social learning theory observation essay

Social learning theory Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Basic concepts

The modeling process.

Learning As defined by (Noe, 2009), is a way through which a person acquires new knowledge as well as skills and behaviors, which generally incorporates synthesizing a range of information in the general environment.

This essay focuses on social learning theory, developed by Bandura, as evident in modern business organizations. Basically, the theory points out that, individuals in organizations learn from each other by means of observation, imitation as well as modeling among many other techniques.

The most critical element in the social learning theory proposed by Bandura is the focus on, what is termed as reciprocal determinism. Essentially, the component of reciprocal determinism points out that, a person’s behavior is stimulated by surrounding environment, besides an individual’s characters, and these factors always work together in any learning situation (Noe, 2009).

Some of the fundamental principles of this theory include the following; one, individuals are able to learn from others, by observing the way they carry out their duties as well as the results of their conducts. Two, learning can take place even if there is no modification of behavior.

Three, cognition is essential in any social learning process, ostensibly because, awareness as well as expectations relating to expected reinforcements or even punishments significantly impact people’s behavior. Additionally, social learning is a form of transition, especially in relation to behavior coupled with learning techniques (Noe, 2009).

To begin with, observational learning in organizations through imitating others is a common occurrence in today’s business environment. For example, if employees observe violent behaviors of their bosses, they are likely to do the same when they get opportunity. In relation to observational learning (Noe, 2009) points out three models.

One is a live model, which basically entails the very person demonstrating behavior. Two is the model relating to verbal instructions, where behaviors are critically described as well as analyzed. Three is the symbolic model, which encompasses not only real characters, but also fictional ones, who will exhibit various behaviors as documented in written materials like books and other forms of media (Noe, 2009).

Moreover, a person’s mental state contributes to learning, where in this case, one’s pride, self-esteem among others, determines how one’s learning process will be. Again, it is not necessary that all the learned behaviors will induce change; this is likely to be the case where learning involves testing to establish truth (Noe, 2009).

According to (Noe, 2009), the social learning theory is a crucial theory as far as learning together with development of individuals is concerned. From a social context, people are able to learn mostly by observing what others are doing, thus termed as observational learning.

In this perspective, such kind of learning is applied in comprehending various human behaviors in organizations. (Noe, 2009) points out that, there are three critical aspects relating to social learning. One is the fact that individuals are able to learn by observing. Two, each person’s mental status is pivotal in the learning process. And three, usually, something one learns does not guarantee change in conduct

Apparently, research studies have shown that, there are some observed behaviors which may not be well learned. Oftentimes, factors touching on both the model and learner determine success of the entire learning process. In such cases, standard procedures are emulated. For this purpose, some of the following stages are encompassed in any learning as well as modeling process (Noe, 2009).

First and foremost is the attention stage, where an individual intending to learn is required to focus on learning. Unfortunately, any distraction disrupts effective observation, which in turn affects the learning process. Second, retention of observed and learned information is mandatory in any learning situation. However, retention is influenced by a number of environmental forces.

Three, is reproduction of learned facts, which should be demonstrated by putting into practice such facts. In reproducing facts, one is able to advance as well as improve learning skills in relative situations (Noe, 2009).

Finally, motivation of learners cements their learning skills, ostensibly because they will be encouraged to model observed behavior. In this respect, reinforcement as well as punishment is imperative in motivating employees. For instance, if organizational employees see their colleague awarded for meeting expected objectives, they will strive towards meeting theirs to be rewarded like their colleague (Noe, 2009).

Social learning theory is applicable in organizations, particularly in assisting employees boost their performance. Broadly speaking, by encouraging employees to take personal responsibility for their jobs, obviously, better job performance is likely to occur, especially if employee ability levels are high.

Better employee performance will result as employees’ thoughts as well as beliefs change, in favor of personal development toward organization tasks if well compensated. This is common when successful cases are on the rise (Noe, 2009). Undeniably, application of social learning theory would provide similar results in a social setting, in this case organizations.

In brief, not only has social learning theory stimulated development of psychology related theories; it has also a significant impact on social settings like in organizations and education institutions.

Presently, organizational leaders lay much emphasis on modeling as one of the techniques for influencing desirable behaviors. Additionally, organizational strategies such employee motivation are equally based on the social learning theory (Noe, 2009).

Noe, R. (2009). Employee training and development . New York: McGraw-Hill Word count: 850

• Scientific Management Principles and Characteristics
• Hofstede and Trompenaars Theories of Culture Diversity
• Concept of Observational Learning
• Freedom and Determinism
• Engaging Students Into a Reciprocal Communication
• Organizational Behavior: Real Research for Real Managers
• Stakeholder Theory in Business
• Quality Assurance Standards and Business Excellence Models
• Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective
• Scientific Management and Human Relations
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, May 16). Social learning theory. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-learning-theory-essay/

"Social learning theory." IvyPanda , 16 May 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/social-learning-theory-essay/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Social learning theory'. 16 May.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Social learning theory." May 16, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-learning-theory-essay/.

1. IvyPanda . "Social learning theory." May 16, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-learning-theory-essay/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Social learning theory." May 16, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-learning-theory-essay/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Social Learning Theory—Albert Bandura

• First Online: 09 September 2020

Cite this chapter

• Anwar Rumjaun 3 &
• Fawzia Narod 3  

Part of the book series: Springer Texts in Education ((SPTE))

44k Accesses

49 Citations

Social learning theory (SLT) is often described as an intermediate between behaviorism (traditional learning theory) and cognitive theory. Behaviorism focuses on one particular view of learning: a change in external behavior achieved through the use of reinforcement and repetition to shape behavior which relates to rote learning. Cognitive learning theory advocates that the different processes concerning learning can be explained by analyzing the mental processes. Thus, SLT is a bridge between behaviorism and cognitive approach. In this chapter, we argue that SLT is still a valid theory supporting the teaching and learning of science. Learning in science is not limited to understanding co-construction of scientific concepts, but includes developing learners’ science process skills by engaging them to work in a group to solve the problem, to carry out projects, to engage in role-play and to conduct inquiry learning to make/construct the meaning of science concepts, issues, and phenomena. These activities in science teaching and learning reconcile with SLT which includes observation, attention, retention, motivation, and different types of modeling. Using this argument, we suggest that social learning theory reconciles with the principles of teaching and learning of science.

We human beings are social beings. We come into the world as the result of others’ actions. We survive here in dependence on others. Whether we like it or not, there is hardly a moment of our lives when we do not benefit from others’ activities. For this reason, it is hardly surprising that most of our happiness arises in the context of our relationships with others. ―Dalai Lama XIV.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Fostering Self-regulated Science Inquiry in Physical Sciences

The Practice Turn in Learning Theory and Science Education

Science teaching in science education

Amineh, R. J., & Asl, H. D. (2015). Review of constructivism and social constructivism. Journal of Social Sciences, Literature & Language, 1 (1), 9–16.

Google Scholar  

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84 (2), 191–215.

Article   Google Scholar  

Blunsdon, B., Reed, K., McNeil, N., & McEachern. (2003). Experiential learning in social science theory: An investigation of the relationship between student enjoyment and learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 22 (1).

Boundless Psychology. (2016). Bandura and observational learning. Boundless Psychology. Retrieved from https://www.boundless.com/psychology/textbooks/boundless-psychology-textbook/learning-7/cognitive-approaches-to-learning-48/bandura-and-observational-learning-203-12738/ .

Chen, M. (2015). Social development theory . University of Victoria. [E-book]. Retrieved from https://onlineacademiccommunity.uvic.ca/learningdesign/wp-content/uploads/sites/1178/2015/06/Mingli-Chen-ebook.pdf .

Chomsky, N. (1959). Review of skinner’s verbal behavior. Language, 35 (1), 26–58.

Culatta, R. (2015). Social learning theory . Innovative Learning. [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.innovativelearning.com/teaching/social_learning_theory.html .

Edinyang, S. D. (2016). The significance of social learning theories in the teaching of social studies education. International Journal of Sociology and Anthropology Research, 2 (1), 40–45.

Facione, P. A. (2007). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.telacommunications.com/nutshell/cthinking7.htm .

Fontana, D. (1995). Psychology for teachers (3rd ed.). Hampshire and New York: Palgrave.

Book   Google Scholar  

Greenfield, D. B., Jirout, J., Dominguez, X., Greenberg, A., Maier, M., & Fuccillo, J. (2009). Science in the preschool classroom: A programmatic research agenda to improve science readiness. Early Education and Development, 20 (2), 238–264.

Hackling, M. W. (2005). Working scientifically. Implementing and assessing open investigation work in science: A resource book for teachers of primary and secondary science . Published by Western Australia: Department of Education and Training. Perth.

Huitt, W., & Monetti, D. (2008). Social learning perspective. In W. Darity (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social sciences (2nd ed., pp. 602–603). Farmington Hills, MI: Macmillan Reference USA/Thompson Gale. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/papers/soclrnpers.pdf .

Hung, D., & Swe Khine, M. (2006). Engaged learning with emerging technologies . New York, NY 10013 USA: Springer.

Jarvis, P., Holford, J., & Griffin, C. (2003). The theory and practice of learning (2nd ed.). London: Kogan- Page.

John-Steiner, V., & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian framework. Educational Psychologist., 31 (3/4), 191–206.

Jonassen, D. H., & Strobel, J. (2006). Modeling for meaningful learning. In D. Hung & M. Swe Khine (Eds.), Engaged learning with emerging technologies (pp. 1–27). Springer.

Kelland, M. (2015). Learning theory and personality development. OpenStax-CNX module: m58073. [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://cnx.org/contents/R3cpfhGP@1/Learning-Theory-and-Personalit .

Kihlstrom, J. (2014). The evolution of cognitive social learning theory . [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~kihlstrm//MemoryWeb/learning/SocialLearningTheory.html .

Laliberte, M. D. (2005). A (very) brief history of learning theory. Worcester Polytechnic Institute NERCOMP SIG. Presentation Retrieved from http://file.upi.edu/Direktori/FPIPS/JUR._PEND._SEJARAH/195704081984031-DADANG_SUPARDAN/BRIEF_HISTORY_OF_LEARNING.pdf .

Oğuz, A. (2007). A look at the theories on the formation of science concepts via samples from theory to practice. Education, Science, Society Journal, 5 (19), 26–51.

McDevitt, T. M., & Ormrod, J. E. (2002). Child development and education . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

McLeod, S. A. (2016). Bandura—Social learning theory. [Blog post]. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/bandura.html .

Miller, N. E., & Dollard, J. (1941). Social learning and imitation. In R. Culatta (Ed.), (2015) Innovative learning . New Haven: Yale University Press. Retrieved from http://www.innovativelearning.com/teaching/social_learning_theory.htm .

Ministry of Education. (2008). The Ontario curriculum grades 11 & 12, science . Retrieved from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/2009science11_12.pdf .

Mukhopadhyay, R. (2013). Problem solving in science learning—Some important considerations of a teacher. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 8 (6), 21–25.

Ormrod, J. E. (2008). Educational psychology: Developing learners . Upper Saddle River, N.J. Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall. 6th Ed.

Saçkes, M., Trundle, K. C., Bell, R. L., & O’Connel, A. A. (2011). The influence of early science experience in kindergarten on children’s immediate and later science achievement: Evidence from the early childhood longitudinal study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48 (2), 217–235.

Science Education for Responsible Citizenship. (2015). Report to the European Commission of the Expert Group on Science Education. Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. European Commission B-1049 Brussels. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_science_education/KI-NA-26-893-EN-N.pdf .

Sternberg, R. J., & Williams, W. M. (2009). Educational psychology . Merrill. Pennsylvania State University.

Stone, D. (1998). Social cognitive theory. Article Retrieved from http://mrspettyjohn.pbworks.com/f/SocialCognitiveTheory.pdf .

UNESCO. (2012). The positive impact of eLearning—2012 update, white paper. Education Transformation. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/ED/pdf/The%20Positive%20Impact%20of%20eLearning%202012UPDATE_2%206%20121%20(2).pdf .

Wikipedia. (2017). Social learning theory. Retrieved August 25, 2017, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_learning_theory .

Willard, E. (2015). Origins of social learning theory. [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.tutor2u.net/psychology/reference/origins-of-social-learning-theory .

Wismath, S., Orr, D., & Zhong, M. (2014). Student perception of problem solving skills. Transformative dialogues. Teaching and Learning Journal, 7 (3), 1–17.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Science Education, Mauritius Institute of Education, Moka, Mauritius

Anwar Rumjaun & Fawzia Narod

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anwar Rumjaun .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, Abuja, Nigeria

University of Texas at Tyler, Tyler, TX, USA

Teresa J. Kennedy

Further Reading

Crittenden, W. F. (2005). A social learning theory of cross-functional case education. Journal of Business Research, 59, 960–966.

Mesoudi, A. (2017). Pursuing Darwin’s curious parallel: Prospects for a science of cultural evolution. Proceedings of the Natural Academy of Sciences, 114 (30), 7853–7860.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Rumjaun, A., Narod, F. (2020). Social Learning Theory—Albert Bandura. In: Akpan, B., Kennedy, T.J. (eds) Science Education in Theory and Practice. Springer Texts in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43620-9_7

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43620-9_7

Published : 09 September 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-43619-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-43620-9

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Anal Verbal Behav
• v.27(1); 2011

Understanding Observational Learning: An Interbehavioral Approach

Mitch j fryling.

The Chicago School of Professional Psychology

Cristin Johnston

University of Nevada, Reno

Linda J Hayes

Observational learning is an important area in the field of psychology and behavior science more generally. Given this, it is essential that behavior analysts articulate a sound theory of how behavior change occurs through observation. This paper begins with an overview of seminal research in the area of observational learning, followed by a consideration of common behavior analytic conceptualizations of these findings. The interbehavioral perspective is then outlined, shedding light on some difficulties with the existing behavior analytic approaches. The implications of embracing the interbehavioral perspective for understanding the most complex sorts of behavior, including those involved in observational learning are considered.

Research in observational learning represents a critical development in the history of psychology. Indeed, the research and scholarly work conducted by Bandura and colleagues set the occasion for the social cognitive perspective of learning ( Bandura, 1986 ), which seemed to challenge the possibility that all behavior could be accounted for by respondent and operant processes alone. Toward this, the social cognitive perspective focused more explicitly on both modeling and cognition, and their role in understanding behavior. Meanwhile, behavior analysts have continued to contend that observational learning can be explained through processes of generalized imitation, conditioned reinforcement, and rule-governed behavior (e.g., Catania, 2007 ; Pear, 2001 ; Pierce & Cheney, 2008 ). However, these contentions become increasingly difficult when we take a closer look at the psychological event of interest in observational learning. Further, while behavior analysts have continued to conduct research in the area of observational learning, relatively little progress has been made toward developing a theoretical understanding of this work. The primary aim of the current paper is to consider the general findings of the observational learning research within a thoroughly naturalistic, behavioral perspective. Of course, verbal processes play an important role in understanding observational learning, and thus, they are given both general and specific treatment throughout. In pursuing this work, J. R. Kantor's philosophy of interbehaviorism and scientific system of interbehavioral psychology are reviewed. The potential benefits of embracing the interbehavioral perspective with respect to understanding observational learning and complex behavior more generally are considered.

OBSERVATIONAL LEARNING

In the 1960s and 70s Albert Bandura and his colleagues became well known for their social psychology research in the area of observational learning. Indeed, several of the early experiments in this area are very well known, and considered hallmarks in the field of psychology and behavior science (e.g., Bandura & McDonald, 1963 ; Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1963 ). These studies were pursued for a variety of reasons; partially to undermine the value of common psychoanalytic ( Bandura & Huston, 1961 ; Bandura, Ross, et al., 1963 ) and developmental theories ( Bandura & McDonald, 1963 ), and also to evaluate the role of observation as a primary determinant of behavior change. Early studies examined the role of modeling 1 on the acquisition of aggression ( Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1963 ) and moral judgment ( Bandura & McDonald, 1963 ), for example, and provided a foundation upon which the social cognitive theory was built. Importantly, this theory is often considered to extend beyond behavioral theories, questioning the possibility that behaviorism alone could provide a comprehensive understanding of learning. Given the importance of this research, we will now provide a brief overview of some of the general findings of studies on observational learning. It is important to note that our review is admittedly less than comprehensive, and that our primary aim is to describe some common themes within this literature.

The Role of Modeling

An early and longstanding aim of the observational learning literature is to understand the role of modeling in behavior change (e.g., Bandura & Huston, 1961 ; Bandura & McDonald, 1963 ; Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1961 ). For example, an early study examined how the incidental behaviors of an experimenter might be acquired in the context of learning another task (Bandura & Huston). The important conclusion of these studies is that behavior change can and does occur through observation, even when such observation is incidental, occurring in the context of other activities. While this finding seems rather simple, it has significant implications for how we conceptualize learning. As we will discuss in the coming paragraphs, this general finding may present specific conceptual challenges for behavioral theories of learning.

The role of consequences

Specific emphasis was also placed on the role of consequences in the observational learning literature (e.g., Bandura, 1965 ; Bandura, Grusec, & Menlove, 1966 ; Bandura & McDonald, 1963 , Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1963 ). Experiments that added to our understanding of the role of consequences generally compared behavior change between children who either observed a model who was rewarded, a model who was punished, or a control condition (e.g., observing non-aggressive play or observing no consequences). Generally, less behavior change is observed when a child observes a model being punished (e.g., Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1963 ). 2

Interestingly, there is often no difference between conditions involving rewards and conditions involving no consequences at all. For example, Bandura and McDonald (1963) compared the effects of three different variables on the acquisition of moral judgment responses. In this study, the three variables involved three different groups of adult/child dyads: group one involved both the model and child's target judgments be reinforced, group two involved the model's behavior being reinforced but not the child's, and group three involved no model and only child reinforcement. Importantly, in the model/child groups trials alternated between the model and the child. Groups one and two demonstrated more behavior change than group three at a 1–3 week post-treatment assessment. Thus, the researchers concluded that modeling was the significant factor involved in the acquisition of the moral judgment repertoire. 3 Other experiments also found no difference between the reward and no consequence groups, while the model punished group continued to yield different results (e.g., Bandura, 1965 ).

Along similar lines, other studies seemed to raise questions about the potentially detrimental effects of incentives on the acquisition of behavior. For example, at the beginning of one experiment ( Bandura, Grusec, & Menlove, 1966 ) half of the participants were placed into an incentive condition where they were told that they would be given candy treats for correctly demonstrating what they learned after watching a movie. More specifically, after watching a film, children in both conditions were asked to demonstrate what they observed on the movie. Generally, the researchers found that children in the incentive condition did slightly worse than those in the no incentive condition, raising questions about the benefits of incentives on learning (see Bandura, et al., p. 505). 4

At this point we must note that the terms reward , reinforcement , and operant conditioning are used rather loosely within this literature. From a behavior analytic perspective, a stimulus change can only be classified as a reinforcer if it increases the future frequency of the class of behavior it was made contingent upon (e.g., Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007 ). Given this, the majority of stimulus changes called “rewards” or “reinforcers” in the observational learning literature do not technically meet the criteria to be classified as reinforcers, or as being involved in the process of reinforcement or operant conditioning in general. Nevertheless, we can say that consequences seem to play some role in observational learning. Again, there are studies suggesting that there are no differences between observation with reinforcement and observation with no consequence at all, leaving us more confident that if consequences have a role, aversive consequences seem to play a large part. Given these important concerns, however, these findings need to be interpreted with caution.

The Role of Verbal Behavior

As this line of researched progressed, increasing attention was paid to the role of cognitive factors, often described with the terms coding and rehearsal . Generally, coding can be thought of as describing what is observed in some way, whereas rehearsal can be thought of as practicing what was observed. For example, Bandura, Grusec, & Menlove. (1966) examined the effects of describing the activity of the model (“coding”) on the acquisition of observed behavior. Of specific interest, this study was fueled by motivation to discredit behavior analysts who failed to account for “delayed reproduction of modeling behavior” (p. 499), which was assumed to necessarily involve some sort of cognitive activity. In this study three groups of children all viewed a video; one group was asked to “verbalize every action of the model as it is being performed” (p. 501), the second group to “count 1 and a 2, and a 3, and a 4, and a 5” (p. 501) repeatedly while watching the video, and a third group observed without any instruction. The researchers found that those individuals who verbally described every action of the model were the most successful when tested for behavior change at a later time. Importantly, this study highlights the early recognition of “cognitive” factors in observational learning.

In an effort to elaborate upon this sort of research, Bandura and Jeffrey (1973) examined the role of “coding and rehearsal” on the acquisition of observed behavior. The researchers found that participants who “symbolically coded” (i.e., developed number or letter coding systems) the model's actions, and also immediately rehearsed (i.e., practiced) those codes had the best outcomes. Neither coding without symbolic rehearsal or symbolic rehearsal without coding was found to be sufficient. Put differently, developing a coded description of the models actions and practicing that description were both found to be important factors in the acquisition of observed behavior. Interestingly, physically practicing (“motor rehearsal”) the observed behavior was found to be less important. This seemed to support a growing distinction between different aspects of an individual's repertoire and the various processes that contribute to their existence (see below).

Learning and performance

Related to the role of verbal behavior, Bandura and colleagues began to notice a difference between the observers imitative performance at a later time compared to their ability to describe what was observed when asked. The ability to describe what was observed was viewed as a measure of learning, while engaging in the observed behavior at a later time was viewed as performance. For example, Bandura, Ross, & Ross (1963) found that children in both the aggressive-reward (participants observed a model be rewarded for engaging in a sequence of responses) and aggressive-punished (participants observed a model be punished for engaging in a sequence of responses) groups were able to describe the observed sequences of behavior, despite differences in imitative behavior change. Similarly, Bandura (1965) found that differences between group measures on imitation of observed behavior were removed on an “acquisition index,” where children were told they would get a reward for telling the experimenter what the model did. These findings further highlighted the role of verbal behavior in the process of learning from observation, including the various ways in which such learning from observation might be measured. That is, one way of measuring learning from observation is through imitation of the observed response at a later time, while another is through descriptions of the observed behavior. As these repertoires seemed to be influenced by different factors, Bandura and colleagues began to distinguish between them more and more.

Theoretical Developments

Throughout the above studies Bandura and colleagues began to articulate a theoretical model of observational learning. Fueled by findings that individuals might be able to describe observed behavior at a later time, even if they did not actually engage in the behavior themselves during a testing condition (e.g., Bandura, 1965 ; Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1963 ), Bandura and colleagues began to distinguish between learning and performance (also see Greer, Singer-Dudek, & Gautreaux, 2006 ). Specifically, Bandura and colleagues noted that verbal processes were more likely to influence learning, 5 whereas consequences were more likely to influence the extent to which the individual's behavior changed through observation (i.e., that they actually engaged in the observed behavior). Indeed, theoretical accounts of observational learning highlight this distinction (e.g., Bandura & Jeffrey, 1973 ; Greer, Singer-Dudek, & Gautreaux, 2006 ).

