for success on verbal rea-
soning and general information tasks. Later, after the students worked on a series of
problems, some were told that they had succeeded on those problems; some were
534 Part V Learning Theories