Bandura and colleagues assumed that learning from observation occurred via an input-output, cognitive model. Specifically, Bandura and Jeffrey (1973) described four processes that account for learning from observation: attentional, retention, motor reproduction, and motivational. Bandura and Jeffery (1973) say, “Within this framework acquisition of modeled patterns is primarily controlled by attention and retention processes. Whereas performance of observationally learned responses is regulated by motor reproduction and incentive processes” (p. 122).

Attentional processes were described as cognitive abilities that “regulate sensory registration of modeled actions” and retention processes were those that took “transitory influences and converted to enduring internal guides for memory representation” ( Bandura & Jeffery, 1973 , p. 122). Motor reproduction processes are those that move component actions stored in memory into overt action resembling that of the modeled behaviors. Finally, motivational processes determine whether or not those behaviors emerge as overt action.

According to the authors, this model not only explains how a modeled response can be imitated immediately after it is observed, but can also explain how this behavior can be reproduced later under many different circumstances. Bandura and Jeffrey (1973) conclude, “After modeled activities have been transformed into images and readily utilizable verbal symbols, these memory codes can function as guides for subsequent reproduction” (p. 123). The authors also concluded that participants who engage in transforming modeled actions into either descriptive words or visual images achieve higher levels of observational learning than those who did not.

As a result of these and other experiments, Bandura theorized that observational learning was an integral part of human development, which accounted for the development of the personality ( Bandura & Walters, 1963 ), as well as social and antisocial behaviors in children ( Bandura, 1973 ). Importantly, this research shows that humans can learn without directly experiencing the consequences of their own actions. Thus, if behavior analysts aim to develop a comprehensive account of learning it must include an adequate description of these instances. In particular, behavior analysts must account for the acquisition of novel behavior in the absence of contingent reinforcement for the individual engaging in those responses, and also articulate the role of verbal behavior in observational learning.

In summary, the studies conducted by Bandura and colleagues seemed to question the role of rewards on the behavior of the observer. Importantly, Bandura believed that reinforcement history alone was not sufficient, and that the observation of a model was the most critical factor. Moreover, learning from observation was viewed to be a result of other processes, of which “verbal coding” was one. These general findings seemed to devalue the comprehensiveness of the behavioral position, and set the stage for the social cognitive perspective. However, it is crucial that we reiterate the fact that Bandura and colleagues often misused the terms reinforcer and reinforcement , and thus, it is difficult to draw valid conclusions about the role of consequences from this line of research. What can be said is that observational learning is an important area for behavior science to consider.

Bandura found limitations with the operant interpretation of behavior, albeit a less than thoroughly informed understanding of it. Observational learning seems to defy traditional discriminative stimulus—response—reinforcer analyses, even when more contemporary concepts (e.g., the motivating operation) are considered. Specifically, novel responses occur in observational learning models, responses that have obviously never been reinforced. Added to this, delayed responding is common, and such responding presents conceptual challenges to traditional behavioral concepts (e.g., Bandura, Grusec, & Menlove, 1966 , p. 499). As mentioned earlier, it is perhaps not surprising that Bandura's work may be considered by some to be an extension or move beyond the behavioral position. The limitations of Bandura's work not withstanding, Bandura and colleagues raised several important issues regarding the role of observation and verbal behavior in behavior change processes.

Still, Bandura's model relies upon the existence of hypothetical entities that do not exist in the spatiotemporal event matrix comprising the natural world. In other words, Bandura's theoretical constructs are not derived from events, and as such cannot be found and thereby can never actually be studied (see Kantor, 1957 ; Smith, 2007 ). Rather, they are inferences derived from a thoroughly mentalistic, dualistic worldview. Behavior analysts have long held that embracing such constructs can only distract workers from a scientific analysis (e.g., Skinner, 1953 ). It isn't surprising, then, that behavior analysts have proposed an alternative conceptualization of observational learning. In the following section we provide an overview of the behavior analytic position on observational learning.

THE BEHAVIOR ANALYTIC POSITION

The behavior analytic account of observational learning rests squarely upon the process of generalized imitation ( Baer, Peterson, & Sherman, 1967 ; Baer & Sherman, 1964 ; Pierce & Cheney, 2008 ). This is a familiar process, where the organism is asked to imitate several responses of the model (e.g., “do this” while the model is touching their nose), and after multiple exemplars have been successfully trained, the organism is asked to engage in a response which has never been modeled before. Generalized imitation is said to occur when the organism engages in a response that has never been modeled or reinforced in the past; that is, when imitation has “generalized” to new behaviors. Furthermore, it is assumed that the social community shapes up delays in imitative responses, and thus, it is said that “all instances of modeling and imitation involve the absence of the Sd” ( Pierce & Cheney, 2008 , p. 252). For example, a child might watch their favorite TV show, and at a much later time repeat a phrase from the show, perhaps while sitting in the car, and their parent might say “yes, that's what you heard on TV!”. In other words, the organism is said to learn to imitate observed behavior in the absence of any particular stimulus, and perhaps at a much later point in time. In this sense, the organism may be said to “emit” behaviors, which typically fall under the purview of generalized imitation.

Importantly, conditioned reinforcement hypotheses are also central to the behavior analytic conceptualization of observational learning and imitation in general. In this sense, behaviors that closely resemble the observed behavior of models are presumed to have a history of reinforcement, and thus, behaving in a manner which is similar to the model may become conditioned reinforcer itself. This sort of conceptualization seems to be particularly helpful toward the behavior analytic understanding of delayed imitation (see Gladstone & Cooley, 1975 ; Rosales-Ruiz & Baer, 1997 ).

Behavior analysts have also provided an account of the verbal coding that is said to participate in observational learning. For example, behavior analysts propose that individuals derive self-rules when they observe their environment (e.g., Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, & Roche, 2001 ; Hayes, Zettle, & Rosenfarb, 1989 ; Poppen, 1989 ). It is assumed that society teaches the organism to tact ( Skinner, 1957 ) relationships in their environment, and that these descriptions exert tremendous control over behavior. Indeed, it is suggested that a large amount of rule-following behavior is reinforced throughout the organisms lifetime, and when combined with a history of tact repertoires being reinforced, individuals both derive self-rules (i.e., tact if-then relations in their environment) and subsequently engage in a great deal of rule-following with respect to those rules.

For example, a child might observe a teacher praising another child for accurately matching a Spanish flashcard to the corresponding English flashcard (“Good job matching perro with dog!”). Two days later, the child who observed the incident may be asked to “match same” when given that same Spanish flashcard, and correctly place it on the corresponding English flashcard. From the behavior analytic perspective it may be assumed that the child already has a generalized imitative repertoire, so they are imitating the child they observed at a later point in time (see conditioned reinforcement hypotheses above). Furthermore, the child may or may not have tacted the observed relationship when it occurred (rule-stating), and engaged in rule-following behavior when she interacted with the card at a later time. Both of these possibilities are consistent with the behavior analytic position. Importantly, the behavior analytic position does not require the individual to engage in rule-stating and following for observational learning to occur. Related to the latter, a recent series of studies conducted by Greer and colleagues seems to support the notion that observational learning may occur without rule-following. For example, individuals have acquired the ability to learn new words through experiences that do not involve observing consequences of another, and stimuli have been conditioned as reinforcers through the observation of others interacting with them, both of which do not require analyses of rule-governed behavior (see Greer & Ross, 2008 , Greer & Speckman, 2009 ).

It must be noted that many of these issues are at the center of current controversy, debate, and development in the field of behavior analysis. For example, the perspectives of joint control (e.g., Lowenkron, 1998 ) naming ( Horne & Lowe, 1996 ), relational frame theory ( Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, & Roche, 2001 ), and verbal behavior development (e.g., Greer & Ross, 2008 ; Greer & Speckman, 2009 ) all seem to account for the type of phenomena we have commented on herein. Given the importance of these issues, this is a good sign. We primarily mention this to acknowledge the current fact that there is not a behavior analytic position on many of these issues. Nevertheless, missteps may occur while we are on our journey to account for such phenomena, missteps that could have more or less dangerous implications for behavior analysis as an enterprise. It is our perspective that the interbehavioral position may be a rather useful foundation for workers as we continue on this journey (see Morris, Higgins, & Bickel, 1982 ).

Generally speaking, the behavior analytic conceptualization of observational learning relies on generalized imitation, conditioned reinforcement, and a range of verbal processes, depending on ones theoretical preference. These processes seem to account for the fact that imitative responses which have never been reinforced occur at a later time, and also for the role of verbal behavior in observational learning. The fact that there are a number of different perspectives on many of these issues may be considered a sign of progress and growth within behavior analysis, but at the same time highlights the need for further system building in this area. In the following sections we take a closer look at the behavior analytic position through the lens of interbehavioral psychology. Before doing so, we briefly introduce the reader to the interbehavioral position, as it is relatively less familiar to most behavior analysts.

THE INTERBEHAVIORIAL POSITION

From the perspective of interbehavioral psychology the event of interest is always a thoroughly naturalistic, psychological event. Specifically, this event is always the stimulus function ( sf ) ←→response function ( rf ) interaction ( Kantor, 1958 ). Moreover, this interaction always participates in a multifactored, inter related field. This field is conceptualized by the following formula: PE  =  C ( k , sf , rf , hi , st , md ); where PE is the psychological event, C is the interrelationship of all of the participating factors, k is the unique organization of all factors, sf is the stimulus function, rf is the response function, hi is the interbehavioral history, st is setting factors, and md is the medium of contact. Importantly, this is one event, one interbehavioral field. When one factor is changed the entire field is altered. This is to say none of the above factors are viewed as independent, dependent, or having causal status. Rather, all of the factors are equal participants in the one, integrated whole (see Smith, 2006 ).

Of particular relevance to our discussion of observational learning and complex behavior in general is the explicit distinction between stimulus objects and stimulus functions made within Kantor's system (e.g., Kantor, 1924 , pp. 47–48; Parrott, 1983a , 1983b , 1986 ). In other words, the stimulating action of stimulus objects is differentiated from the formal properties of those objects in Kantor's system. Kantor has suggested that the borrowing of the terms stimulus and response from biology, where stimulus and response functions are at least relatively more determined by their structural properties, has perhaps contributed to the failure to distinguish between object and functional properties in the domain of psychology ( Kantor, 1958 , p. 68). For example, in Kantor's system a picture as a stimulus object would be explicitly distinguished from its psychological functions, such that accounting for seeing something in the absence of the thing seen (as when looking at a picture “reminds you” of the time or place it was taken) is not difficult (see Parrott, 1983a , 1983b , 1986 ; Skinner, 1974 ). The process by which this happens is central to understanding complex behavior, including those that typically fall within the purview of observational learning, and we will now describe this process in more detail.

Kantor suggested that association conditions are fundamental psychological processes (1921, 1924). The term association is used here to refer to spatiotemporal relationships; that is, to relationships among various factors that occur in the environment together in space and time. To be clear, these factors are associated in the environment , and not within the organism. Further, it is not the organism who is associating; rather, the environment is where all associating takes place. Association conditions may involve stimuli and responses, stimuli and stimuli, settings and stimuli, settings and reactions, settings and settings, and reactions and reactions (including implicit and nonimplicit variations thereof; Kantor, 1924 , pp. 321–322).

Stimulus Substitution

Stimulus substitution is the outcome of a history of an organism interacting with various association conditions ( Kantor, 1924 , 1958 ; Parrott, 1983a , 1983b , 1986 ). That is, given an organisms history of interacting with spatiotemporal relationships ( A -coffee shop←→ B -Peter), stimulus objects may have the stimulational properties of other objects, even when those other objects are no longer physically present. This is how you might see Peter when you enter a coffee shop you frequented with him, even when he isn't physically there. In this example, stimulus A (coffee shop) and B (Peter) occurred together in space and time, and an organism interacted with that relationship, such that B becomes A ( B [ A ]) and A becomes B ( A [ B ]), psychologically speaking (see Hayes, 1992a ). This process is of particular importance to understanding complex behavior of various sorts. Furthermore, this is how interbehaviorists are able to conceptualize the past and present as one, avoiding both mentalistic and reductionistic practices which place the past within the organism in one way or another (see Hayes, 1992b ).

Added to this, through processes of generalization, stimuli that share physical features of those that participated in spatiotemporal association conditions may also develop substitute stimulus functions. For example, a coffee shop that is physically similar to the coffee shop you went to with your friend Peter might also substitute for Peter. Specifically, you might see Peter in the presence of a coffee shop that is physically similar to the shop you frequented with him. That is to say, substitute stimulus functions also generalize to stimuli which have never actually participated in spatiotemporal association conditions, but which are physically similar to stimuli which have, and thereby involve similar stimulus functions. This type of process may become particularly subtle, and is likely to be involved in a range of complex behaviors, including imagining and dreaming.

At this point it is important to address one potential misunderstanding with the interbehavioral perspective, specifically with respect to association conditions and the development of substitute stimulus functions. 6 We are suggesting that all stimuli which occur together in space and time, and which the organism interacts with, may develop substitute stimulus functions of one another. That is, it is possible for all stimuli to develop substitute stimulus functions of any other stimulus, given the appropriate interbehavioral history. Indeed, as an individual's interbehavioral history becomes more and more elaborate, one might imagine how all stimuli could develop substitute stimulus functions of all other stimuli, such that everything might become one, psychologically speaking. However, recall that the stimulus function←→response function interaction is always a participant in an exceptionally unique, complex, multifactored field. Indeed, Kantor stated “Each interaction is always absolutely specific. What the reacting organism and the stimulus object do in each interaction constitutes a distinctly unique relational happening” (1977, p. 38). Thus, while a specific stimulus object may indeed substitute for a wide range of things given an appropriate interbehavioral history, specific substitute stimulus functions are always actualized (or not) in a unique interbehavioral field. For example, a glass of sangria might substitute for a particular friend in a specific multifactored field (you might see your friend and remember drinking sangria together), whereas that same glass of sangria might substitute for the music of a live band in a different multifactored field (you might hear the music that was playing at a restaurant where you drank sangria in the past). As this example demonstrates, while there may be a wide range of potential substitute stimulus functions for every stimulus object, in each and every specific psychological event, particular substitute stimulus functions are actualized.

Thus far we have briefly introduced some important features of interbehavioral psychology, which we find to be particularly relevant to our understanding of observational learning. From the interbehavioral perspective, individuals observe (i.e., interact with) spatiotemporal association conditions in the environment (e.g., a child putting scrap paper in the recycling bin and this being followed by praise), such that at a later time the stimulus objects involved might substitute for the prior observation (e.g., the scrap paper might have the stimulus functions of praise in the previous observation). In other words, the scrap paper develops the stimulational properties of the observed relations; it substitutes for them. Psychologically speaking, the scrap paper is those relations (see Hayes, 1992a , 1992b ).

The role of verbal behavior must also be considered in the context of our analysis thus far. Generally speaking, one outcome of interacting with an observed relationship is being able to describe it. In other words, describing an observed relationship requires the organism to interact with it, and thus, descriptions are a particularly strong indication that the relations assumed to be observed have indeed actually been contacted. However, from our perspective verbal behavior, including rules more generally, does not explain observational learning. This is to say, whether or not the organism describes the observed relationship does not explain behavior change at a later time; however, not surprisingly, it is likely to be correlated with it, as it assures the organism has interacted with the observed relation. Moreover, to the extent that rule-statements substitute for a history of reinforcement, they may further enhance any learning by observation. Importantly, in this sense verbal behavior does not “mediate” responding. Its participation in the process of observational learning, however, seems to be worth considering. In doing so, it is important that verbal behavior not be given any causal or special sort of status. Observational learning certainly can, and does occur in the absence of verbal behavior, as is the case in animal research within this area (e.g., Biederman, Robertson, & Vanayan, 1986 ; Meyers, 1970 ; Reiss, 1972 ).

Our contention that verbal behavior not be given any causal status within the conceptualization of observational learning may seem to be at odds with a number of popular perspectives in behavior analysis. For example, a growing body of research on naming (e.g., Miguel, Petursdottir, Carr, & Michael, 2008 ), joint control (e.g., Lowenkron, 1998 ), and generalized imitation (e.g., Horne & Erjavec, 2007 ) seems to support the idea that verbal behavior is mediational. Again, as stated above, we do not deny that verbal behavior is likely to be helpful in a number of circumstances, but caution against giving it any sort of special status. That is, verbal behavior may, but importantly also may not, participate in learning from observation. In this sense, verbal behavior need not be considered “meditational.” Our perspective on this matter seems to be both parsimonious and comprehensive. That is, it does not employ any unnecessary assumptions or constructs, and accounts for observational learning that occurs with and without verbal behavior. 7

We hope we have made it clear that observational learning isn't puzzling from an interbehavioral perspective. Stimulus substitution offers a straight forward, naturalistic, and parsimonious way to conceptualize complex processes, including those involved in observational learning. Importantly, the interbehavioral perspective also avoids some shortcomings found with the behavior analytic interpretation of observational learning. In the following section we outline and address these issues specifically.

Review of the Behavior Analytic Perspective

As described earlier, the behavior analytic conceptualization of observational learning rests on the processes of generalized imitation, conditioned reinforcement, rule-governed behavior, and verbal processes more generally. From our perspective these analyses fail to fully articulate the nature of stimulation in the psychological event. Again, from the interbehavioral perspective the psychological event is always the stimulus function←→response function interaction. The generalized imitation analysis leaves us questioning the nature of the stimulus interacted with. In other words, it is not clear what the stimulus is. This problem is further underscored by the suggestion that generalized imitation involves responding in the absence of a discriminative stimulus ( Pierce & Cheney, 2008 , p. 252). Given our assumption that psychological events always involve sf ←→ rf interactions, as participants in multifactored fields, this account is problematic. The process of deriving and following self-rules leaves us in a similar situation. Again, we are left questioning the nature of the stimulus interacted with. That is, it unclear what the organism is interacting with when he/she derives a self-rule, and similarly, when he/she follows such a rule. Again, given our assumptions about the psychological event, both of these analyses require further consideration of the stimulus involved.

Added to the concerns described above, behavior analytic conceptualizations also fail to explicitly articulate the location of the stimulus. In other words, it is unclear where the stimulus interacted with is located. Failing to fully describe the nature and location of the stimulus leaves the door open for common mentalistic explanations to thrive. In the case of generalized imitation we find ourselves saying that the response is “in the repertoire” of the organism, because the stimulus is private, covert, or biological in nature (also see Hayes & Fryling, 2009 ). Alternatively, the organism may be said to “derive” or “relate” with respect to participating verbal processes. In other words, we either avoid attempting to specify the stimulus, place it within the organism, or, alternatively, suggest that it is available only to those involved in other scientific disciplines, namely biology. 8 In each of these cases, we fail to provide a thoroughly psychological account of the event we are interested in, leaving our job unfinished. As has been the case throughout history, where our work is left unfinished, both dualistic and reductionistic workers are quick to complete the job. While it may be argued that much of the contemporary work in the area of complex behavior does in fact avoid many of the concerns we have described, a failure to be explicit about these important issues can only result in long-term confusion, and a possible resurfacing of mentalistic thinking.

The behavior analytic community continues to be interested in the important processes involved in observational learning (e.g., Alvero & Austin, 2004 ; Bruzek & Thompson, 2007 ; Greer & Singer-Dudek, 2008 ; Greer, Singer-Dudek, Longano, & Zrino, 2008 ; Moore & Fisher, 2007 ; Ramirez & Rehfeldt, 2009 ; Rehfeldt, Latimore, & Stromer, 2003 ). Added to this, there are some interesting reasons to believe that this process has important clinical value when compared to other procedures (see Hayes, Kohlenberg, & Melancohn, 1989 ). What is needed is a thoroughly naturalistic conceptualization of observational learning, one that avoids all mentalism (i.e., no intermediate steps within the organism). As we have described, the interbehavioral perspective offers us just that, a clear, consistent, and thoroughly naturalistic conceptualization of observational learning. Moreover, it is one that does not require any additional constructs to explain complex processes, remaining comprehensive all the while.

It is our perspective that the position described in this paper may be integrated with contemporary research and scholarship in behavior analysis. This is especially so when we make clear distinctions between investigative constructs and events, as is advocated by interbehaviorists (see Fryling & Hayes, 2009 ; Kantor, 1957 ; Smith, 2007 ). Kantor (1958) has suggested that investigative constructs are acceptable within the context of the investigative subsystem of science, but that these constructs should not be confused with the constructions of the subject matter and philosophy more generally. That is, the constructs we employ to understand various interrelations among factors participating in psychological events should never be confused to be representations of the subject matter as a whole, as being explanatory of one another, or as having more or less causal status. For example, both operant and respondent processes can be conceptualized within the more global processes of association and subsequent outcomes of stimulus substitution. Contemporary research in behavior analysis requires us to emphasize specific aspects to the interbehavioral position, particularly with respect to the role of the context (unique multifactored fields), and the actualization of specific substitute stimulus functions. In this regard, the research on relational responding is particularly stimulating. In this line of research a multitude of historical association conditions are manipulated in unique ways, under various contextual conditions, and the development or “emergence” of a wide range of events is then tested. When these interesting outcomes are conceptualized as unique sorts of substitute stimulation, operating in historical, multifactored fields, their explanations remain wholly consistent and naturalistic. We think most contemporary research and scholarship in behavior analysis can and should be integrated with the interbehavioral perspective. Importantly, such integration might serve to coordinate the efforts of various workers in the field, and ultimately maximize on our productivity as a scientific enterprise.

The limitations of Bandura's work not withstanding, the process of learning from observation is interesting and relevant to a comprehensive analysis of behavior. Indeed, if one values such comprehensiveness, our most basic concepts and principles must be relevant to, and provide an account of observational learning. Moreover, this comprehensiveness is only valuable when it is achieved within the context of validity (internal consistency) and significance (external consistency within the greater field of the sciences; see Clayton, Hayes, & Swain, 2005 ; Kantor, 1958 ). The interbehavioral perspective is particularly valuable in this regard. Kantor's conceptualization of the psychological event, with all of its fullness, provides an avenue by which the most complex sorts of behavior, including those involved in observational learning, might be fully integrated into a natural science approach to the analysis of behavior.

Cristin Johnston is affiliated with Spectrum Center, Oakland, CA.

1 The term modeling is used synonymously with observation and demonstration in this context. In other words, when something has been modeled the individual has observed a demonstration of the response and factors surrounding it.

2 See Greer et al., 2004 for a description of related studies on peer tutoring, where it was the observation of corrections, and not simply of reinforcement, that resulted in observational learning.

3 Of note, the researchers acknowledged the possibility that their positive statements may not have been the most optimal reinforcers, and thus, it is possible that the modeling plus reinforcement condition would have been superior had more powerful reinforcers been used ( Bandura & McDonald, 1963 , p. 281).

4 The idea that rewards distract individuals from learning seems to be related to the concerns raised by Alfie Kohn (1999) .

5 In this literature the term learning is used to describe the individual's ability to describe observed behavior at a later time.

6 For example, some have criticized interbehaviorism for its “loose form of associationism” (e.g., Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, & Roche, 2001 , p. 8).

7 A number of socially significant behaviors involve language, and we are not questioning the interest in it for the purposes of understanding how to promote such behaviors (e.g., categorization). However, we are arguing that language not be given special status in the conceptualization of observational learning.

8 Here, it is important to note that even when biological factors are observed (and indeed, they increasingly are) they are never observed to be engaging in the psychological event of interest. That is to say, we can never observe the brain or any biological component of the organism engaging in the behavior we are most interested in (see Kantor, 1947 ). Confusions between what is measured and what ones says they measuring are common in science (see Kantor, 1957 ; Smith, 2007 ), and are especially likely when there is a failure to fully articulate the boundary conditions between individual scientific disciplines.

• Alvero A.M, Austin J. The effects of conducting behavioral observations on the behavior of the observer. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 2004; 37 :457–468. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baer D.M, Peterson R.F, Sherman J.A. The development of imitation by reinforcing similarity to a model. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1967; 10 :405–416. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baer D.M, Sherman J.A. Reinforcement control of generalized imitation in young children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 1964; 1 :37–49. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A. Influence of models' reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1965; 1 :589–595. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A. Aggression: A social learning analysis. Oxford, England: Prentice-Hall; 1973. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1986. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A, Grusec J.E, Menlove F.L. Observational learning as a function of symbolization and incentive set. Child Development. 1966; 37 :499–506. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A, Huston A.C. Identification as a process of incidental learning. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1961; 63 :311–318. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A, Jeffrey R.W. Role of symbolic coding and rehearsal processes in observational learning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1973; 26 :122–130. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A, McDonald F.J. Influence of social reinforcement and the behavior of models in shaping children's judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1963; 67 :274–281. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A, Ross D, Ross S.A. Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1961; 63 :575–582. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A, Ross D, Ross S.A. Vicarious reinforcement and imitative learning. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1963; 67 :601–607. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A, Walters R.H. Social learning and personality development. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston; 1963. [ Google Scholar ]
• Biederman G.B, Robertson H.A, Vanayan M. Observational learning of Two visual discriminations by pigeons: A within-subjects design. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1986; 46 :45–49. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bruzek J.L, Thompson R.H. Antecedent effects of observing peer play. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 2007; 40 :327–331. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Catania A.C. Learning, interim 4th edition. Cornwall-on-Hudson, NY: Sloan Publishing; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Clayton M.C, Hayes L.J, Swain M.A. The nature and value of scientific system building: The case of interbehaviorism. The Psychological Record. 2005; 55 :335–359. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cooper J.O, Heron T.E, Heward W.L. Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fryling M.J, Hayes L.J. Psychological constructs and events: An alliance with Smith. The Psychological Record. 2009; 59 :133–142. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gladstone B.W, Cooley J. Behavioral similarity as a reinforcer for preschool children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1975; 23 :357–368. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Greer R.D, Keohane D, Meincke K, Gautreaux G, Pereira J.A, Chavez-Brown M, Yuan L. Key instructional components of effective peer tutoring for tutors, tutees, and peer observers. In: Moran D.J, Malott R.W, editors. Evidence-based educational methods. New York: Elsevier/Academic Press; 2004. pp. 295–334. (Eds.) [ Google Scholar ]
• Greer R.D, Ross D.E. Verbal behavior analysis: Inducing and expanding complex communication in children with severe language delays. Boston: Allyn & Bacon; 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Greer R.D, Singer-Dudek J. The emergence of conditioned reinforcement from observation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 2008; 89 :15–29. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Greer R.D, Singer-Dudek J, Gautreaux G. Observational learning. International Journal of Psychology. 2006; 41 (6):486–499. [ Google Scholar ]
• Greer R.D, Singer-Dudek J, Longano J, Zrino M. The emergence of praise as conditioned reinforcement as a function of observation in preschool and school age children. Revista Mexicana de Psicologia. 2008; 25 (1):5–26. [ Google Scholar ]
• Greer R.D, Speckman J. The integration of speaker and listener responses: A theory of verbal development. The Psychological Record. 2009; 59 :449–488. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hayes L.J. Equivalence as process. In: Hayes S.C, Hayes L.J, editors. Understanding verbal relations. Reno, NV: Context Press; 1992a. pp. 97–108. (Eds.) [ Google Scholar ]
• Hayes L.J. The psychological present. The Behavior Analyst. 1992b; 15 :139–145. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hayes L.J, Fryling M.J. Overcoming the pseudo-problem of privacy in the analysis of behavior. Behavior & Philosophy. 2009; 37 :39–57. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hayes S.C, Barnes-Holmes D, Roche B, editors. Relational Frame Theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Plenum; 2001. (Eds.) [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hayes S.C, Kohlenberg B.S, Melancon S.M. Avoiding and altering rule-control as a strategy of clinical intervention. In: Hayes S.C, editor. Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies, and instructional control. New York: Plenum; 1989. pp. 359–385. (Ed.) [ Google Scholar ]
• Hayes S.C, Zettle R.D, Rosenfarb I. Rule following. In: Hayes S.C, editor. Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies, and instructional control. New York: Plenum; 1989. pp. 191–220. (Ed.) [ Google Scholar ]
• Horne P.J, Erjavec M. Do infants show generalized imitation of gestures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 2007; 87 :63–87. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Horne P.J, Lowe C.F. On the origins of naming and other symbolic behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1996; 65 :185–241. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kantor J.R. Association as a fundamental process of objective psychology. The Psychological Review. 1921; 28 (6):385–424. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kantor J.R. Principles of psychology (I) Chicago: The Principia Press; 1924. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kantor J.R. Problems of physiological psychology. Chicago: The Principia Press; 1947. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kantor J.R. Constructs and events in psychology: Philosophy: Banished and recalled. The Psychological Record. 1957; 7 :55–60. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kantor J.R. Interbehavioral psychology. Chicago: The Principia Press; 1958. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kantor J.R. Psychological linguistics. Chicago: The Principia Press; 1977. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kohn A. Punished by rewards: The trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A's, praise, and other bribes. New York: Houghton Mifflin; 1999. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lowenkron B. Some logical functions of joint control. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1998; 69 :327–354. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Meyers W.A. Observational learning in monkeys. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1970; 14 :225–235. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miguel C.F, Petursdottir A.I, Carr J.E, Michael J. The role of naming in stimulus categorization by preschool children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 2008; 89 :383–405. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moore J.W, Fisher W.W. The effects of videotape modeling on staff Acquisition of functional analysis methodology. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 2007; 40 :197–202. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morris E.K, Higgins S.T, Bickel W.K. The influence of Kantor's interbehavioral psychology on behavior analysis. The Behavior Analyst. 1982; 5 :158–173. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Parrott L.J. Similarities and differences between Skinner's radical behaviorism and Kantor's interbehaviorism. Mexican Journal of Behavior Analysis. 1983a; 9 (2):95–115. [ Google Scholar ]
• Parrott L.J. Systemic foundations for the concept of “private events.” In: Smith N.W, Mountjoy P.T, Ruben D.H, editors. Reassessment in psychology: The interbehavioral alternative. Lanham, MD: University Press of America; 1983b. pp. 251–268. (Eds.) [ Google Scholar ]
• Parrott L.J. On the role of postulation in the analysis of inapparent events. In: Reese H.W, Parrott L.J, editors. Behavior science: Philosophical, methodological, and empirical advances. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates; 1986. pp. 35–60. (Eds.) [ Google Scholar ]
• Pear J.J. The science of learning. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pierce D.W, Cheney C.D. Behavior analysis and learning (4th ed.) New York: Psychology Press; 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Poppen R.L. Some clinical implications of rule-governed behavior. In: Hayes S.C, editor. Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies, and instructional control. New York: Plenum; 1989. pp. 325–357. (Ed.) [ Google Scholar ]
• Ramirez J, Rehfeldt R.A. Observational learning and the emergence of symmetry relations in teaching Spanish vocabulary words to typically developing children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 2009; 42 :801–805. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rehfeldt R.A, Latimore D, Stromer R. Observational learning and the formation of classes of reading skills by individuals with autism and other developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2003; 24 :333–358. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reiss D. Vicarious conditioned acceleration: Successful observational learning of an aversive Pavolovian stimulus contingency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1972; 18 :181–186. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosales-Ruiz J, Baer D.M. Behavioral cusps: A developmental and pragmatic concept for behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 1997; 30 :533–544. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Skinner B.F. Science and human behavior. New York: Free Press; 1953. [ Google Scholar ]
• Skinner B.F. Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts; 1957. [ Google Scholar ]
• Skinner B.F. About behaviorism. New York: Knopf; 1974. [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith N.W. The interbehavioral field. In: Midgley B.D, Morris E.K, editors. Modern perspectives on J. R. Kantor and interbehaviorism. Reno, NV: Context Press; 2006. pp. 87–110. (Eds.) [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith N.W. Events and constructs. The Psychological Record. 2007; 57 :169–186. [ Google Scholar ]

Applying Social Learning Theory in Social Work & Education

As it turns out, a lot.

Social learning is a natural approach to acquiring new information relevant to all students and clients and, most of the time, a preferred method of learning.

Social learning presents an alternative avenue for obtaining new knowledge and frequently reinforces social work and education concepts. This type of learning involves observing others and requires four elements:

• Reproduction

Let’s explore this applicable theory further.

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Positive Psychology Exercises for free . These science-based exercises explore fundamental aspects of positive psychology, including strengths, values, and self-compassion, and will give you the tools to enhance the wellbeing of your clients, students, or employees.

This Article Contains:

Social learning theory of personality explained, applying social learning theory in social work, 7 social learning interventions & treatments, how to apply social learning theory in education, understanding motivation in the classroom, 4 best books on the topic, resources from positivepsychology.com, a take-home message.

Our personality may encourage or limit our capacity for social learning.

A shy individual or someone who has introverted qualities may experience fewer opportunities for social learning than someone who is outgoing and frequently seeks social situations.

Additionally, personality can be molded through the environment via social learning. Curran, Hill, Madigan, and Stornaes (2020) studied perfectionism in adolescents and found that social learning and parent socialization predicted the occurrence of the potentially harmful trait.

With social learning, children also pick up academic, athletic, and artistic skills via society, gender groups, peer groups, and their families (Social Work License Map, 2021).

This new knowledge could include both positive and negative behaviors.

For social work practitioners, this theory can apply to behavioral issues or conflict. Social learning theory can be used to both learn and unlearn certain behaviors. Suppose that an abusive parent raises a child. The child may resort to physical violence in their own household when they are older.

Further, social learning theory can explain other deviant behavior. For example, a drug habit could be rationalized and attributed to copying friends’ habits, being influenced by others, or simply being surrounded by the “wrong” people (Kolodziej, 2015).

The importance of surrounding yourself with people whose qualities you wish to emulate cannot be emphasized enough.

Differential association theory

The differential association theory, one of the most discussed theories of deviance , was developed by Edwin Sutherland (2015).

Similar to the social learning theory, the premise of this theory is that individuals learn the values, attitudes, techniques, and motives for criminal behavior through interaction with others. This is an example of observational learning, but in the most unfavorable way.

Sutherland (2015) asserted that associations with criminal behavior and a lack of association with noncriminal behavior encourage deviant behavior in an individual.

Interestingly, these researchers provide a logical analogy of a Southerner in the United States who does not pronounce the “r” sound when they speak. Because people in the southern United States may not pronounce “r” sounds, other Southerners are inclined to do the same.

As a social worker, it is helpful to understand this theory, as it may sometimes explain the origin and intent of criminal behavior.

Social learning & depression

According to Frey, Frank, and McCabe (2021), there is very little research concerning learning from social outcomes in depression or social learning in depression; however, research by Frey and McCabe (2020) suggests that depression is affiliated with learning deficits.

Not only do people with depression experience impaired learning from social outcomes at the neural and behavioral levels, they often have decreased occasions for social interactions, limiting their opportunities for social learning.

Just as personality affects and is affected by social learning, depression has the same relatedness. People with depression may have a difficult time participating socially and gaining new knowledge from social learning.

Health promotion and social learning theory

Promoting positive and healthy habits is a critical part of an educator’s or social worker’s position.

Parcel et al. (1987) concluded that health instruction alone is ineffective in schools’ health promotion. The health instruction needs to be supported by the school environment. Therefore, expected behavior was modeled in classroom activities, such as in stories and role-play.

Download 3 Free Positive Psychology Exercises (PDF)

Enhance wellbeing with these free, science-based exercises that draw on the latest insights from positive psychology.

Download 3 Free Positive Psychology Tools Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

Below is a selection of interventions and treatments where social learning theory has been applied.

Cognitive restructuring

Cognitive therapy is a powerful tool to elicit behavioral change. Cognitive restructuring aims to achieve schematic change through structured, goal-directed, and collaborative intervention strategies (Clark, 2013; Gardner, n.d.).

With collaborative being the keyword, individuals cannot do this work in isolation. Through therapy, clients identify maladaptive thoughts , and with cognitive restructuring, professionals expose individuals to information that contradicts their biased beliefs (Ellis, 2008).

Skill building

Skill building targets and builds upon skill deficits. This type of intervention addresses skill gaps and may include social skills training (including life skills training), social cognitive training, cognitive remediation , and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (Lyman et al., 2014).

The process involves modeling, behavior rehearsal or role-play, feedback, and reinforcement (Gardner, n.d.). Behavioral interventions in adaptive skill building, particularly early intensive behavioral intervention, are the most effective for children (Palmen, Didden, & Lang, 2012).

Culture restructuring

Culture restructuring involves a process of creating a positive culture in which prosocial behaviors are positively reinforced (Gardner, n.d.).

Cultures may include the family unit or school setting. In culture restructuring, there is a change in the messages exchanged within the culture, which is accomplished by persuading people to change how they think. Said another way, it is a paradigm shift.

Process comparison

Similar to cognitive restructuring, the operations are much the same in process comparison (Gardner, n.d.). A common six-step process to teach social skills includes (Gardner, n.d.; McDaniel, Bruhn, & Troughton, 2017):

• Education about prosocial behavior – Engaging cognition
• Stop and think – Activating awareness
• Good choice/bad choice – Evaluating options
• What are the steps? – Identifying steps of the “good choice” and potential consequences
• Action – Implementing the steps
• How did I do? – Reflecting on the action

Humans strive to understand and make sense of their environment through comparison. Consider the structure mapping theory. Comparison involves structured representation, a preference for connected relational structure, and mapping to find a semantic similarity between the relations of the domains (Markman & Gentner, 2000). Comparison can occur between processes or standards.

Develop a healthier network

If you want to lead a healthier lifestyle, surround yourself with like-minded individuals who share the same goals. Developing a network of people who strive for a healthier lifestyle and have the motivation to make health-conscious decisions can encourage us to be healthier and maintain the lifestyle changes necessary to improve our health.

Considering addiction treatment, a healthier network of peers may involve a social circle of people who abstain from drugs (MentalHelp.net, n.d.). Someone who has a goal to lose weight may want to seek peers with healthy eating and exercise habits.

World’s Largest Positive Psychology Resource

The Positive Psychology Toolkit© is a groundbreaking practitioner resource containing over 500 science-based exercises , activities, interventions, questionnaires, and assessments created by experts using the latest positive psychology research.

Updated monthly. 100% Science-based.

“The best positive psychology resource out there!” — Emiliya Zhivotovskaya , Flourishing Center CEO

Teach positive coping skills

Positive coping skills are adaptive and constructive ways to deal with stressful situations (Kaplánová, 2020). Observing positive coping skills and surrounding yourself with people who practice positive coping skills can also help you choose to exercise these skills (MentalHelp.net, n.d.).

Positive coping skills may include mindfulness, meditation, yoga, and deep/slow breathing. Your Life, Your Voice from Boys Town provides 99 Coping Skills and is an excellent tool to find the right coping skill for you. Our own Coping Skills Worksheets for Adults and Youth article is also a top-notch resource to explore coping skills.

Refusal skills to combat peer pressure

Although establishing a healthier network is strongly encouraged, some people may have difficulty distancing themselves from peers who may present a negative influence (MentalHelp.net, n.d.).

In this situation, refusal skills are critical. A deficit in refusal skills could result in harmful behavior, including drug, tobacco, or alcohol use (Anuar, 2018). When you cannot avoid a particular situation or influential peer, refusal skills may consist of verbally declining, redirecting, or physically walking away.

Social learning in education is conducive to instructing numerous students in one classroom, as this learning can occur at multiple levels and through various situations.

Children are constantly observing others, making this type of learning both reciprocal and continuous.

Teachers can support students’ learning by framing personal experiences as meaningful content, facilitating community through peer assessment, using group work to develop shared practices, and extending the purpose of subject teaching to influence students’ identities (Restad, 2021).

Teachers can use the following methods in the classroom to help facilitate learning:

• Encouraging connections and facilitating relationships in the classroom
• Providing praise for students who are doing the desired behavior
• Short, student-created skits
• Peer assessments, peer teaching, peer coaching, peer tutoring
• Flipped classroom model
• Technology: Jamboard, Padlet, YouTube videos, monitored social media, PenPal Schools
• Student-created videos or presentations

Bandura and social learning theory – The Curious Classroom

Motivation is a critical element in the classroom. In fact, it is one of the four elements of the social learning theory, in which Bandura asserted that observation alone might not be enough to influence learning; motivation is also necessary (Bandura & Walters, 1977).

To attain long-term assimilation, a student needs to see the benefit of the new behavior. Motivation can be intrinsic (a feeling of accomplishment when finishing a task) or extrinsic (earning a prize from the treasure chest upon completion of a task).

A student can become motivated upon seeing another student rewarded for a behavior. Likewise, a student may also become motivated to refrain from an undesired behavior when observing a student receiving punishment for that behavior. Often, verbal praise can be an effective tool for motivating students.

Besides our selection of social work books every practitioner should read, we selected these four focused on social learning theory.

1. Teach Boldly: Using EdTech for Social Good – Jennifer Williams

While we may assume that students who stare at a computer screen or have their eyes glued to their phone are being antisocial, they may be socializing extensively and actively engaging in social learning.

For encouraging innovative practices and global collaboration through technology, this book delivers a human-centered approach to teaching.

Teach Boldly covers constructing agile classrooms, digital storytelling, communicating across differences, and prioritizing feedback and active listening. This book offers readers the skills to create a quality action plan for encouraging social learning through technology.

Find the book on Amazon .

2. The Social Neuroscience of Education: Optimizing Attachment and Learning in the Classroom – Louis Cozolino

Stimulating the mind and brain to learn is the name of this game.

Holding the brain as discernibly social, Cozolino describes the steps a teacher can take to encourage healthy attachment patterns and resilient psyches. He explores what effective teachers do to motivate the difficult-to-motivate student.

Using social neuroscience and interpersonal neurobiology, Cozolino uncovers methods to maximize student learning and stimulate the brain to grow.

The section on How to Turn Brains Off explores stress, bullying, and “unteachable” students, while How to Turn Brains On probes why emotional attunement, exploration, play, and stories are crucial to learning.

3. Critical Service Learning Toolkit: Social Work Strategies for Promoting Healthy Youth Development –  Annette Johnson, Cassandra McKay-Jackson, and Giesela Grumbach

This comprehensive toolkit encourages interconnectedness and participation in the community while enhancing skill building, self-reflection, and civic engagement.

This user-friendly, step-by-step guide enables readers to plan, carry out, and evaluate critical service learning. This book is an ideal resource for educators and social workers who promote civic responsibility and social agency.

4. Model-Directed Learning: Albert Bandura’s Social Cognitive Learning Theory and Its Social-Psychological Significance for School and Instruction – Liwia Kolodziej

Using the cognitive learning theory and model-based learning, Kolodziej explains how schools can characterize the relationships between social interactions, social learning, and learning through imitation.

Further, the teacher–student relationship and the teacher’s role as the model are explicitly described. The book concludes with implications of school instruction using the social learning theory.

To gain a clearer understanding of the social learning theory, you may want to review What Is Bandura’s Social Learning Theory? 3 Examples . In this piece, we describe the theory’s stages, provide real-life examples, present fascinating experiments and studies, and establish the strengths and weaknesses of the theory.

The Promoting Positive Behavior worksheet may help a student identify peers’ positive behaviors that should be mirrored. A teacher or counselor may wish to begin a social skills conversation with this worksheet and prompt the student to think of examples of classmates’ positive behaviors that they have witnessed.

Perhaps this Behavior Contract may encourage individuals in a client’s social circle to help them make the lifestyle changes they desire.

As we know, students learn best in an environment where they feel safe. Therefore, social learning may be most likely to occur in an environment where students exhibit trust. Here are a few icebreakers and team-building exercises that may foster a safe environment:

• Getting to Know One Another Exercise
• Making Eye Contact Exercise
• True and False Exercise

If you’re looking for more science-based ways to help others enhance their wellbeing, this signature collection contains 17 validated positive psychology tools for practitioners. Use them to help others flourish and thrive.

17 Top-Rated Positive Psychology Exercises for Practitioners

Expand your arsenal and impact with these 17 Positive Psychology Exercises [PDF] , scientifically designed to promote human flourishing, meaning, and wellbeing.

Created by Experts. 100% Science-based.

Just as the children learned to act violently toward the Bobo doll in Bandura et al.’s (1961) landmark study, children and adults generally learn by observing.

Furthermore, kids simply “don’t learn from teachers they don’t like” (Pierson, 2013). If this is the case, the classroom teacher can employ the other students as “the teacher” to help facilitate learning.

Cultivating social learning in your classroom and engaging the social learning theory in your practice as a social worker can benefit students and clients. It can be an effective and efficient method to promote cognitive change.

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Positive Psychology Exercises for free .

• Anuar, D. N. B. (2018). The effectiveness of smoking prevention module towards knowledge and smoking refusal skill among secondary school students in Kota Bharu, Kelantan (Doctoral dissertation, University Sains Malaysia). Retrieved August 19, 2021, from http://eprints.usm.my/47033/1/Dr.%20Norlina%20Anuar-24%20pages.pdf
• Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models.  Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 63 , 575–582.
• Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory (vol. 1). Prentice Hall.
• Clark, D. A. (2013). Cognitive restructuring . In S. G. Hofmann, D. J. A. Dozois, W. Rief, & J. Smits (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of cognitive behavioral therapy.  John Wiley & Sons.
• Cozolino, L. (2013).  The social neuroscience of education: Optimizing attachment and learning in the classroom . W. W. Norton.
• Curran, T., Hill, A. P., Madigan, D. J., & Stornaes, A. V. (2020). A test of social learning and parent socialization perspectives on the development of perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences , 160 .
• Ellis, A. (2008). Cognitive restructuring of the disputing of irrational beliefs. In W. T. O’Donohue & J. E. Fisher (Eds.), Cognitive behavior therapy: Applying empirically supported techniques in your practice (pp. 91–95). John Wiley & Sons.
• Frey, A. L., Frank, M. J., & McCabe, C. (2021). Social reinforcement learning as a predictor of real-life experiences in individuals with high and low depressive symptomatology. Psychological Medicine , 51 (3), 408–415.
• Frey, A. L., & McCabe, C. (2020). Impaired social learning predicts reduced real-life motivation in individuals with depression: A computational fMRI study. Journal of Affective Disorders , 263 , 698–706.
• Gardner, J. (n.d.). 10 Social learning interventions . Cognitive Behavior Management. Retrieved August, 15, 2021, from https://cognitivebehaviormanagement.com/practice-concepts/social-learning-interventions/
• Johnson, A., McKay-Jackson, C., & Grumbach, G. (2018). Critical service learning toolkit: Social work strategies for promoting healthy youth development. Oxford University Press.
• Kaplánová, A. (2020). Financial awards and their effect on football players’ anxiety and coping skills. Frontiers in Psychology , 11 .
• Kolodziej, L. (2015). Model-directed learning. Albert Bandura’s social cognitive learning theory and its social-psychological significance for school and instruction . GRIN Verlag.
• Lyman, D. R., Kurtz, M. M., Farkas, M., George, P., Dougherty, R. H., Daniels, A. S., … Delphin-Rittmon, M. E. (2014). Skill building: Assessing the evidence. Psychiatric Services , 65 (6), 727–738.
• Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (2000). Structure mapping in the comparison process. American Journal of Psychology , 113 (4), 501–538.
• McDaniel, S. C., Bruhn, A. L. & Troughton, L. (2017). A brief social skills intervention to reduce challenging classroom behavior. Journal of Behavior Education , 26 , 53–74.
• MentalHelp.net. (n.d.). Social learning theory and addiction . Retrieved August, 15, 2021, from https://www.mentalhelp.net/addiction/social-learning-theory/
• Palmen, A., Didden, R., & Lang, R. (2012). A systematic review of behavioral intervention research on adaptive skill building in high-functioning young adults with autism spectrum disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders , 6 (2), 602–617.
• Parcel, G. S., Simons-Morton, B. G., O’Hara, N. M., Baranowski, T., Kolbe, L. J., & Bee, D. E. (1987). School promotion of healthful diet and exercise behavior: An integration of organizational change and social learning theory interventions. Journal of School Health , 57 (4), 150–156.
• Pierson, R. (2013, May). Every kid needs a champion (Video) Retrieved August 2, 2021, from https://www.ted.com/talks/rita_pierson_every_kid_needs_a_champion?language=en#t-100042
• Restad, F. (2021). Exploring the problems and potential of curriculum-making for social learning: Implications for policy and practice. The Curriculum Journal.
• Social Work License Map. (2021, June). Theoretical approaches in social work: Social learning theory . Retrieved August 16, 2021, from https://socialworklicensemap.com/social-work-resources/social-learning-theory-and-its-importance-to-social-work/
• Sutherland, E. H. (2015). Differential association. In F. P. Williams & M. D. McShane (Eds.),  Criminology theory: Selected classic readings (2nd ed.). Routledge.
• Williams, J. (2019). Teach boldly: Using edtech for social good. International Society for Technology in Education.

Share this article:

Article feedback

Let us know your thoughts cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

Hierarchy of Needs: A 2024 Take on Maslow’s Findings

One of the most influential theories in human psychology that addresses our quest for wellbeing is Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. While Maslow’s theory of [...]

Emotional Development in Childhood: 3 Theories Explained

We have all witnessed a sweet smile from a baby. That cute little gummy grin that makes us smile in return. Are babies born with [...]

Using Classical Conditioning for Treating Phobias & Disorders

Does the name Pavlov ring a bell? Classical conditioning, a psychological phenomenon first discovered by Ivan Pavlov in the late 19th century, has proven to [...]

Read other articles by their category

• Body & Brain (52)
• Coaching & Application (39)
• Compassion (23)
• Counseling (40)
• Emotional Intelligence (22)
• Gratitude (18)
• Grief & Bereavement (18)
• Happiness & SWB (40)
• Meaning & Values (26)
• Meditation (16)
• Mindfulness (40)
• Motivation & Goals (41)
• Optimism & Mindset (29)
• Positive CBT (28)
• Positive Communication (23)
• Positive Education (37)
• Positive Emotions (32)
• Positive Leadership (16)
• Positive Parenting (14)
• Positive Psychology (21)
• Positive Workplace (35)
• Productivity (16)
• Relationships (46)
• Resilience & Coping (39)
• Self Awareness (20)
• Self Esteem (37)
• Strengths & Virtues (29)
• Stress & Burnout Prevention (33)
• Theory & Books (42)
• Therapy Exercises (37)
• Types of Therapy (54)

3 Positive Psychology Tools (PDF)

Social Learning Theory: How Bandura’s Theory Works

Categories Development , Theories

Social learning theory, also known today as social cognitive theory, is a theory proposed by psychologist Albert Bandura that explains how people learn through observation, imitation, and modeling. This model of learning suggests that both environmental and cognitive factors play a critical role in the acquisition of knowledge.

In this article, learn more about the basics of social learning theory and how people learn by observing others.

Table of Contents

What Is Social Learning Theory?

Behaviorism was the dominant school of thought in psychology for much of the first half of the 20th century, advocated by thinkers such as John B. Watson and B. F. Skinner . According to the behavioral perspective, learning is the result of conditioning through association reinforcement . 

While Bandura agreed that classical conditioning and operant conditioning were important for learning, he noted that these processes alone could not account for all examples of learned behavior. For example, people are often able to demonstrate that they have learned something even if they have no direct experience with it. 

According to Bandura’s social learning theory, people can also learn simply by observing the actions of others.

This theory extended behavioral ideas about learning by adding a social component. As Bandura once suggested, learning would be time-consuming, laborious, and even dangerous if you could only acquire knowledge through direct experience.

Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment

During the 1960s, Bandura conducted a series of famous experiments that came to be known as the Bobo doll experiment. The experiments involved having children observe an adult interact with a Bobo doll, a large inflatable toy that resembles the shape of a bowling pin. If tipped over, the doll returns to its original upright position.

When children observed the adult acting aggressively or violently toward the doll, the kids were more likely to imitate these behaviors when they were later allowed to interact with the doll.

The research served as a basis for Bandura’s social learning theory and the important role that observational learning plays. The study also had an impact on the conversation about how the violence that children observe in the media may impact their behavior.

Bandura dubbed his approach social learning theory when it was first introduced in 1977. He continued to develop his ideas and renamed his approach social cognitive theory in 1986. 

Components of Social Learning Theory

Bandura proposed that some key elements were essential for the social learning process. 

Observational Learning

The observational learning process is the cornerstone of Bandura’s model of learning. While this might immediately call to mind direct observation, you don’t necessarily have to actually witness an action being performed to learn through observation.

There are three primary types of observational modeling situations:

• Directly observing a live model perform and action, such as watching an instructor teach how to cook a dish
• Symbolically observing a character perform an action, such as reading about a fictional character
• Verbal instructions that explain how behavior might be performed, such as listening to a podcast that explains how to do something

It’s important to note that not all learning is easily observable . People can learn information even if they do not have to demonstrate that knowledge by performing it directly.

Emotion, Motivation, and Self-Efficacy

Bandura also believed that inner states could affect the social learning process. Cognitive influences, including your emotional states, moods, and thoughts, can affect your attention, motivation, and willingness to learn.

Social experiences can also affect your sense of self-efficacy , which is your belief in your ability to perform a test or achieve a goal. Having a strong sense of self-efficacy can help you choose goals, initiate actions, and persist in the face of obstacles.

Observing people do something successfully can influence your sense of self-efficacy. When you watch them succeed, it can inspire your own belief in your ability to be successful as well.

Factors That Affect Social Learning

Several factors can affect how observational occurs. Not everything we see or hear is learned or learned well. According to Bandura, some important elements affect the observational learning process:

• Attention: To learn something through observation, it needs to be the focus of your attention. Being distracted during the learning process can affect how well the information is learned.
• Retention : Observational learning also hinges on your ability to remember what you have observed.
• Reproduction : The next step of the process involves reproducing the behavior you have observed. While not all observational learning requires demonstrating the behavior, practicing can be helpful for the learning process.
• Motivation : Observational learning is also affected by motivation. This can include behavioral processes such as reinforcement and punishment . If you observe somebody else being rewarded for performing a behavior, it is more likely that you will also perform that behavior again in the future.

Uses for Social Learning Theory

As you might imagine, social learning theory has a number of practical applications. Some of these include:

• Parenting: Parents can use social learning to model behaviors that they want their children to learn.
• Education: Teachers can utilize principles of social learning theory to help teach children in classroom settings. Not only can the teacher serve as a model, pure models can also play an important part in observational learning.
• Therapy: social learning can also be important in the therapeutic process. Therapists can model appropriate behaviors, and peers can also model these behaviors in group therapy settings.
• Media messages: Social modeling also has the potential to have a positive effect on persuasive public health messaging. Encouraging people to engage in healthy behaviors can often be effective. However, researchers also suggest that media influencers can sometimes play a negative role. The debate over the impact of violence in mass media is one example of how observational learning might have a detrimental impact on behavior.

Social learning theory is a major theory of development that explains the importance of social factors in the learning process. While Bandura felt that behavioral factors such as conditioning processes did play an important role in learning, he felt that behaviorism neglected other important parts of this process, including social influences and cognition. 

Social learning theory continues to play an important role in psychology today. Bandura proposed that this approach could play a part in helping people adopt healthier behaviors and inspire people to take action to address problems such as climate change.

Bandura A, Ross D, Ross SA. Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models . The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1963;66(1):3-11. doi:10.1037/h0048687

Bandura A. Social Learning Theory . Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1977.

Bandura A. The Social and Policy Impact of Social Cognitive Theory. In M https://doi.org/10.1037/h004868710.1037/h0048687 . Mark, S. Donaldson, & B. Campbell (Eds.), Social Psychology and Evaluation. (pp. 33-70). New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2011.

Cook DA, Artino AR. Motivation to learn: an overview of contemporary theories. Med Educ. 2016;50(10):997-1014. doi:10.1111/medu.13074

Fryling MJ, Johnston C, Hayes LJ. Understanding observational learning: an interbehavioral approach . Anal Verbal Behav. 2011;27(1):191-203. doi:10.1007/bf03393102

Overskeid G. Do we need the environment to explain operant behavior ? Front Psychol. 2018;9:373. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00373

15 Social Learning Theory Examples

Dave Cornell (PhD)

Dr. Cornell has worked in education for more than 20 years. His work has involved designing teacher certification for Trinity College in London and in-service training for state governments in the United States. He has trained kindergarten teachers in 8 countries and helped businessmen and women open baby centers and kindergartens in 3 countries.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Chris Drew (PhD)

This article was peer-reviewed and edited by Chris Drew (PhD). The review process on Helpful Professor involves having a PhD level expert fact check, edit, and contribute to articles. Reviewers ensure all content reflects expert academic consensus and is backed up with reference to academic studies. Dr. Drew has published over 20 academic articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education and holds a PhD in Education from ACU.

The social learning theory is a theory in social psychology that was developed by psychologist Albert Bandura (1977) at a time when classical conditioning and operant conditioning were the most prominent perspectives on human behavior.

Bandura thought that these theories were valuable, but failed to take into account the role of cognitive processes and social factors .

According to social learning theory there are four primary factors in learning (Sherry & Berge, 2012):

• Attention – First, in order for learning to occur, a person must be paying attention . If they are distracted or unable to input the information from the environment, then learning will not occur.
• Retention – Then, the information must be retained and stored in memory (i.e., retention ).
• Reproduction – Next, being able to perform an observed behavior is not always possible. Each person has limitations and may need practice in order to reproduce the actions they have observed.
• Motivation – Finally, a person must be motivated to perform the observed behavior. Motivation can come from wanting a reward or to avoid punishment.

The characteristics of the person being observed are also important. Models that are experts, important to the observer, or rewarded for their actions are much more likely to be imitated.

Social Learning Theory postulates that people can learn by observing others. For example, we learn table manners by observing our parents at the dinner table.

Social Learning Theory Examples

1. the bobo doll study.

By far the most famous example of Bandura’s social learning theory was his research involving a Bobo doll.

Bandura had different children watch a video of an adult playing with a Bobo doll. In one version of the video, the adult struck the doll with a mallet and kicked it several times. In another version, the adult carried the doll around the room and played gently.

Afterwards, each child was taken to another room that happened to have a Bobo doll. The results showed that children that observed the adult be aggressive towards the doll, were also aggressive.

They imitated the adult’s social behavior . However, the children that watched the video of the adult playing gently with the doll, imitated their behavior.

This type of study demonstrates that children learn by observing. The study also helped start a very intense debate in society about television violence.

In later decades, social learning theory merged with cognitive approaches to develop the social cognitive theory .

2. Social Media Trends

A more modern example of social learning theory happens on social media all over the world.

First, one person does some kind of interesting trick and posts a video of themselves doing it. For example, maybe someone unscrews the cap on a water bottle by doing a round-house kick to spin the cap and make it fall off.

It’s not an easy thing to do. You have to swing your foot precisely, grazing the cap enough to make it spin, but not so hard as to knock the bottle over.

After the video goes all over the internet, there will be tons of other people, even celebrities, doing the same trick and posting a video proving that they can do it too; a perfect example of learning, and reproducing behavior, by observing.  

3. The New Employee

Whenever someone is new on the job, there are a lot of things to learn. In addition to learning the basics of performing one’s job, there are also unwritten rules to follow, which are learned through observation.

For example, how often do people chat with each other, does everyone leave exactly at 5:00 o’clock, is it common for people to bring their own coffee or does everyone use what is supplied by the company.

Unfortunately, there is usually no handbook for the new guy to read so that they can quickly fit in. So, new employees need to be observant; watch what others do and take a lot of mental notes.

No one wants to go against the grain of the office culture, so observing colleagues is a great way to learn. It’s also a great example of Bandura’s social learning theory.

4. Perfect Form at the Gym

Not everyone at the gym knows what they’re doing. Believe it or not, there is a right way and a wrong way to lift weights. To learn the right way, we need to observe!

If your feet are not positioned properly, or your back not straight and firm enough, somebody could get hurt. That person could be you or the person whose toes you just dropped a dumbbell on.

So, one good way to learn the right form is to watch a trainer who is working with one of their clients. By watching how the trainer is positioning their client’s feet and other body parts, a person can learn proper technique.

Although this kind of learning is cheating the trainer out of their fee, it is something that a lot of people do to learn proper form.

5. Cooking Shows

The number of cooking shows on television is staggering. There must be hundreds. You can learn how to cook just about any meal from any culture just by watching the right episode.

The chef will take viewers through the entire process of preparing a great dish. They demonstrate the proper way to chop and slice, or how thick or thin one should cut. The chef always shows how much of this or that kind of seasoning go in the pan and when.

Viewers at home can literally follow along in their own kitchen if they want. All they have to do is turn on the tele and imitate the steps demonstrated by the chef. When all is done, you will have a meal that tastes just as fantastic as if it were prepared by Gordon Ramsay himself.

6. Playdough in the Classroom

Every kindergarten teacher knows how much children love to play with playdough. But of course, most kids this age really don’t know how to make anything other than a lumpy wad. So, it’s up to the teacher to show the class how to make something. It’s up to the kids to pay attention.

The teacher will demonstrate how much dough to start with and how to make the basic shape. Then they will show how to use one of the tools to add some features. Eventually the teacher will have demonstrated the entire process step-by-step.

Of course, most children will need a little help, but some will be able to imitate the teacher’s actions surprisingly well.  

7. Computer Class in the Lab

Learning by observing plays a key role in many computer classes. A typical computer lab will include the teacher’s computer screen being projected to the front of the classroom.

The teacher will demonstrate how to perform various functions and the students will follow along at their individual stations.

It is a much better way of learning than a relying on a verbal mode of instruction or reading about the steps in a thick textbook. Learning how to do something by observing another person demonstrating the actions is incredibly efficient.

It is also a purely cognitive process, and for this reason, it offers an explanation of learning that operant and classical conditioning cannot .  

8. Chimpanzee Tool Use

Social learning theory is not just limited to explaining human behavior . As it turns out, lots of other animal species learn through observation as well. For example, chimp mothers show their offspring how to use a variety of tools.

They demonstrate a technique of harvesting termites by using a twig like a fishing pole. First, they insert the twig down the tunnel of a termite hill. When they pull the twig out, it is covered in termites, which the chimps then consume. 

Chimps also use rocks to crack open nuts. It’s not as easy as it sounds. Scientists have noted that the younger chimps will observe their mother for quite some time before mastering the technique themselves.   

9. Cultural Habits and Customs

There are some aspects of human behavior which are clearly examples of our biology, such as eating and sleeping. We all do it in pretty much the same way no matter where we were born. However, we are also products of our culture.

There are many examples of human behavior which vary greatly from culture to culture. Take for example, the way people greet others, the variations in gender roles , or differences in musical preferences.

Although many of these behaviors are becoming quite similar due to globalization, the differences can still be very pronounced.

This is because of cultural factors that people are exposed to as they are raised in a particular country. As we grow, we observe the nuances of the culture in which we live. As time progresses, we begin to internalize those cultural practices and then display them ourselves.

Imitating cultural habits and customs is process of learning by observing.

10. Language Acquisition

When children begin to learn how to speak, they do so through observational learning .

Long before going to school and learning grammar rules about dangling participles, children have built a vocabulary of thousands of words and are already speaking in grammatically correct sentences.

This is all accomplished by observing those around them. When the adults or older siblings speak, the young child is processing the sounds cognitively and imitating what they hear. More than likely, their pronunciation or sentence structure will be corrected by a parent, and their language skills will improve.

Language acquisition meets all of the conditions of social learning theory.

11. Workplace Learning

Workplace learning is very different from learning in a classroom. In the workplace, we do a lot more learning through social interaction and observation.

Scholars like Lave and Wegner argue that this approach is beneficial for learners because they learn within a context. They don’t just learn academic jargon; they actually know why they’re doing things and how to do them in real life .

For example, an electrician can spend all day studying electrical circuits on a piece of paper, but he (or she!) only really gets a good idea of how to run wires through a wall, and the dexterity to tie wires together, when he gets in there and learns as an apprentice from an experienced electrician who has developed tricks and tips over decades of practice.

12. YouTube Tutorial Videos

You can learn how to do just about anything on YouTube. Want to know how to prepare a leaky faucet or refinish hardwood floors? YouTube is the place to look. Want to pick up some useful tips on Photoshop or video editing? Give YouTube a try.

Having trouble understanding multivariate analysis of variance and regression coefficients? There is a YouTube video for that as well.

Watching a video is a fantastic and incredibly efficient way to learn. There was a time that if you wanted to learn how to do something, you had to either go to a school or hire a professional to teach you. Not any longer.

YouTube contains millions of examples of social learning theory in action.

13. Athlete Training

Certain elite sports require a degree of finesse. Gymnastics, diving, synchronized swimming, all involve going through a carefully scripted sequence of movements. The more precise the routine, the better the performance.

To achieve this level of precision requires a lot of practice and some very special training techniques. For example, coaches will almost always video record their athletes during rehearsals or actual performances.

The coach and athlete will watch the footage and try to identify which movements were performed well and which need modifying. By observing themselves on video the athlete learns how to improve. Then, they will rehearse again and make another recording to study. It is a long and arduous process.

Although this is an example in which the model demonstrating the behavior is not another person, but the learner themselves, it’s still an example of social learning theory.

14. Learning How to Hunt

Lion cubs can’t exactly listen to their mom and dad’s lectures on how to hunt. They can, however, watch carefully.

By observing the stalking movements of their mother, young cubs can learn how to approach prey in a stealth-like silence. Inching forward bit-by-bit, staying low in the tall grass, and getting as close as possible before springing into action are all learned by observing.

Although Bandura probably did not intend for his social learning theory to apply to the animal kingdom, it clearly has explanatory value. In fact, there are probably examples of social learning theory in action in nearly all mammalian species.

15. Handling Conflict

The socio-emotional development of a child is highly dependent on the adults in their lives. Children learn almost everything from mom and dad. They watch carefully and then imitate everything they see.

Sometimes parents are amazed when a child repeats something they said while they were in the other side of the house.

Sometimes this is lighthearted, and sometimes it’s not. For example, when parents fight, children are well aware of what is happening. Even if they are in another room, they seem to have a sixth sense about what’s going on.

So, when mom and dad have disagreements that are destructive and involve yelling loudly and hurling insults, you can be absolutely sure that the children are absorbing those patterns of behavior.

They might not repeat those actions for years, maybe even not until they are adults and in relationships themselves, but those actions do have an impact.  

Bandura’s social learning theory was an attempt to include the whole human being in our theories of behavior. The dominant theories of the time, classical and operant conditioning, almost viewed people as computers that were programmed through associations and rewards.

Social learning theory says that one very fundamental way that people learn, is by simple observation. Of course, rewards and associations are also important, but a more complete understanding of human behavior must also take into account cognitive processes.

We can see examples of learning by observation every day of our lives, from how children learn to talk or make things out of playdough, to the dangers of watching role models smoke on television. Social learning theory has explanatory value for so much of our behavior.

See four more social development theories here

Bandura, A. (1977).  Social Learning Theory . Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66 (1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048687

Pechmann, C., & Knight, S.J. (2002). An experimental investigation of the joint effects of advertising and peers on adolescents’ beliefs and intentions about cigarette consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 29 , 5-19.

Sherry, D. L., & Berge, Z. L. (2012). Social Learning Theory. Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning, 3116-3118. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_1257

Wakefield, M., Flay, B., Nichter, M., & Giovino, G. (2003). Role of the media in influencing trajectories of youth smoking. Addiction , 98(1) , 79–103. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1360-0443.98.s1.6.x

Zentall, T. (2011). Perspectives on observational learning in animals. Journal of Comparative Psychology , 126 (2), 114-28. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025381

• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 23 Achieved Status Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 25 Defense Mechanisms Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 15 Theory of Planned Behavior Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 18 Adaptive Behavior Examples

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 23 Achieved Status Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 15 Ableism Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 25 Defense Mechanisms Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 15 Theory of Planned Behavior Examples

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Albert Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory

Charlotte Nickerson

Research Assistant at Harvard University

Undergraduate at Harvard University

Charlotte Nickerson is a student at Harvard University obsessed with the intersection of mental health, productivity, and design.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

Key Takeaways

• Social cognitive theory emphasizes the learning that occurs within a social context. In this view, people are active agents who can both influence and are influenced by their environment.
• The theory was founded most prominently by Albert Bandura, who is also known for his work on observational learning, self-efficacy, and reciprocal determinism.
• One assumption of social learning is that we learn new behaviors by observing the behavior of others and the consequences of their behavior.
• If the behavior is rewarded (positive or negative reinforcement), we are likely to imitate it; however, if the behavior is punished, imitation is less likely. For example, in Bandura and Walters’ experiment,  the children imitated more the aggressive behavior of the model who was praised for being aggressive to the Bobo doll.
• Social cognitive theory has been used to explain a wide range of human behavior, ranging from positive to negative social behaviors such as aggression, substance abuse, and mental health problems.

How We Learn From the Behavior of Others

Social cognitive theory views people as active agents who can both influence and are influenced by their environment.

The theory is an extension of social learning that includes the effects of cognitive processes — such as conceptions, judgment, and motivation — on an individual’s behavior and on the environment that influences them.

Rather than passively absorbing knowledge from environmental inputs, social cognitive theory argues that people actively influence their learning by interpreting the outcomes of their actions, which, in turn, affects their environments and personal factors, informing and altering subsequent behavior (Schunk, 2012).

By including thought processes in human psychology, social cognitive theory is able to avoid the assumption made by radical behaviorism that all human behavior is learned through trial and error. Instead, Bandura highlights the role of observational learning and imitation in human behavior.

Numerous psychologists, such as Julian Rotter and the American personality psychologist Walter Mischel, have proposed different social-cognitive perspectives.

Albert Bandura (1989) introduced the most prominent perspective on social cognitive theory.

Bandura’s perspective has been applied to a wide range of topics, such as personality development and functioning, the understanding and treatment of psychological disorders, organizational training programs, education, health promotion strategies, advertising and marketing, and more.

The central tenet of Bandura’s social-cognitive theory is that people seek to develop a sense of agency and exert control over the important events in their lives.

This sense of agency and control is affected by factors such as self-efficacy, outcome expectations, goals, and self-evaluation (Schunk, 2012).

Origins: The Bobo Doll Experiments

Social cognitive theory can trace its origins to Bandura and his colleagues, in particular, a series of well-known studies on observational learning known as the Bobo Doll experiments .

In these experiments, researchers exposed young, preschool-aged children to videos of an adult acting violently toward a large, inflatable doll.

This aggressive behavior included verbal insults and physical violence, such as slapping and punching. At the end of the video, the children either witnessed the aggressor being rewarded, or punished or received no consequences for his behavior (Schunk, 2012).

After being exposed to this model, the children were placed in a room where they were given the same inflatable Bobo doll.

The researchers found that those who had watched the model either received positive reinforcement or no consequences for attacking the doll were more likely to show aggressive behavior toward the doll (Schunk, 2012).

This experiment was notable for being one that introduced the concept of observational learning to humans.

Bandura’s ideas about observational learning were in stark contrast to those of previous behaviorists, such as B.F. Skinner.

According to Skinner (1950), learning can only be achieved through individual action.

However, Bandura claimed that people and animals can also learn by watching and imitating the models they encounter in their environment, enabling them to acquire information more quickly.

Observational Learning

Bandura agreed with the behaviorists that behavior is learned through experience. However, he proposed a different mechanism than conditioning.

He argued that we learn through observation and imitation of others’ behavior.

This theory focuses not only on the behavior itself but also on the mental processes involved in learning, so it is not a pure behaviorist theory.

Stages of the Social Learning Theory (SLT)

Not all observed behaviors are learned effectively. There are several factors involving both the model and the observer that determine whether or not a behavior is learned. These include attention, retention, motor reproduction, and motivation (Bandura & Walters, 1963).

The individual needs to pay attention to the behavior and its consequences and form a mental representation of the behavior. Some of the things that influence attention involve characteristics of the model.

This means that the model must be salient or noticeable. If the model is attractive, prestigious, or appears to be particularly competent, you will pay more attention. And if the model seems more like yourself, you pay more attention.

Storing the observed behavior in LTM where it can stay for a long period of time. Imitation is not always immediate. This process is often mediated by symbols. Symbols are “anything that stands for something else” (Bandura, 1998).

They can be words, pictures, or even gestures. For symbols to be effective, they must be related to the behavior being learned and must be understood by the observer.

Motor Reproduction

The individual must be able (have the ability and skills) to physically reproduce the observed behavior. This means that the behavior must be within their capability. If it is not, they will not be able to learn it (Bandura, 1998).

The observer must be motivated to perform the behavior. This motivation can come from a variety of sources, such as a desire to achieve a goal or avoid punishment.

Bandura (1977) proposed that motivation has three main components: expectancy, value, and affective reaction. Firstly, expectancy refers to the belief that one can successfully perform the behavior. Secondly, value refers to the importance of the goal that the behavior is meant to achieve.

The last of these, Affective reaction, refers to the emotions associated with the behavior.

If behavior is associated with positive emotions, it is more likely to be learned than a behavior associated with negative emotions. Reinforcement and punishment each play an important role in motivation.

Individuals must expect to receive the same positive reinforcement (vicarious reinforcement) for imitating the observed behavior that they have seen the model receiving.

Imitation is more likely to occur if the model (the person who performs the behavior) is positively reinforced. This is called vicarious reinforcement.

Imitation is also more likely if we identify with the model. We see them as sharing some characteristics with us, i.e., similar age, gender, and social status, as we identify with them.

Features of Social Cognitive Theory

The goal of social cognitive theory is to explain how people regulate their behavior through control and reinforcement in order to achieve goal-directed behavior that can be maintained over time.

Bandura, in his original formulation of the related social learning theory, included five constructs, adding self-efficacy to his final social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986).

Reciprocal Determinism

Reciprocal determinism is the central concept of social cognitive theory and refers to the dynamic and reciprocal interaction of people — individuals with a set of learned experiences — the environment, external social context, and behavior — the response to stimuli to achieve goals.

Its main tenet is that people seek to develop a sense of agency and exert control over the important events in their lives.

This sense of agency and control is affected by factors such as self-efficacy, outcome expectations, goals, and self-evaluation (Bandura, 1989).

To illustrate the concept of reciprocal determinism, Consider A student who believes they have the ability to succeed on an exam (self-efficacy) is more likely to put forth the necessary effort to study (behavior).

If they do not believe they can pass the exam, they are less likely to study. As a result, their beliefs about their abilities (self-efficacy) will be affirmed or disconfirmed by their actual performance on the exam (outcome).

This, in turn, will affect future beliefs and behavior. If the student passes the exam, they are likely to believe they can do well on future exams and put forth the effort to study.

If they fail, they may doubt their abilities (Bandura, 1989).

Behavioral Capability

Behavioral capability, meanwhile, refers to a person’s ability to perform a behavior by means of using their own knowledge and skills.

That is to say, in order to carry out any behavior, a person must know what to do and how to do it. People learn from the consequences of their behavior, further affecting the environment in which they live (Bandura, 1989).

Reinforcements

Reinforcements refer to the internal or external responses to a person’s behavior that affect the likelihood of continuing or discontinuing the behavior.

These reinforcements can be self-initiated or in one’s environment either positive or negative. Positive reinforcements increase the likelihood of a behavior being repeated, while negative reinforcers decrease the likelihood of a behavior being repeated.

Reinforcements can also be either direct or indirect. Direct reinforcements are an immediate consequence of a behavior that affects its likelihood, such as getting a paycheck for working (positive reinforcement).

Indirect reinforcements are not immediate consequences of behavior but may affect its likelihood in the future, such as studying hard in school to get into a good college (positive reinforcement) (Bandura, 1989).

Expectations

Expectations, meanwhile, refer to the anticipated consequences that a person has of their behavior.

Outcome expectations, for example, could relate to the consequences that someone foresees an action having on their health.

As people anticipate the consequences of their actions before engaging in a behavior, these expectations can influence whether or not someone completes the behavior successfully (Bandura, 1989).

Expectations largely come from someone’s previous experience. Nonetheless, expectancies also focus on the value that is placed on the outcome, something that is subjective from individual to individual.

For example, a student who may not be motivated to achieve high grades may place a lower value on taking the steps necessary to achieve them than someone who strives to be a high performer.

Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy refers to the level of a person’s confidence in their ability to successfully perform a behavior.

Self-efficacy is influenced by a person’s own capabilities as well as other individual and environmental factors.

These factors are called barriers and facilitators (Bandura, 1989). Self-efficacy is often said to be task-specific, meaning that people can feel confident in their ability to perform one task but not another.

For example, a student may feel confident in their ability to do well on an exam but not feel as confident in their ability to make friends.

This is because self-efficacy is based on past experience and beliefs. If a student has never made friends before, they are less likely to believe that they will do so in the future.

Modeling Media and Social Cognitive Theory

Learning would be both laborious and hazardous in a world that relied exclusively on direct experience.

Social modeling provides a way for people to observe the successes and failures of others with little or no risk.

This modeling can take place on a massive scale. Modeling media is defined as “any type of mass communication—television, movies, magazines, music, etc.—that serves as a model for observing and imitating behavior” (Bandura, 1998).

In other words, it is a means by which people can learn new behaviors. Modeling media is often used in the fashion and taste industries to influence the behavior of consumers.

This is because modeling provides a reference point for observers to imitate. When done effectively, modeling can prompt individuals to adopt certain behaviors that they may not have otherwise engaged in.

Additionally, modeling media can provide reinforcement for desired behaviors.

For example, if someone sees a model wearing a certain type of clothing and receives compliments for doing so themselves, they may be more likely to purchase clothing like that of the model.

Observational Learning Examples

There are numerous examples of observational learning in everyday life for people of all ages.

Nonetheless, observational learning is especially prevalent in the socialization of children. For example:

• A newer employee avoids being late to work after seeing a colleague be fired for being late.
• A new store customer learns the process of lining up and checking out by watching other customers.
• A traveler to a foreign country learning how to buy a ticket for a train and enter the gates by witnessing others do the same.
• A customer in a clothing store learns the procedure for trying on clothes by watching others.
• A person in a coffee shop learns where to find cream and sugar by watching other coffee drinkers locate the area.
•  A new car salesperson learning how to approach potential customers by watching others.
•  Someone moving to a new climate and learning how to properly remove snow from his car and driveway by seeing his neighbors do the same.
•  A tenant learning to pay rent on time as a result of seeing a neighbor evicted for late payment.
•  An inexperienced salesperson becomes successful at a sales meeting or in giving a presentation after observing the behaviors and statements of other salespeople.
•  A viewer watches an online video to learn how to contour and shape their eyebrows and then goes to the store to do so themselves.
•  Drivers slow down after seeing that another driver has been pulled over by a police officer.
•  A bank teller watches their more efficient colleague in order to learn a more efficient way of counting money.
•  A shy party guest watching someone more popular talk to different people in the crowd, later allowing them to do the same thing.
• Adult children behave in the same way that their parents did when they were young.
• A lost student navigating a school campus after seeing others do it on their own.

Social Learning vs. Social Cognitive Theory

Social learning theory and Social Cognitive Theory are both theories of learning that place an emphasis on the role of observational learning.

However, there are several key differences between the two theories. Social learning theory focuses on the idea of reinforcement, while Social Cognitive Theory emphasizes the role of cognitive processes.

Additionally, social learning theory posits that all behavior is learned through observation, while Social Cognitive Theory allows for the possibility of learning through other means, such as direct experience.

Finally, social learning theory focuses on individualistic learning, while Social Cognitive Theory takes a more holistic view, acknowledging the importance of environmental factors.

Though they are similar in many ways, the differences between social learning theory and Social Cognitive Theory are important to understand. These theories provide different frameworks for understanding how learning takes place.

As such, they have different implications in all facets of their applications (Reed et al., 2010).

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory . Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84 (2), 191.

 Bandura, A. (1986). Fearful expectations and avoidant actions as coeffects of perceived self-inefficacy.

Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American psychologist, 44 (9), 1175.

Bandura, A. (1998). Health promotion from the perspective of social cognitive theory. Psychology and health, 13 (4), 623-649.

Bandura, A. (2003). Social cognitive theory for personal and social change by enabling media. In Entertainment-education and social change (pp. 97-118). Routledge.

Bandura, A. Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through the imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 63, 575-582.

LaMort, W. (2019). The Social Cognitive Theory. Boston University.

Reed, M. S., Evely, A. C., Cundill, G., Fazey, I., Glass, J., Laing, A., … & Stringer, L. C. (2010). What is social learning?. Ecology and society, 15 (4).

Schunk, D. H. (2012). Social cognitive theory .

Skinner, B. F. (1950). Are theories of learning necessary?. Psychological Review, 57 (4), 193.

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Health & Nursing

Courses and certificates.

• Bachelor's Degrees
• View all Business Bachelor's Degrees
• Business Management – B.S. Business Administration
• Healthcare Administration – B.S.
• Human Resource Management – B.S. Business Administration
• Information Technology Management – B.S. Business Administration
• Marketing – B.S. Business Administration
• Accounting – B.S. Business Administration
• Finance – B.S.
• Supply Chain and Operations Management – B.S.
• Communications – B.S.
• User Experience Design – B.S.
• Accelerated Information Technology Bachelor's and Master's Degree (from the School of Technology)
• Health Information Management – B.S. (from the Leavitt School of Health)
• View all Business Degrees

Master's Degrees

• View all Business Master's Degrees
• Master of Business Administration (MBA)
• MBA Information Technology Management
• MBA Healthcare Management
• Management and Leadership – M.S.
• Accounting – M.S.
• Marketing – M.S.
• Human Resource Management – M.S.
• Master of Healthcare Administration (from the Leavitt School of Health)
• Data Analytics – M.S. (from the School of Technology)
• Information Technology Management – M.S. (from the School of Technology)
• Education Technology and Instructional Design – M.Ed. (from the School of Education)

Certificates

• Supply Chain
• Accounting Fundamentals
• Digital Marketing and E-Commerce

Bachelor's Preparing For Licensure

• View all Education Bachelor's Degrees
• Elementary Education – B.A.
• Special Education and Elementary Education (Dual Licensure) – B.A.
• Special Education (Mild-to-Moderate) – B.A.
• Mathematics Education (Middle Grades) – B.S.
• Mathematics Education (Secondary)– B.S.
• Science Education (Middle Grades) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Chemistry) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Physics) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Biological Sciences) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Earth Science)– B.S.
• View all Education Degrees

Bachelor of Arts in Education Degrees

• Educational Studies – B.A.

Master of Science in Education Degrees

• View all Education Master's Degrees
• Curriculum and Instruction – M.S.
• Educational Leadership – M.S.
• Education Technology and Instructional Design – M.Ed.

Master's Preparing for Licensure

• Teaching, Elementary Education – M.A.
• Teaching, English Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• Teaching, Mathematics Education (Middle Grades) – M.A.
• Teaching, Mathematics Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• Teaching, Science Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• Teaching, Special Education (K-12) – M.A.

Licensure Information

• State Teaching Licensure Information

Master's Degrees for Teachers

• Mathematics Education (K-6) – M.A.
• Mathematics Education (Middle Grade) – M.A.
• Mathematics Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• English Language Learning (PreK-12) – M.A.
• Endorsement Preparation Program, English Language Learning (PreK-12)
• Science Education (Middle Grades) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Chemistry) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Physics) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Biological Sciences) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Earth Science)– M.A.
• View all Technology Bachelor's Degrees
• Cloud Computing – B.S.
• Computer Science – B.S.
• Cybersecurity and Information Assurance – B.S.
• Data Analytics – B.S.
• Information Technology – B.S.
• Network Engineering and Security – B.S.
• Software Engineering – B.S.
• Accelerated Information Technology Bachelor's and Master's Degree
• Information Technology Management – B.S. Business Administration (from the School of Business)
• User Experience Design – B.S. (from the School of Business)
• View all Technology Master's Degrees
• Cybersecurity and Information Assurance – M.S.
• Data Analytics – M.S.
• Information Technology Management – M.S.
• MBA Information Technology Management (from the School of Business)
• Full Stack Engineering
• Web Application Deployment and Support
• Front End Web Development
• Back End Web Development

3rd Party Certifications

• IT Certifications Included in WGU Degrees
• View all Technology Degrees
• View all Health & Nursing Bachelor's Degrees
• Nursing (RN-to-BSN online) – B.S.
• Nursing (Prelicensure) – B.S. (Available in select states)
• Health Information Management – B.S.
• Health and Human Services – B.S.
• Psychology – B.S.
• Health Science – B.S.
• Public Health – B.S.
• Healthcare Administration – B.S. (from the School of Business)
• View all Nursing Post-Master's Certificates
• Nursing Education—Post-Master's Certificate
• Nursing Leadership and Management—Post-Master's Certificate
• Family Nurse Practitioner—Post-Master's Certificate
• Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner —Post-Master's Certificate
• View all Health & Nursing Degrees
• View all Nursing & Health Master's Degrees
• Nursing – Education (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Leadership and Management (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Nursing Informatics (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Family Nurse Practitioner (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S. (Available in select states)
• Nursing – Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S. (Available in select states)
• Nursing – Education (RN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Leadership and Management (RN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Nursing Informatics (RN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Master of Healthcare Administration
• Master of Public Health
• MBA Healthcare Management (from the School of Business)
• Business Leadership (with the School of Business)
• Supply Chain (with the School of Business)
• Accounting Fundamentals (with the School of Business)
• Digital Marketing and E-Commerce (with the School of Business)
• Back End Web Development (with the School of Technology)
• Front End Web Development (with the School of Technology)
• Web Application Deployment and Support (with the School of Technology)
• Full Stack Engineering (with the School of Technology)
• Single Courses
• Course Bundles

Apply for Admission

Admission requirements.

• New Students
• WGU Returning Graduates
• WGU Readmission
• Enrollment Checklist
• Accessibility
• Accommodation Request
• School of Education Admission Requirements
• School of Business Admission Requirements
• School of Technology Admission Requirements
• Leavitt School of Health Admission Requirements

Additional Requirements

• Computer Requirements
• No Standardized Testing
• Clinical and Student Teaching Information

Transferring

• FAQs about Transferring
• Transfer to WGU
• Transferrable Certifications
• Request WGU Transcripts
• International Transfer Credit
• Tuition and Fees
• Financial Aid
• Scholarships

Other Ways to Pay for School

• Tuition—School of Business
• Tuition—School of Education
• Tuition—School of Technology
• Tuition—Leavitt School of Health
• Your Financial Obligations
• Tuition Comparison
• Applying for Financial Aid
• State Grants
• Consumer Information Guide
• Responsible Borrowing Initiative
• Higher Education Relief Fund

FAFSA Support

• Net Price Calculator
• FAFSA Simplification
• See All Scholarships
• Military Scholarships
• State Scholarships
• Scholarship FAQs

Payment Options

• Payment Plans
• Corporate Reimbursement
• Current Student Hardship Assistance
• Military Tuition Assistance

WGU Experience

• How You'll Learn
• Scheduling/Assessments
• Accreditation
• Student Support/Faculty
• Military Students
• Part-Time Options
• Virtual Military Education Resource Center
• Student Outcomes
• Return on Investment
• Students and Gradutes
• Career Growth
• Student Resources
• Communities
• Testimonials
• Career Guides
• Skills Guides
• Online Degrees
• All Degrees
• Explore Your Options

Admissions & Transfers

• Admissions Overview

Tuition & Financial Aid

Student Success

• Prospective Students
• Current Students
• Military and Veterans
• Commencement
• Careers at WGU
• Advancement & Giving
• Partnering with WGU

A Guide to Social Learning Theory in Education

• See More Tags

Every teacher has those students. The ones that make the classroom difficult. They speak out of turn, bully other children, and express many behavioral problems that can bring a teacher to the end of their rope. Every classroom has students like these, and it can be incredibly frustrating for a teacher to deal with this all the time. At the root of the problem may be the student lacking guidance in the classroom. 

“The content of most textbooks is perishable, but the tools of self-directedness serve one well over time.” - Albert Bandura

Current and aspiring teachers know that one of their most important jobs is to help give students guidance to be better learners and people, not just try and teach them one or two things out of a book. Understanding learning theories can help teachers connect with students who are acting out or having trouble learning. The practical applications of the social learning theory can directly address behavioral issues in some students and help them improve. In both their actual learning, and their behavior as a student, the right learning theory can make a world of difference.

What is the social learning theory?

Simply put, social learning theory is the idea that children learn from observing others. This learning can be acted on, a child sees a sibling politely ask for a treat and get one, or not acted on, a teenager hears a friend talking picking a lock and they learn something new, but don’t try it themselves. Especially when it comes to aggressive behavior, social learning theory plays a big role in how all people and especially children learn. 

There are four elements to social learning theory including:

Attention. Children can’t learn if they aren’t focused on the task. Students who see something unique or different are more likely to focus on it, helping them to learn.

Retention. People learn by internalizing information. We can then recall that information later when we want to respond to a situation in the same way which we saw. In order to learn from what we see, we have to retain that information.

Reproduction. We reproduce our previously learned behavior or knowledge when it’s required. Practicing our response in our head or in actions can improve the way we respond.

Motivation. Motivation is required in order to do anything. Usually our motivation comes from seeing someone else be rewarded or punished for something they have done. This can motivate us to do or not do that same thing.

Teachers have found that social modeling and examples are a very powerful tool in education. If children see positive consequences from an action, they are likely to do that action themselves. And if they see negative consequences, they are likely to avoid that behavior. Unique, novel, and different situations often catch a student’s attention and can stand out to them.

If students see other students paying attention, they are more likely to pay attention. So teachers utilize reward systems and punishments to help students learn from the examples of others. Social learning theory also has a great root in encouraging self-efficacy by using constructive feedback. Students who get positive reinforcement have more confidence in themselves and their abilities—this stands out in their mind and they want to repeat this behavior.

History of social learning theory.

Albert Bandura is considered the father of social learning theory. In the 1960’s he conducted a now-famous experiment called the Bobo doll experiment that led to his official writings on the social learning theory in 1977.

The Bobo doll experiment was a group of tests performed from 1961-1963. The experiments involved studying children’s behavior after they watched an adult act aggressively toward a doll-like toy with a low center of mass that rocked back after being knocked down. The most important element of the experiment was seeing how children behaved after seeing the adult get rewarded, punished, or no consequence for physically abusing the Bobo doll. These experiments helped show how children can be influenced by learning from the behavior of others. Albert Bandura’s insights focus on behavioral development of students

Lev Vygotsky is also known for his work on understanding how children learn from their peers, but his work is more focused on cognitive and language development. Lev Vygotsky focuses on the difference between what a child knows and what they want to know, the zone of proximal development. He focuses on how seeing other adults and peers helps children be able to overcome that zone of proximal development.

Social learning theory vs. social cognitive theory.

Albert Bandura is known as being the creator of both of these learning theories. Social cognitive theory is a more specific and detailed element of the social learning theory, and is connected to the cognitive theory of learning . It takes the idea that people learn from other people, and adds their personal or cognitive factors, the behavior itself, and the environment as combination factors for determining learning and behavior. 

In social cognitive theory, Bandura broadens the theory by saying that humans aren’t just shaped by their environment and inner forces, but they also shape their environment and inner force. Self-efficacy is an even more crucial area of social cognitive theory. 

Social learning theory is the more broad approach to the idea that humans and children learn from observing others.

How to incorporate social learning in your classroom.

While it’s one thing to think about social learning, it’s another to really incorporate it into your classroom. It’s important to understand strategies for how to incorporate this theory and help students succeed with it. Empathy and care are crucial to making sure this learning theory goes well in your classroom. Teachers should always remember that they can focus on reinforcement to shape behavior, model appropriate behavior, and build self-efficacy as part of their classroom model.

The flipped classroom model . A flipped classroom model involves changing the way students would traditionally learn. Instead of a teacher lecturing during the school day, students watch an instructional video or reading material at home. Then in class, they apply what they learned through activities or assignments that might have been homework. Teachers act as guides and coaches, helping them continue their learning. This embodies the social learning theory because students are able to observe the behavior and action of other students during the learning and activities, seeing when they are getting praised and encouraged, and apply those observations to their learning.

Teachers can incorporate this model by recording themselves lecturing on a certain subject so students can watch that video as their homework. They can then take their homework assignments and plan to work on them the next day with the students. It can be beneficial for teachers who choose this model to be available to help answer student questions if needed.

Gamification and simulations. Gamification and simulations help teachers turn their classroom into a more interactive experience. It takes assignments and activities and put them into a game. Gamification involves turning an activity into a competitive game, creating rewards for winners, and creating that unique and novel spark that will attract the interest of students.

Simulations in the classroom help add interest and fun to a classroom situation. A mock trial, a mock city, a digital simulation—all of these simulation options are great ways to enhance a classroom setting and make students feel more engaged. They also get the opportunity to learn from their peers.

Gamification and simulations connect to social learning theory by allowing students to make real observations for rewards and punishments in an engaging way in the classroom. Students can win a game or see someone succeed in the simulation, and then emulate that behavior. 

Teachers can start by creating a unit that has a simple game or simulation to test it out, and then continue to add new games or simulations whenever possible.

Peer coaching. Peer coaching is a great way to help students learn from each other. Students connected to each other can observe and learn, helping each other along the way. It’s important to be careful when instituting peer coaching—you don’t want students to feel uncomfortable or insecure about another student helping them. This can work well for math learning, paper writing and editing, and more. To institute peer coaching, carefully observe students first to see who would be a good fit to make the experience a success.

Teachers can be a peer coach for students, or another aid can help act as peer coaches for students, especially when it comes to older students. Older students can directly learn from adults who have been in similar situations, and they can see how then ended up and how they got to where they are. 

Teacher resources for social learning.

These resources will help teachers be prepared to incorporate social learning in their classroom and help students improve behaviors and be successful.

http://www.google.com/sky/ . This resource is a simulation of the sky that can help students learn about astronomy.

http://padlet.com/ . Padlet can help students and teachers collaborate. Students can communicate and work with each other while watching instructional videos or reading articles written by the teacher.

http://edpuzzle.com/ . Edpuzzle allows teachers to create video content for students to consume easily.

http://quizizz.com/ . Quizizz is a great game option that makes learning and quizzes a more fun, game option. 

http://www.youtube.com/user/wardsci/videos?view=0 . How-to videos are a great way for students to learn at home, particularly in a flipped classroom environment.

If you're a current or aspiring educator , it's important to understand how different learning theories can benefit your classroom and help students find success. Get more help and knowledge about teaching and education with a degree from WGU.

Ready to Start Your Journey?

HEALTH & NURSING

Recommended Articles

Take a look at other articles from WGU. Our articles feature information on a wide variety of subjects, written with the help of subject matter experts and researchers who are well-versed in their industries. This allows us to provide articles with interesting, relevant, and accurate information. 

{{item.date}}

{{item.preTitleTag}}

{{item.title}}

The university, for students.

• Student Portal
• Alumni Services

Most Visited Links

• Business Programs
• Student Experience
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Student Communities

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Sweepstakes
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

How Observational Learning Affects Behavior

• Influential Factors
• Pros and Cons

Observational learning describes the process of learning by watching others, retaining the information, and then later replicating the behaviors that were observed.

There are a number of learning theories, such as classical conditioning and operant conditioning , that emphasize how direct experience, reinforcement, or punishment can lead to learning. However, a great deal of learning happens indirectly.

For example, think about how a child may watch adults waving at one another and then imitates these actions later on. A tremendous amount of learning happens through this process. In psychology , this is referred to as observational learning.

Observational learning is sometimes called shaping, modeling, and vicarious reinforcement. While it can take place at any point in life, it tends to be the most common during childhood.

It also plays an important role in the socialization process. Children learn how to behave and respond to others by observing how their parent(s) and/or caregivers interact with other people.

Verywell / Brianna Gilmartin

History of Observational Learning

Psychologist Albert Bandura is the researcher most often associated with learning through observation. He and others have demonstrated that we are naturally inclined to engage in observational learning.

Studies suggest that imitation with social understanding tends to begin around 2 years old, but will vary depending on the specific child. In the past, research has claimed that newborns are capable of imitation, but this likely isn't true, as newborns often react to stimuli in a way that may seem like imitation, but isn't.

Basic Principles of Social Learning Theory

If you've ever made faces at a toddler and watched them try to mimic your movements, then you may have witnessed how observational learning can be such an influential force. Bandura's social learning theory stresses the power of observational learning.

Bobo Doll Experiment

Bandura's Bobo doll experiment is one of the most famous examples of observational learning. In the Bobo doll experiment , Bandura demonstrated that young children may imitate the aggressive actions of an adult model. Children observed a film where an adult repeatedly hit a large, inflatable balloon doll and then had the opportunity to play with the same doll later on.

Children were more likely to imitate the adult's violent actions when the adult either received no consequences or when the adult was rewarded. Children who saw the adult being punished for this aggressive behavior were less likely to imitate them.

Observational Learning Examples

The following are instances that demonstrate observational learning has occurred.

• A child watches their parent folding the laundry. They later pick up some clothing and imitate folding the clothes.
• A young couple goes on a date to an Asian restaurant. They watch other diners in the restaurant eating with chopsticks and copy their actions to learn how to use these utensils.
• A child watches a classmate get in trouble for hitting another child. They learn from observing this interaction that they should not hit others.
• A group of children play hide-and-seek. One child joins the group and is not sure what to do. After observing the other children play, they quickly learn the basic rules and join in.

Stages of Observational Learning

There are four stages of observational learning that need to occur for meaningful learning to take place. Keep in mind, this is different than simply copying someone else's behavior. Instead, observational learning may incorporate a social and/or motivational component that influences whether the observer will choose to engage in or avoid a certain behavior.

For an observer to learn, they must be in the right mindset to do so. This means having the energy to learn, remaining focused on what the model is engaging in, and being able to observe the model for enough time to grasp what they are doing.

How the model is perceived can impact the observer's level of attention. Models who are seen being rewarded for their behavior, models who are attractive, and models who are viewed as similar to the observer tend to command more focus from the observer.

If the observer was able to focus on the model's behavior, the next step is being able to remember what was viewed. If the observer is not able to recall the model's behavior, they may need to go back to the first stage again.

Reproduction

If the observer is able to focus and retains the information, the next stage in observational learning is trying to replicate it. It's important to note that every individual will have their own unique capacity when it comes to imitating certain behaviors, meaning that even with perfect focus and recall, some behaviors may not be easily copied.

In order for the observer to engage in this new behavior, they will need some sort of motivation . Even if the observer is able to imitate the model, if they lack the drive to do so, they will likely not follow through with this new learned behavior.

Motivation may increase if the observer watched the model receive a reward for engaging in a certain behavior and the observer believes they will also receive some reward if they imitate said behavior. Motivation may decrease if the observer had knowledge of or witnessed the model being punished for a certain behavior.

Influences on Observational Learning

According to Bandura's research, there are a number of factors that increase the likelihood that a behavior will be imitated. We are more likely to imitate:

• People we perceive as warm and nurturing
• People who receive rewards for their behavior
• People who are in an authoritative position in our lives
• People who are similar to us in age, sex, and interests
• People we admire or who are of a higher social status
• When we have been rewarded for imitating the behavior in the past
• When we lack confidence in our own knowledge or abilities
• When the situation is confusing, ambiguous, or unfamiliar

Pros and Cons of Observational Learning

Observational learning has the potential to teach and reinforce or decrease certain behaviors based on a variety of factors. Particularly prevalent in childhood, observational learning can be a key part of how we learn new skills and learn to avoid consequences.

However, there has also been concern about how this type of learning can lead to negative outcomes and behaviors. Some studies, inspired by Bandura's research, focused on the effects observational learning may have on children and teenagers.

For example, previous research drew a direct connection between playing certain violent video games and an increase in aggression in the short term. However, later research that focused on the short- and long-term impact video games may have on players has shown no direct connections between video game playing and violent behavior.

Similarly, research looking at sexual media exposure and teenagers' sexual behavior found that, in general, there wasn't a connection between watching explicit content and having sex within the following year.

Another study indicated that if teenagers age 14 and 15 of the same sex consumed sexual media together and/or if parents restricted the amount of sexual content watched, the likelihood of having sex was lower. The likelihood of sexual intercourse increased when opposite-sex peers consumed sexual content together.

Research indicates that when it comes to observational learning, individuals don't just imitate what they see and that context matters. This may include who the model is, who the observer is with, and parental involvement.

Uses for Observational Learning

Observational learning can be used in the real world in a number of different ways. Some examples include:

• Learning new behaviors : Observational learning is often used as a real-world tool for teaching people new skills. This can include children watching their parents perform a task or students observing a teacher engage in a demonstration.
• Strengthening skills : Observational learning is also a key way to reinforce and strengthen behaviors. For example, if a study sees another student getting a reward for raising their hand in class, they will be more likely to also raise their hand the next time they want to ask a question.
• Minimizing negative behaviors : Observational learning also plays an important role in reducing undesirable or negative behaviors. For example, if you see a coworker get reprimanded for failing to finish a task on time, it means that you may be more likely to finish your work more quickly.

A Word From Verywell

Observational learning can be a powerful learning tool. When we think about the concept of learning, we often talk about direct instruction or methods that rely on reinforcement and punishment . But, a great deal of learning takes place much more subtly and relies on watching the people around us and modeling their actions. This learning method can be applied in a wide range of settings including job training, education, counseling, and psychotherapy .

Jones SS. The development of imitation in infancy.   Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences . 2009;364(1528):2325-2335. doi:10.1098/rstb.2009.0045

Bandura A.  Social Learning Theory . Prentice Hall; 1977.

Kühn S, Kugler DT, Schmalen K, Weichenberger M, Witt C, Gallinat J. Does playing violent video games cause aggression? A longitudinal intervention study.  Mol Psychiatry . 2019;24(8):1220-1234. doi:10.1038/s41380-018-0031-7

Gottfried JA, Vaala SE, Bleakley A, Hennessy M, Jordan A. Does the effect of exposure to TV sex on adolescent sexual behavior vary by genre? Communication Research . 2013;40(1):73-95. doi:10.1177/0093650211415399

Parkes A, Wight D, Hunt K, Henderson M, Sargent J. Are sexual media exposure, parental restrictions on media use and co-viewing TV and DVDs with parents and friends associated with teenagers’ early sexual behaviour?   Journal of Adolescence . 2013;36(6):1121-1133. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.08.019

The impact of interactive violence on children . U.S. Senate Hearing 106-1096. March 21, 2000.

Anderson CA, Dill KE. Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life .  J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000;78(4):772-790. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.4.772

Collins RL, Elliott MN, Berry SH, et al. Watching sex on television predicts adolescent initiation of sexual behavior . Pediatrics . 2004;114(3):e280-9. dloi:10.1542/peds.2003-1065-L

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 08 September 2024

Global analysis of social learning’s archetypes in natural resource management: understanding pathways of co-creation of knowledge

• Michelle Bonatti   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8511-5365 1 , 2 ,
• Marcos Lana 3 ,
• Leonardo Medina 1 , 2 ,
• Paul Chevelev 4 ,
• Carla Baldivieso 1 , 2 ,
• Carla Errismann 1 , 2 ,
• Pia Gleich 5 ,
• Tatiana Rodriguez 6 ,
• Luca Eufemia 7 ,
• Teresa da Silva Rosa 8 ,
• Juliano Borba 9 ,
• Custodio Matavel   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3800-7887 10 ,
• Sandro Schlindwein 11 ,
• Ray Ison   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9191-119X 12 ,
• Klaus Eisenack   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9070-4017 2 ,
• Jon Hellin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2686-8065 13 ,
• Grazia Pacillo 14 ,
• Vincent Vadez   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2014-0281 15 , 16 ,
• Jérôme Bossuet   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0005-1671-482X 15 , 17 ,
• Aleksandra Dolinska &
• Stefan Sieber   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4849-7277 1 , 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  1161 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

174 Accesses

Metrics details

• Complex networks
• Environmental studies

Although social learning (SL) conceptualization and implementation are flourishing in sustainability sciences, and its non-rigid conceptual fluidity is regarded as an advantage, research must advance the understanding of SL phenomenon patterns based on empirical data, thus contributing to the identification of its forms and triggering mechanisms, particularly those that can address urgent Anthropocene socio-ecological problems. This study aims to discover fundamental patterns along which SL in natural resources management differs by identifying SL archetypes and establishing correlations between the SL process and overall geopolitical conditions. Using a systematic literature review comprising 137 case studies in the five continents, content analysis, and correlations were performed. Results show two main archetypes of social learning (endogenous and exogenous). Their occurrence was linked, to where social learning occurs and how venues/preconditions for social learning are placed. In the Global South, endogenous SL should be better potentialized as a catalyzer of deliberative processes for sustainable natural resources management.

Similar content being viewed by others

Evaluating trust and shared group identities in emergent social learning processes in the Zambezi river basin

Six modes of co-production for sustainability

Institutional navigation for polycentric sustainability governance

Introduction.

Attempts to improve sustainable natural resource management (NRM) increasingly highlight the importance of generating conducive contexts for the co-creation of social–ecological strategies based on learning approaches, rather than relying on technocratic models built on hierarchy and linear conceptions of knowledge transfer (Kristjanson et al., 2014 ; Rodela, 2011 ; Pahl-Wostl, 2009 ; Ison and Russell, 2000 ; Armitage et al., 2008 ). Although technological advancements and technical understandings of social–ecological system dynamics are undoubtedly important and widely adopted in the environmental and agricultural sciences to steer sustainable transitions (e.g., climate-smart agriculture and sustainable intensification, among others), technocratic models tend not to transcend technical knowledge (Blok, 2018 ). Instead, they obscure the collective understanding of interdependencies, complexity, uncertainty, and competing truths in sustainable development (SD) agendas (Rist et al., 2007 ). Where technocratic management overshadows human responsibilities for the multiple crises of the Anthropocene, humanistic approaches focusing on collective processes and risk, bring them to light (Blok, 2018 ). Therefore, sustainable NRM requires further research and development that enables and institutionalizes new practice dynamics, interactions, roles, responsibilities, and pathways to co-create novel systems of knowledge and knowing.

Here, knowledge of sustainable NRM is understood as a form of cognitive understandings that guide natural resource management strategies, and as a relational achievement (Ison et al., 2013 ). Replacing accounts of individual discoverers and/or technology, knowledge for sustainable NRM is a result of humans–biophysical world interactions and co-creation processes (Gergen, 2011 ), which should be fostered to accelerate transformative development and democratic decision-making. This perspective has gained momentum since 2000, with a particular interest in learning-based and co-creation approaches in sustainability sciences (Kristjanson et al., 2014 ; Bonatti, 2018 ). However, knowledge co-creation settings can also face challenges, especially in co-creation settings among Global North and Global South actors. In this context, the current difference between “co-creation” and “classic” crowdsourcing initiatives is far from clear, resulting in some skepticism about the co-creation process since it can be used as a form of coloniality (Quijano, 2007 ) and scientific extractivism (Mpoe and Swartz, 2019 ). Co-creation denotes a deeper relationship and commitment by the involved parties, who must work to jointly ideate, design, and produce knowledge and strategies that benefit all based on alternative pedagogies in the form of practical reflexivity and dialogical research (praxis) (Freire, 2020 ; Baron, 2004 ). These alternative pedagogies are associated with social learning (SL) processes (Lotz-Sisitka et al., 2015 ).

Created during the 1960s in the educational sciences (Bandura and Walters, 1977 ), SL has quickly evolved conceptually and been adopted by several different disciplines and sub-disciplines. During the 1980s, SL was intensively used in Organizational Sociology, and in the 2000s, Sustainability Sciences embraced the concept as a fundamental pathway for the co-creation of strategies for sustainable natural resource management (Cundill and Rodela, 2012 ), hence establishing a second school of social learning (Bonatti, 2018 ). SL continues to be conceptualized, understood, and used in many different ways (Wals, 2007 ; Muro and Jeffrey, 2008 ; Reed et al., 2010 ; Collins and Ison, 2009 ; Bonatti et al., 2022 ).

Here, SL is defined as a process based on collaborative groups and networks that: (a) integrate different sources of knowledge; (b) undertake iterative and transformative actions as a result of critical learnings that transcend the individual and become situated within wider social units (Reed et al., 2010 ); and (c) generate an epistemological point of view that defines knowledge not as an object that can be transferred between people but as the result of an emergent, relational dynamic of social interactions (Ison et al., 2013 ). Social learning (the second school) is a process crucial for natural resource management and is found in different kinds of institutions and communities, although with diverse forms and functions. This implies that questions concerning the different functions of SL, how it contributes to sustainable transformations, and questions concerning conditions and structures that foster its emergence cannot be answered in a general way (Ison et al., 2013 ). Furthermore, the rapid growth and diversification of SL approaches have generated, in some cases, divergence about the meanings, outcomes, and limitations of SL for NRM. Since purposeful empirical social learning research is still comparatively new (Cundill et al., 2014 ; Kristjanson et al., 2014 ), emerging at a time of significant inter and transdisciplinary interest in societal change toward a more sustainable future (Cundill et al., 2014 ), research should forge a stronger and deeper understanding of SL processes, along with potential models for societal transformation and sustainable NRM. While some remarkable advances in social learning classifications (Rodela, 2011 ; Cundill and Rodela, 2012 ; Slater and Robinson, 2020 ) and metaphors (Ison et al., 2013 ) have been established, the actual design and organization of empirical cases that aim to trigger social learning remain largely underexplored. Therefore, although the conceptualization of social learning is rapidly evolving in sustainability science, and its non-rigid conceptual fluidity is regarded as an advantage (Ison et al., 2013 ), it is critical that research advances the understanding of social learning phenomenon patterns based on empirical evidence (Kristjanson et al., 2014 ). Further developments in this regard could contribute to the identification of different social learning forms, particularly those most effective in addressing urgent social–ecological problems in the Anthropocene.

To close this gap, this research advances theory in this area by identifying overall geopolitical contexts that differentiate social learning and identifying their archetypes. Archetypes are models based on patterns of behaviors or phenomena (Oberlack et al., 2019 ; Eisenack et al., 2019 ). Thus, archetypes of social learning refer to the fundamental paths/patterns through which people involved in NRM learn from each other in a social context. By investigating archetypes of social learning, this study can advance the understanding of social learning approaches and definitions of ‘what is’ social learning (Rodela, 2011 ; Cundill and Rodela, 2012 ; Ison et al., 2013 ; Reed et al., 2010 ), focusing particularly on the following research questions: What are the archetypical pathways of social learning in NRM? How do they occur in different social and geopolitical contexts? The primary aim is not only to understand the observed social learning phenomena through extensive empirical data but also to establish correlations between social learning, geopolitical location, and general socio-economic conditions. This is crucial for advancing the study of social learning and is particularly significant in showcasing potential alternative models of social learning that may emerge from various contexts.

This study, therefore, adopts a working hypothesis based on previous SL studies to guide the analysis. Chavez-Miguel et al. ( 2022 ), Bonatti et al. ( 2022 ), and Souza et al. ( 2020 ) show initial evidence regarding the potential emergence of different kinds of social learning based on initiatives led by communities living in adverse socioeconomic conditions in the Global South. Their research focuses, respectively, on Escuelas Campesinas (in Colombia), the Bucket Revolution, and the community of Lomba do Pinheiro (both in Brazil). These case studies offered initial evidence about a kind of social learning that is triggered through collective action at community levels that emerged autonomously possibly indicating different patterns of relational dynamics among social actors occurring in the Global South.

Although the Global South is not a static concept, it is understood that the concepts of Global North and Global South (or the North–South divide in a global context) are used to describe a grouping of countries sharing similar socioeconomic and political characteristics (Dados and Connell, 2012 ). The Global South is a term generally used to identify countries in the regions of Latin America, Africa, parts of Asia, and Oceania. Most, though not all, of the countries in the Global South, are characterized by low-income, dense populations, poor infrastructure, colonial past, minorities’ exclusion, and marginalization processes (Mahler, 2017 , 2018 ). Although this distinction has limitations given the changing global dynamics (Gray and Gills, 2016 ) and the potential to overlook specific contexts related to class, gender, and race that contribute to global inequalities (Dados and Connell, 2012 ), it represents the latest development and critical approach to the previous definition called developing or developing countries.

The previous studies, findings (Chavez-Miguel et al., 2022 ; Bonatti et al., 2022 ; Souza et al., 2020 ) are the central source of information for the development and investigation of the hypothesis of this study, and this type of social learning can be called Endogenous SL. A definition of this type of SL is only found in the work of Carlile ( 2013 ), where it is defined as a process rooted in the political, economic and social frameworks of the locality or region. This process would embody a form of social learning that convened stakeholders that represented not just a socially differentiated community of actors but a set of actors that acknowledged the traditions and local authorities of the region as well as an understanding of the local organizations (Carlile, 2013 ). Therefore, for the purpose of the analysis carried out here, Endogenous SL is initially understood as the process through which interacting individuals within a society or group learn from one another, rather than from external sources or formal instruction (Cunningham and Cunningham, 2008 ). This type of learning is “endogenous” because it originates from within the system or community itself (Wals and van der Leij, 2007 ). It involves the exchange of knowledge, behaviors, and skills through observation, practices, and communication among peers (Reed et al., 2010 ) sharing a territory (Berkes, 2009 ). This concept can be related to Endogenous Development which focuses on leveraging local resources, knowledge, and capacities to foster sustainable development from within a community or region (Vázquez-Barquero, 2002 ). It prioritizes the participation and empowerment of local populations, ensuring that development initiatives are culturally appropriate and rooted in local traditions and/or practices (Escobar, 1995 ; Ray, 1999 ).

A second type of SL called Exogenous, for which a formal definition does not exist (or cannot be found) in the literature, has also been identified, which could be included among the current social learning concepts. In this type of social learning, individuals or groups learn from experiences, information, and influences that originate outside their immediate social context or community (Reed et al., 2010 ) based on interactions with external social actors such as representatives of organizations. As a result, this study elaborates on actual and potential differences between endogenous and exogenous SL patterns to be confirmed on the basis of further empirical evidence.

The differentiation of two initial archetypes is crucial to provide a parameter for identifying the potential emergence of different types of social learning, based on initiatives led by communities living in the different geopolitical contexts. Although this study recognizes the limitations of using North–South relations (Gray and Gills, 2016 ; Dados and Connell, 2012 ), the adoption of this geopolitical differentiation was essential because different patterns of relational dynamics may occur in different socio-economic contexts, which could have implications for the emergence of different kinds of social learning to be identified at the global level.

To understand the observed social learning phenomena through extensive empirical data and to establish correlations between social learning and power structures and socio-economic conditions, four interconnected steps were applied: (1) development of the analytical framework (2) case study selection; (3) case study classification; and (4) clustering and definition of archetypes. Steps 2 and 3 are based on a systematic literature review, defined as systematic methods to identify, select, and critically appraise relevant research, collecting and analyzing data from the studies that are included in the review (Petticrew and Roberts, 2008 ).

Step 1—Development of the analytical framework

To answer the research questions, this study applied an archetype analysis, which can identify/represent recurring interaction patterns (Moallemi et al., 2022 ). Archetype analysis avoids the traps of overgeneralization and ideography by identifying recurring but non-universal patterns that hold for well-defined subsets of cases (Eisenack et al., 2019 ). This kind of analysis in sustainability research offers the opportunity to assess recurrent causes and effects of human–nature interactions as an integrated set of processes rather than isolated factors while considering the specific spatiotemporal contexts in which they evolve. Therefore, this study seeks to discover social learning generalizations about key interlinkages and patterns relevant to sustainable natural resource research by using archetype analysis as a core methodological approach (Kates et al., 2001 ). These patterns are useful for understanding functional similarities and differences from a broader perspective, thus informing decisions that must be made across diverse knowledge co-creation contexts (Miller et al., 2014 ; Sietz et al., 2019 ), linking empirical evidence with broader learning processes. Importantly, recognizing similarities can enhance learning and inform the scaling-up of sustainability improvements.

The analytical framework synthesizes some insights from a collection of seminal studies (Cundill and Rodela, 2012 ; Scholz et al., 2014 ; Slater and Robinson, 2020 ), which delineate essential characteristics and attributes of social learning in terms of materials (Slater and Robinson, 2020 ), processes (Cundill and Rodela, 2012 ), involved actors, methodologies, resources, and resulting outcomes such as new knowledge, reflective thinking, and newly forged relationships (Table 2 ). These fundamental elements were methodically integrated and organized through the lens of archetype analysis (Fig. 1 ), leading to the development of a comprehensive conceptual model that articulates the social learning phenomena within natural resource management (NRM). This model is structured around three principal dimensions—outputs, inputs, and geopolitical context—each aligning with the archetype analysis’s structural components: design, outcome, and diagnostic criteria.

Analytical framework.

The geopolitical context dimension delves into the interplay between political and geographic territories, drawing on the conceptualizations by Quijano ( 2007 ) and Dados and Connell ( 2012 ). The input dimension encapsulates the essential tools, participants, processes, and materials that facilitate social learning events (Cundill and Rodela, 2012 ; Slater and Robinson, 2020 ). Conversely, the output dimension captures the tangible and intangible products emanating from the social learning interactions (Scholz et al., 2014 ). Notably, this study opted to exclude the transformation of mental models from our analysis, as outlined by Scholz et al. ( 2014 ), due to their inherently higher subjective nature.

The 10 social learning key characteristics were defined as the 10 specific categories of analysis. In order to analyze comparable factors across heterogeneous cases, this study prioritized the inclusion of more objective categories (such as ‘geopolitical location’, ‘location’, ‘country’, ‘natural resource addressed’ and ‘resource availability’). However, subjective categories (‘relational capital’, ‘methods’, ‘targeted objective’ and ‘level of social learning’) are also included because of the importance of trying to understand the inputs and outputs of a social phenomenon (in this case, the social learning process). Therefore, this study has a certain degree of subjectivity in its analysis. These categories were classified as interdepend or independent to further analyses. The explanation of the interconnections and dependencies among categories was crucial for clarifying the possibility of category exclusions if necessary and enhancing the comprehension of our analytical framework. Analyzing interdependent relations requires an approach that considers the direct interactions, causal relations, and connections variables. In contrast, independent relations can be examined separately, focusing on individual effects.

Classifying and analyzing a consistent quantity of social learning cases based on these categories of analysis enables us to investigate the SL phenomenon in depth and its context, to identify the boundaries between the phenomenon under investigation and the context in which it occurs, as well as to generalize SL recurrent mechanisms, co-relations, and patterns (Cundill et al., 2014 ).

Step 2—Selection of study cases

To understand the current forms of social learning in NRM, this study systematically reviewed a selection of international peer-reviewed literature that directly assesses the status, processes, tools, barriers, outcomes, and opportunities for social learning NRM. Specific keywords were used in our initial search, such as “social learning” and “natural resource management,” in combination with variations of “case of study,” “study case,” “case,” or “case study,” which helped identify the initial 4220 documents (with 4072 of these documents from Web of Science and 158 from Science direct). These keywords were developed based on a rigorous process that drew from previous literature in the field and the collective familiarity of the authors with the topic (period of data collection September 20 to December 20, 2022). Non-empirical (theoretical and conceptual) literature and empirical cases of social learning that occurs without human group in-person collaboration were excluded. In other words, our review focused on empirical studies that included collaboration for on-ground actions, as well as publications including “learning” in the content.

To ensure a high standard of reporting quality of the revision process and its replicability, our study follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, which includes a standard methodology that uses a guideline checklist and a flow diagram (Page et al., 2021 ). The flow diagram, which provides a schematic overview of the review steps, is depicted in Fig. 2 .

PRISMA flowchart of primary study selection.

After removing duplicate records (154), an initial screening of titles took place, excluding a total of 3523 records that were marked as ineligible. Subsequently, the remaining 553 documents were manually screened and further filtered based on the abstracts to include only peer-reviewed publications that: (1) explicitly analyze social learning or learning processes, directly mention social learning processes, or specifically use methods mentioning social learning; (2) relate it to sustainability and natural resources management (i.e., land use, water management, biodiversity, etc.); and (3) are peer-reviewed and published in international scientific journals (Table 1 includes specific criteria to including or excluding the articles). Accordingly, it was selected 130 articles that went through a full-text assessment. The scope of this review is limited to the natural resource management literature. This does not negate the importance of the other bodies of literature on the topic, particularly in the areas of pedagogy, governance, and policy. Rather, the limited scope of this review highlights the challenge of summarizing a large and rapidly growing discourse on social learning in natural resource management.

In order to ensure the reliability and validity of this systematic literature review, a rigorous quality assessment was conducted. This involved a multi-step process to evaluate the included studies and ensure the consistency and comparability of the data.

During the coding phase (Step 3), it became evident that one category of analysis, namely “Conflict,” consistently lacked sufficient and consistent information across the selected studies. Consequently, this category was deemed unsuitable for inclusion in the review. The decision to exclude the “Conflict” category was made in order to maintain the overall quality and reliability of the review by focusing on categories with more robust and consistent data. As illustrated in the analytical framework, conflict is an independent variable. Consequently, the exclusion of this category would not affect the overall analysis.

In addition to the exclusion of categories, meticulous attention was paid to the methodologies employed in the selected studies. It was observed that some articles employed methods related to computer games as a social learning process that were not directly comparable to the primary research focus of this systematic review. In order to maintain methodological consistency, comparability, and relevance to the research question, 21 articles were excluded from the review. Consequently, only a final sample of 109 articles met the inclusion criteria (see Supplementary Material : List of articles). To maintain the individual case study as the unit of analysis, articles discussing more than one case were analyzed on a per-case basis. This resulted in a total number of 137 individual cases of social learning for natural resource management.

Step 3—Classification of the cases according to categories of analysis

A content analysis was conducted on the selected papers through the following ten analytical categories of the analytical framework: 1. geopolitical location; 2. The type of participants; 3. Scope of learning; 4. Outcomes; 5. Relational capital generated; 6. Conflicts generated; 7. SL mediation/methodology applied; 8. Financial resource availability during the SL process; 9. SL level (endogenous or exogenous process); and 10. Natural resources are addressed with the SL process (Table 2 ).

The classification of the articles according to the categories of analysis was conducted by an interdisciplinary team ( n : 10) comprising geographers, politicians, agronomists, an economist, a sociologist, and a pedagogue, which had rounds of inter-rater checks for concordance. Regarding quality assurance of coding, to enable cross-article comparisons, we conducted a quality assessment of each coder to identify those who had missed entries or skipped significant questions/indicators. Individual training was conducted to understand and calibrate the categories of analysis and its variables. As such, all included studies underwent a thorough and independent review by the research team. The analysis and evidence synthesis were conducted using established coding procedures, adhering to recognized methodological guidelines (Haddaway et al., 2015 ). Each selected study was reviewed independently and cross-checked by at least two team members against these indicators. Discrepancies were resolved not merely by discussion, but by referring back to our operational definitions and consulting a third reviewer if necessary. This approach ensured a high standard of consistency and rigor in the assessment process.

Step 4—Clustering and defining archetypes: data treatment, patterns identification, and archetypes generation

Correlations between categories of analysis were processed to identify underlying structural conditions that differentiate and cluster the cases, resulting in potentially different archetypes. A comprehensive archetype analysis characterizes each archetype by three elements: (i) a configuration of attributes; (ii) a theory or hypothesis that explains the relation between the attributes; and (iii) a set of cases where it holds (Sietz et al., 2019 ).

Following this rationality, data treatment follows three steps: (1) finding the significant, positive, and negative correlations using Pearson’s bivariate correlations in the extracted information of the 109 papers/137 cases; (2) decomposing each significant correlation to discover attributes; and (3) constructing and linking the multiple variables analyzed then explaining and analyzing the working hypotheses. For that, we loaded the collected social learning data into a Python file and calculated the Pearson correlations with the aid of the Python library pandas. The network graphs were then created using the Python library networks by scaling each node with the strength of its corresponding correlation with the SL archetype (endogenous or exogenous) and colored depending on whether the correlation is positive or negative. Due to the social subject being analyzed, the correlation classification (weak to strong) follows the principles of correlation coefficients proposed by Akoglu ( 2018 ). The values ranged from strong negative correlations (dark red areas) to strong positive correlations (dark green areas).

A cartographic representation comparing the occurrence of Endogenous SL and Exogenous SL at the country scale was generated by ratio calculation with the help of the Python libraries Pandas and Plotly. A data analyst and a mathematician led this data analysis with the support of the team previously described.

Study limitations

It is essential to acknowledge the inherent limitations of our systematic review in the context of the field of Social learning in NRM. One prominent limitation arises from the significant heterogeneity in research methodologies (cases) observed across the body of literature we reviewed. In the absence of a universally agreed-upon protocol and the prevalent use of mixed methods by researchers, achieving a high degree of comparability among the studies included in this review was a formidable challenge. To mitigate this limitation, we made concerted efforts to carefully discuss it in interdisciplinary team and contextualize our results within the framework of this heterogeneity. Finally, it important to highlight that archetype analysis is was also chosen considering heterogeneity. As a methodology, archetype analysis is primarily driven by the objective of explaining outcomes in heterogeneous cases that lack universal patterns (Eisenack et al., 2019 ). Ultimately, the review omits certain publications like books, proceedings, dissertations, and non-English regional journals due to its primary emphasis on bibliographic databases. By prioritizing bibliographic databases, various other material types have been left out of the review. Further limitations are related to the overall use of the geopolitical category. It is important to note that the Global North-South divide is a simplification of complex realities. There are significant variations within each category, and some countries may not fit neatly into either group (Milanovic, 2016 ). Additionally, the rise of emerging economies, such as China and India, has challenged the traditional North-South dichotomy (Gray and Gills, 2016 ). Finally, it is acknowledged that other categories of analysis, such as governance systems, can be investigated in future research.

The results show significant correlations, both positive and negative, among the variables of the categories of analysis (SL level related to the others). The results are presented based on the two archetypes (endogenous and exogenous SL) (Figs. 3 and 4 ). Although there are nuances, the results show a trend aligned with the initial working hypothesis.

Exogenous significant, positive, and negative correlations between SL levels related to the other categories of analysis.

Endogenous significant, positive, and negative correlations between SL levels related to the other categories of analysis.

As a general result, the positive correlations, with strong to moderate effect strength among the variables, indicate that the patterns of each archetype of social learning can be characterized as (i) Endogenous social learning associated with learning by doing methods, financial resources scarcity, Global South, knowledge focused on community development, community individuals engagement and (ii) Exogenous social learning, associated to financial resources availability, fixed methods, Global North, general stakeholders engagement, focused on environmental knowledge and political agreements. Of the 137 study cases, discussed across 109 articles, 33 are classified as Endogenous SL, 90 as Exogenous SL, and 14 could not be categorized as belonging solely to one or another archetype.

The 14 cases have non-clear patterns (not patterned). Therefore it was not possible to define it as a pure Archetype itself. However, it was chosen to present it as a result to indicate that other kinds of archetypes might exist. The fact that 14 cases are not clearly categorized indicates that the proposed framework is not able to take account of the whole diversity of the social learning phenomena, implying the exclusion of specific cases. Examples of such cases include sources that were initially reporting Exogenous SL processes and then transitioning or having characteristics of Endogenous SL. As stated by Eisenack et al. ( 2019 ) if one observation does not fit to an archetype, this does not falsify the archetype simply because archetypes are not required to be universal. It only falsifies the applicability of that archetype in that case.

The results showing the strongest correlations for Exogenous SL and Endogenous SL are related to the three categories of analysis of input: “financial resources,” “method applied,” and “types of participants” (Figs. 3 and 4 ). The other categories of analysis can also be associated with Endogenous or Exogenous archetypes. Regarding the “Continent” category, while Europe is the continent where most cases of Exogenous appear, Latin America has the most frequency Endogenous cases. The category “location” does not show significant results related to specific countries. These results suggest that they are the conditions (structure and inputs) under which the different kinds of SL archetypes emerged, generating different outputs. Although these two archetypes are distinguishable, they are not entirely opponent or antagonist archetypes. The existence of these archetypes does not exclude the existence of other archetypes.

For this category of ‘natural resources’, endogenous SL is more closely correlated with ‘multiple resources’, while exogenous SL is more closely correlated with ‘ecosystems’. This may suggest that in some, but not most, cases, the social learning process has addressed multiple resources or systems. In the dataset, the proportion of occurrences of several natural resources is close for endogenous and exogenous (e.g. water, 42% of endogenous cases and 30% of exogenous cases), making the correlation for these items non-significant and signaling that this relationship could be due to chance rather than being a characteristic component of any archetypes.

Exogenous archetypes: correlations and characterization

See Fig. 3 .

Endogenous archetypes: correlations and characterization

See Fig. 4 .

Analysis of the multiple variables and the relation between the attributes

In Fig. 5 , the patterns of each archetype of social learning characterized as structure, input, and outcome are represented in a hierarchical form. Here, we construct and link the multiple variables, explaining and analyzing the working hypotheses about Endogenous and Exogenous SL according to the co-relations found.

Social learning archetypes essential features based on correlations found.

As the left side of Fig. 5 summarizes, in the SL endogenous archetype features where social learning outcomes are focused on increasing critical thinking and environmental knowledge, and strengthening participation. The inputs/conditions for generating these outputs are related to the use of learning-by-doing methods under conditions of scarcity of financial resources, with the aim of community development and participation mainly of individuals in the community. These conditions may have their origins in the geopolitical context of the societies in which these archetypes occur.

On the right side of Fig. 5 , in the SL Exogenous archetype, the social learning outputs are more centered on increased critical thinking and some combinations. The inputs/conditions (center of Fig. 1 ) for producing these outcomes are related to the use of pre-established methods in the condition of availability of financial resources with the participation of general stakeholders.

The correlations between exogenous SL and the Global North, as opposed to endogenous SL and the Global South, are not the strongest, but they clearly indicate a trend. Although most of the attributes of the structures, inputs, and outputs of each SL in NRM differ, the combined outcomes of relational capital (arrangements between a–c) have some common aspects (especially increased environmental knowledge). In the map (Fig. 6 ), the occurrence of Endogenous SL and Exogenous SL at the country scale is shown.

A cartographic representation delineating the occurrence of Endogenous SL and Exogenous SL at the country scale.

The results showed evidence of at least two main archetypes (Endogenous SL and Exogenous SL); confirming the working hypothesis that different patterns of SL are occurring. The inputs for and outputs of SL in NRM (as documented in the literature analyzed) differ strongly between processes with Exogenous SL and Endogenous SL. It can be associated with where social learning takes place (Global North/Europe or Global South/Latin America). Therefore, would the characteristics of Global North or South determine how the venues and preconditions for social learning are placed (more power-imbalanced settings and fewer resources)?

As presented in our hypothesis, a few studies (Chavez-Miguel et al., 2022 ; Bonatti et al., 2022 ; Souza et al., 2020 ) suggest that a different kind of social learning occurs in the territories of the Global South. When looking at communities in the Global South, the focus of social learning is more closely related to community development done by community individuals, where most “learning by doing” methodologies and low-resource SL processes are used. SL Endogenous might be a process close to what Pahl-Wostl ( 2009 ) conceptualized as social learning that proceeds in a stepwise fashion moving from single to double to triple loop learning where informal networks are considered to play a crucial role in learning processes.

As shown in the map (Fig. 6 ), the results of SL Endogenous show a correlation with the Global South, particularly Latin America. This region has been related to the emergence of numerous grassroots movements rooted in co-creation processes and community rationalities. Prominent examples include La Vía Campesina across Latin America (Desmarais, 2008 ), the landless workers’ movement in Brazil (Wolford, 2010 ), and the Proceso de Comunidades Negras in the Colombian Pacific (Escobar, 2008 ). Moreover, theoretical frameworks, including Freire ( 2020 ) and Fals Borda and Mora-Osejo ( 2004 ), shed light on several community-based initiatives and endogenous development in neglected areas.

In contrast to the community-based, endogenous archetypes of social learning seen in many Latin American contexts, Exogenous social learning processes are more prevalent in the Global North, particularly in Europe. Unlike community-based initiatives that often emphasize the importance of local knowledge, local identities, and their connection to specific territories, exogenous processes may not place a similar emphasis on these aspects. Exogenous social learning then incorporates a high level of advocacy and diverse civil society groups not directly representing the communities in multi-stakeholder networks (Pahl-Wostl et al., 2013 ). However, the focus of these processes is often on political agreements, policy development, and scientific recommendations that guide a societal transition towards sustainability (Schäpke et al., 2017 ). This may overlook the intricacies of local identities and their ties to the land and natural resources.

In the Global South, characterized processes such as structural exclusion and neglection (Mahler, 2018 ; Capdepuy, 2023 ) may exert an influence in terms of a self-designed process of innovative social learning emerging under a scarcity of financial resources, through the engagement of community members focusing on self-determined priorities for local development in the face of multiple crises. Therefore, it may indicate that some Global South communities might have developed endogenous social learning processes based on their self-rationalities and structures (Souza et al., 2020 ) in response to multiple crises and the possibility of handling an intersected process of exclusion (Bonatti et al., 2022 ). These results are in line with the assertion of Cundill et al. ( 2014 ) that social learning processes emerge in diverse contexts. For them, in the Global South, several factors that “go beyond choices related purely to methodological rigor influence the agenda of social learning research” (p.11). Exogenous SL might be established in settings where social actors have suffered less exclusion and marginalization by existing governance systems, possibly with more symmetric power relations. In general, the literature provides a variety of perspectives on various models and tools for social learning related to NRM and governance. In the Global North, for example, SL is often considered crucial for making the management and governance of natural resources more sustainable (Reed et al., 2010 ; Cundill and Rodela, 2012 ) without being directly related to community development. It is also tightly coupled with the history of interactions among those institutional representatives involved in NRM and their relational dynamics within a multi-stakeholder network. As results show, in Exogenous SL, stakeholders/institutional representatives tend to follow the agenda of developing learning focused on natural resource management.

In the case of Endogenous SL, which more commonly emerges in communities with historical legacies of oppression, distrust, and power asymmetries between actors, these factors should play a significant role in determining the kinds of research processes that are considered ethically and socially appropriate (Cundil et al., 2014 ). This may be creating the need for a ‘community engaged’ orientation to research through which scientific inquiry is not seen as ‘separate’ from the world in which it is constituted, but rather as a valid contributor to expanding learning. According to Freire ( 2020 ), a development process should start with an understanding of the participants’ perspectives about their reality. Thus, participants develop a type of diagnosis with a particular focus on how they understand their reality at that moment. At the beginning of the process, the mental models of the participants over their reality are also investigated. They become active, presenting narratives, images, improvisations, characters, and objects that reflect their true understanding of their realities. Through dialog, participants are encouraged to investigate and establish new perceptions about ways to see the proposed problems (Freire, 2020 ; Bonatti et al., 2021 ).

Policies and programs based on SL Exogenous approaches may undervalue or overlook the occurrence and potential of SL Endogenous approaches. It is crucial to understand the logic of SL Endogenous to promote sustainable NRM that clearly supports all involved actors while avoiding the replication of coloniality (Quijano, 2007 ; Escobar, 2012 ). Therefore, SL processes in the Global South can be better facilitated with what Jürgen Habermas describes as ‘communicative action,’ in contrast to ‘strategic action’ and instrumental rationality (Habermas, 1984 ). Sustainable NRM requires space for communicative action designed to share intersubjectively validated explanations of actual situations as well as to achieve the co-articulation of purpose and means required for transforming current norms, rules, and power relations, thus achieving sustainable development (Rist et al., 2007 ). In this context, this study does not intend to decisively determine the best models or archetypes, rather it seek to understand the existing archetypes, identifying the conditions under which they prosper. This study also highlighted SL models that may be invisible to the broader world given their peripheral/neglected territories of origin. It is also critical to emphasize that the idea is not to dichotomize, but rather to indicate that archetypes and learning processes can be complementary, as suggested by existing evidence and remembering that “there are Souths in the geographic North and Norths in the geographic South” (Mahler, 2018 , p. 32),

Finally, interfaces between SL processes here analyzed, endogenous development, and institutional changes (IC) theories might exist in NRM literature. This literature emphasizes commons management processes at different levels of governance and theorizes about participatory and community-based arrangements and practices that imply SL processes for social transformation (Pahl-Wostl and Hare, 2004 ; Romina, 2014 ; Thiel et al., 2015 ). This article also contributes to a better understanding of the mechanism of social transformation and collective action related to NRM especially to analysis of in which circumstances they occurred. Other schools of scientific knowledge conceptualize these related processes differently, but the mechanisms identified here point to clear theoretical interfaces. For example, from an institutional economic perspective, Thiel et al. ( 2015 ) explain that institutional change can be the product of two distinct processes, objective institutional design (OID) and subjective institutional design (SID). This study might contribute to Thiel’s (et al., 2015 ) findings to understand how the collective action process can be differentiated.

There is a dynamic and close relationship between changes in thinking and changes in social behavior, resulting in the development of social institutions and knowledge-creation processes (Wehn and Montalvo, 2018 ). In the literature on NRM, social learning processes and institutional change are linked, as this literature, especially that related to the management of common goods at different levels of governance, often theorizes about participatory arrangements and practices that involve collective learning processes for social transformation. These processes involve the co-creation of knowledge between actors with different interests, rationalities, and knowledge, collaborative and sustainable learning, and the development of social institutions that support socio-ecological sustainability (Bodin and Tengö, 2012 ; Chitata et al., 2021 ; Romina, 2014 ). Furthermore, emerging evidence in the NRM literature highlights the relationship between collective action, a common focus of institutional change studies, and social learning (Assuah and Sinclair, 2019 ; Bodin, 2012, 2017 ). In considering collaboration for social-ecological sustainability, Bodin ( 2017 ) emphasizes collaboration as the foundation of knowledge processes and key to collective action, suggesting that collaboration is a means to (i) enhance the generation of new knowledge through social learning, (ii) better integrate valuable insights from different knowledge systems, and (iii) disseminate knowledge and best practices among a wide range of actors (p. 2).

Further research needs are identified that align with the idea of investigating other categories of analysis such as governance systems, different levels of social learning, or sub-archetypes, which can occur during NRM. Bos et al. ( 2013 ) point out the need for a broader understanding of social learning by applying experimental processes that: (i) define whether all participating actors need to learn the same information about a socio-technical system, and (ii) critically assess the learning needs of different actors at different process points to empower these actors to act as change agents. With further elaboration this can facilitate a better understanding of the relationship between conflicts and social learning.

In terms of limitations, this study acknowledges that many social learning cases may be described using different terms, such as collective learning or transformative learning. The use of the term “sustainable natural resource management” also represents a limitation, considering that several natural resource management cases could be described as adaptive climate change, sustainable development, and NR governance, among others. Furthermore, it is important to note that social learning models from the Global South, such as indigenous or grassroots movements learning systems, may be underrepresented in this study because endogenous SL approaches are unlikely to be reported in scientific articles.

Conclusions

In this work, the case studies analyzed contribute to expanding upon Reed et al.’s, and Cundill et al.’s explanations of ‘what’ social learning is by understanding under which conditions social learning emerges and how it can be facilitated in specific contexts. In order to better develop pathways for co-creation in natural resources management, it is crucial to enrich the current literature in SL by providing evidence for alternative, invisible models of social learning that emerge from different contexts. From here, with this first evidence generated, further research should be undertaken to understand the governance systems and pedagogies used in different models and relations between types of social learning and governance systems.

Identifying archetypes of social learning that originated in the Global South could also shed light on how vulnerable social groups themselves address intersectional issues (racism, gender, and so on) alongside their processes of sustainable NRM. Communities facing failings or an absence of, functional governance systems and inadequate or missing public policies may be developing innovative systems of self-constructed knowledge based on collective learning centered on community needs, their significant universe, and the construction of identity as empowerment process. This includes a critical analysis of the state of vulnerability and neglect within which they live, as well as, concurrently, natural resource self-management.

These community-based development cases reveal a variety of SL mechanisms, leading to transformative natural resource management in the context of multiple socio-environmental crises, a typical scenario of the Global South. In the Global South, endogenous social learning should be better tapped as an instrument of development and catalyzer of deliberative processes for sustainable natural resource management. In this era of multiple environmental crises, research based on transdisciplinary networks of researchers should embrace and value different identities and learning models. As it advances, robust situated south learning models must be supported, with intentional efforts made to engage smaller institutions, thus avoiding an over-investment in a limited number of better-known organizations that apply exogenous structures where the endogenous might be more adequate or already operating.

Data availability

This manuscript is based on a systematic literature review. In this approach, all data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the manuscript and its supplementary information file (including references and data-generated Excel table) attached in the submission process.

Akoglu H (2018) User’s guide to correlation coefficients. Turkish J Emerg Med 18(3):91–93

Article   Google Scholar  

Armitage D, Marschke M, Plummer R (2008) Adaptive co-management and the paradox of learning. Glob Environ Change 18(1):86–98

Assuah A, Sinclair AJ (2019) Unraveling the relationship between collective action and social learning: evidence from community forest management in Canada. Forests 10(6):494. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10060494

Bandura A, Walters RH (1977) Social learning theory, vol 1. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

Baron D (2004) Alfabetização Cultural: a luta íntima por uma nova humanidade. Alfarrábio, São Paulo, p. 422

Berkes F (2009) Indigenous ways of knowing and the study of environmental change. J R Soc NZ 39(4):151–156

Blok V (2018) Technocratic management versus ethical leadership redefining responsible professionalism in the agri-food sector in the anthropocene. J Agric Environ Ethics 31(5):583–591

Bloor D (1976) Knowledge and social imagery. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA, p. 211

Bodin Ö (2017) Collaborative environmental governance: Achieving collective action in social–ecological systems. Science 357(6352). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan1114

Bodin Ö, Tengö M (2012) Disentangling intangible social-ecological systems. Glob Environ Change 22(2):430–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.01.005

Bonatti M (2018) Social learning and community-based strategies to promote sustainable development goals (SDGs): The case of food security and climate change in rural areas. PhD dissertation, Humboldt Universitaet zu Berlin, Germany

Bonatti M, Borba J, Löhr K, Tremblay C, Sieber S (2021) Social learning and Paulo Freire concepts for understanding food security cases in Brazil. Agriculture 11(9):807

Bonatti M, Erismann C, Askhabalieva A, Borba J, Pope K, Reynaldo R, … Sieber S (2022) Social learning as an underlying mechanism for sustainability in neglected communities: The Brazilian case of the Bucket Revolution project. Environ Dev Sustain, pp. 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02167-z

Bos JJ, Brown RR, Farrelly MA (2013) A design framework for creating social learning situations. Glob Environ Change 23(2):398–412

Carlile L (2013) 5 key institutional change areas for adopting a social learning methodology with CCAFS and the CGIAR system: a synthesis paper. Synthesis of ideas from the CCAFS-ILRI Workshop on Communications and Social Learning in Climate Change, held 8–10 May 2012. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), Copenhagen, Denmark

Capdepuy V (2023) Le Sud global, un nouvel acteur de la géopolitique mondiale? Géoconfluences

Chavez-Miguel ÁlvaroA-O, Guillermo C-A, Katharina L, Stefan S, Bonatti M (2022) Farmer-led education on the Colombian Andes: Escuelas Campesinas de Agroecología as a social learning approach for post-conflict reconstruction. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst 46(8):1249–1276. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2022.2092577

Chitata T, Kemerink-Seyoum JS, Cleaver F (2021) Engaging and learning with water infrastructure: Rufaro Irrigation Scheme. Zimb Water Alter 14(3):690–716

Google Scholar  

Collins J (1985) Some problems and purposes of narrative analysis in educational research. J Educ 167:57–70

Collins K, Ison R (2009) Jumping off Arnstein’s ladder: social learning as a new policy paradigm for climate change adaptation. Environ Policy Gov 19(6):358–373

Craps M (2003) Social learning in river basin management. https://www.harmonicop.uni-osnabrueck.de/_files/_down/SocialLearning.pdf

Craps M, Maurel P (2003) Social learning pool of questions: an instrument to diagnose social learning and IC-tools in European River Basin Management, pp. 4–65. https://www.harmonicop.uni-osnabrueck.de/_files/_down/PoolOfQuestions.pdf

Cundill G, Rodela R (2012) A review of assertions about the processes and outcomes of social learning in natural resource management. J Environ Manag 113:7–14

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Cundill HL-S, Mukute M, Belay M, Shackleton S, Kulundu I (2014) A reflection on the use of case studies as a methodology for social learning research in sub Saharan Africa. NJAS: Wagening J Life Sci 69(1):39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2013.04.001

Cunningham WP, Cunningham MA (2008) Principles of environmental science: inquiry and applications. McGraw-Hill Higher Education

Dados N, Connell R (2012) The global south. Contexts 11(1):12–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536504212436479

Desmarais AA (2008) The power of peasants: reflections on the meanings of La Vía Campesina. J Rural Stud 24(2):138–149

Eisenack K, Villamayor-Tomas S, Epstein G, Kimmich C, Magliocca N, Manuel-Navarrete D, Oberlack C, Roggero M, Sietz D (2019) Design and quality criteria for archetype analysis. Ecol Soc 24(3):6. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10855-240306

Escobar A (1995) Encountering development: the making and unmaking of the third world. Princeton University Press

Escobar A (2008) Territories of difference: place, movements, life, redes. Duke University Press

Escobar A (2012) Encountering development. Princeton University Press, Princeton and Oxford

Fals Borda O, Mora-Osejo LE (2004) La superación del Eurocentrismo, Polis [En línea], 7 | 2004, URL: http://journals.openedition.org/polis/6210

Freire P (2020) Pedagogy of the oppressed. In: Toward a sociology of education. Routledge, pp. 374–386

Gergen, Kenneth J (2011) ‘Knowledge as co-creation’, relational being: beyond self and community, online edn. Oxford Academic, New York

Gray K, Gills BK (2016) South–South cooperation and the rise of the Global South. Third World Q 37(4):557–574

Habermas J (1984) The theory of communicative action. Beacon, Boston

Haddaway NR, Woodcock P, Macura B, Collins A (2015) Making literature reviews more reliable through application of lessons from systematic reviews. Conserv Biol 29(6):1596–1605

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Ison R, Blackmore C, Iaquinto BL (2013) Towards systemic and adaptive governance: exploring the revealing and concealing aspects of contemporary social-learning metaphors. Ecol. Econ. 87:34–42

Ison RL, Russell DB, eds (2000) Extensão Agrícola e Desenvolvimento Rural: Quebrando as Tradições. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Reino Unido, p. 239

James P et al (2012) Sustainable communities, sustainable development: other paths for Papua New Guinea. University of Hawai’i Press

Kates RW, Clark WC, Corell R, Hall JM, Jaeger CC, Lowe I, McCarthy JJ, Schellnhuber HJ, Bolin B, Dickson NM, Faucheux S, Gallopin GC, Grübler A, Huntley B, Jäger J, Jodha NS, Kasperson RE, Mabogunje A, Matson P, Mooney H, Moore B, O’Riordan T, Svedin U (2001) Sustainability science. Science 292:641–642. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1059386

Kristjanson P, Harvey B, Van Epp M, Thornton PK (2014) Social learning and sustainable development. Nat Clim Change 4(1):5–7

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Latour B, Woolgar S (1979) Laboratory life: the social construction of scientific facts. Sage Publication, Inc, Beverly Hills, CA, USA, p. 291

Lotz-Sisitka H, Wals AE, Kronlid D, McGarry D (2015) Transformative, transgressive social learning: rethinking higher education pedagogy in times of systemic global dysfunction. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 16:73–80

Mahler AG (2017) “Global south.” In: Eugene O’Brien (ed) Oxford bibliographies in literary and critical theory. Oxford University Press, New York

Mahler AG (2018) From the tricontinental to the global south: race, radicalism, and transnational solidarity. Duke University Press, Durham

Milanovic B (2016). Global inequality: a new approach for the age of globalization. Harvard University Press

Miller TR, Wiek A, Sarewitz D, Robinson J, Olsson L, Kriebel D, Loorbach D (2014) The future of sustainability science: a solutions-oriented research agenda. Sustain Sci 9(2):239–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-013-0224-6

Moallemi EA, Hosseini SH, Eker S, Gao L, Bertone E, Szetey K, Bryan BA (2022) Eight archetypes of sustainable development goal (SDG) synergies and trade-offs. Earth’s Future 10:e2022EF002873

Mpoe JK, Swartz L (2019) Decolonising research methodologies: lessons from a qualitative research project. Glob Health Action 12:1. https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2018.1561175

Muro M, Jeffrey P (2008) A critical review of the theory and application of social learning in participatory natural resource management. J Environ Plan Manag 51:325–344

Oberlack C, Sietz D, Bonanomi EB, de Bremond A, Dell’Angelo J, Eisenack K, Ellis EC, Epstein G, Giger M, Heinimann A, Kimmich C, Kok MT, Manuel-Navarrete D, Messerli P, Meyfroidt P, Václavík T, Villamayor-Tomas S (2019) Archetype analysis in sustainability research: meanings, motivations, and evidence-based policy making. Ecol Soc 24(2):26, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26796959

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD et al. (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Pahl-Wostl C (2009) A conceptual framework for analysing adaptive capacity and multi-level learning processes in resource governance regimes. Glob Environ Change 19(3):354–365

Pahl-Wostl C, Hare M (2004) Processes of social learning in integrated resources management. J Community Appl Soc Psychol 14(3):193–206. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.774

Pahl-Wostl C, Becker G, Knieper C, Sendzimir J (2013) How multilevel societal learning processes facilitate transformative change: a comparative case study analysis on flood management. Ecol Soc 18(4):art58. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05779-180458

Petticrew M, Roberts H (2008) Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. John Wiley & Sons

Quijano A (2007) Coloniality and modernity/rationality. Cult Stud 21(2-3):168–178

Ray C (1999) Towards a meta-framework of endogenous development: repertoires, paths, democracy and rights. Socio Rural 39(4):522–537

Reed MS, Evely AC, Cundill G, Fazey I, Glass J, Laing A, Newig J, Parrish B, Prell C, Raymond C, Stringer LC (2010) What is social learning? Ecol Soc 15(4):10, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26268235

Rist S, Chidambaranathan M, Escobar C, Wiesmann U, Zimmermann A (2007) Moving from sustainable management to sustainable governance of natural resources: the role of social learning processes in rural India, Bolivia and Mali. J Rural Stud 23(1):23–37

Rodela R (2011) Social learning and natural resource management: the emergence of three research perspectives. Ecol Soc 16(4):30

Romina R (2014) Social learning, natural resource management, and participatory activities: a reflection on construct development and testing. NJAS: Wagening J Life Sci 69(1):15–22

Schäpke N, Omann I, Wittmayer JM, Van Steenbergen F, Mock M(2017) Linking transitions to sustainability: A study of the societal effects of transition management Sustainability 9(5):737

Scholz G, Dewulf A, Pahl-Wostl C (2014) An analytical framework of social learning facilitated by participatory methods. Syst Pr Action Res 27:575–591

Sietz D, Frey U, Roggero M, Gong Y, Magliocca N, Tan R, Janssen P, Václavík T (2019) Archetype analysis in sustainability research: methodological portfolio and analytical frontiers. Ecol Soc 24(3). https://www.jstor.org/stable/26796999

Slater K, Robinson J(2020) Social learning and transdisciplinary co-production: a social practice approach. Sustainability 12(18):7511

Souza DT, Jacobi PR, Wals AE (2020) Overcoming socio-ecological vulnerability through community-based social learning: the case of Lomba do Pinheiro in Porto Alegre. Braz Local Environ 25(2):179–201

Thiel A, Mukhtarov F, Zikos D (2015) Crafting or designing? Science and politics for purposeful institutional change in Social–Ecological Systems. Environ Sci Policy 53:81–86

Vázquez-Barquero A (2002) Endogenous development: Networking, innovation, institutions and cities. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203217313

Wals AEJ (2007) Learning in a changing world and changing in a learning world: reflexively fumbling towards sustainability. South Afr J Environ Edu 24:35–45

Wals AE, van der Leij T (2007) Social learning. Social learning towards a more sustainable world. Wagengingen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers, 17–32

Wathne KH, Heide JB (2004) Relationship governance in a supply chain network. J Mark 68(1):73–89

Wehn U, Montalvo C (2018) Knowledge transfer dynamics and innovation: Behaviour, interactions and aggregated outcomes. J Clean Prod 171:S56–S68

Wenger E (1998) Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. Systemsthinker 9(5):2–3

Wolford W (2010) This land is ours now: Social mobilization and the meanings of land in Brazil. Duke University Press

Young OR (2015) Politics of force: Bargaining during international crises. Princeton University Press

Download references

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF e. V), Müncheberg, Germany

Michelle Bonatti, Leonardo Medina, Carla Baldivieso, Carla Errismann & Stefan Sieber

Resource Economics Group, Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany

Michelle Bonatti, Leonardo Medina, Carla Baldivieso, Carla Errismann, Klaus Eisenack & Stefan Sieber

Crop Production Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden

Marcos Lana

Hasso Plattner Institute, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany

Paul Chevelev

Department of Community Energy and Adaptation to Climate Change, Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany

Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research GmbH (UFZ), Leipzig, Germany

Tatiana Rodriguez

WWF Mediterranean Marine Initiative, Rome, Italy

Luca Eufemia

Vila Velha University, ES, Vila Velha, Brazil

Teresa da Silva Rosa

Education Department, Florianópolis City Hall, Florianópolis, Brazil

Juliano Borba

Leibniz Institute for Agricultural Engineering and Bioeconomy (ATB), Potsdam, Germany

Custodio Matavel

Federal University of Santa Catarina State, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil

Sandro Schlindwein

Applied Systems Thinking in Practice Research Group, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK

IRRI CGIAR International Rice Research Institute, Los Baños, Philippines

CIAT - CGIAR Climate Security Office, Cairo, Egypt

Grazia Pacillo

French National Research Institute for Sustainable Development (IRD), UMR DIADE, University of Montpellier, Bridge Consortium, Montpellier, France

Vincent Vadez & Jérôme Bossuet

Centre d’Etude Regionale sur l’amelioration de l’Adaptation a la Secheresse (CERAAS), Laboratoire Mixte International, Campus ENSA, Thiès, Senegal

Vincent Vadez

French National Research Institute for Sustainable Development (IRD), UMR Espace-Dev, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France

Jérôme Bossuet

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

MB: Conceptualized the study, developed the methodology, led the writing process, reviewed and edited the manuscript, and supervised the project; ML: Contributed to data analysis and interpretation, reviewed and edited the manuscript; LM: Assisted with data collection and analysis, contributed to writing the original draft; PC: Data analysis, provided technical support and contributed to data visualization; CB: Participated in fieldwork, data collection, and analysis; CE: Assisted with literature review and contributed to writing specific sections; PG: Assisted with literature review; TdSR: Assisted with methodology and literature review; LE: Assisted with methodology development and data validation; TRS: Provided expertise on context and contributed to discussion section; JB: Assisted with data collection and contributed to writing the results section; CM: Assisted with data collection and contributed to writing the results section.; SS: Contributed to the conceptual framework and manuscript review.; RI: Provided theoretical guidance and critical review of the manuscript.; KE: Supervised the research process and contributed to the final manuscript revision.; JH: Contributed to the conceptual framework and manuscript review; GP: Contributed to the conceptual framework and manuscript review; VV: Contributed to the conceptual framework and manuscript review; JB: Contributed to the conceptual framework and manuscript review; AD: Contributed to methodology development and data collection protocols; SS: Provided overall project supervision, secured funding, and contributed to final manuscript review.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michelle Bonatti .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors’

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Bonatti, M., Lana, M., Medina, L. et al. Global analysis of social learning’s archetypes in natural resource management: understanding pathways of co-creation of knowledge. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 1161 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03590-5

Download citation

Received : 22 June 2023

Accepted : 14 August 2024

Published : 08 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03590-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Subscribe to the PwC Newsletter

Join the community, edit social preview.

Add a new code entry for this paper

Remove a code repository from this paper, mark the official implementation from paper authors, add a new evaluation result row.

• PAC LEARNING

Remove a task

Add a method, remove a method, edit datasets, a practical theory of generalization in selectivity learning.

11 Sep 2024  ·  Peizhi Wu , Haoshu Xu , Ryan Marcus , Zachary G. Ives · Edit social preview

Query-driven machine learning models have emerged as a promising estimation technique for query selectivities. Yet, surprisingly little is known about the efficacy of these techniques from a theoretical perspective, as there exist substantial gaps between practical solutions and state-of-the-art (SOTA) theory based on the Probably Approximately Correct (PAC) learning framework. In this paper, we aim to bridge the gaps between theory and practice. First, we demonstrate that selectivity predictors induced by signed measures are learnable, which relaxes the reliance on probability measures in SOTA theory. More importantly, beyond the PAC learning framework (which only allows us to characterize how the model behaves when both training and test workloads are drawn from the same distribution), we establish, under mild assumptions, that selectivity predictors from this class exhibit favorable out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization error bounds. These theoretical advances provide us with a better understanding of both the in-distribution and OOD generalization capabilities of query-driven selectivity learning, and facilitate the design of two general strategies to improve OOD generalization for existing query-driven selectivity models. We empirically verify that our techniques help query-driven selectivity models generalize significantly better to OOD queries both in terms of prediction accuracy and query latency performance, while maintaining their superior in-distribution generalization performance.

Code Edit Add Remove Mark official

Tasks edit add remove, datasets edit, results from the paper edit, methods edit add remove.