the bobo doll experiment shows the impact of

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

Bobo doll experiment

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Academia - Bobo Doll Experiment
• Frontiers - Albert Bandura's experiments on aggression modeling in children: A psychoanalytic critique
• Simply Psychology - Bobo Doll Experiment
• University of Central Florida Pressbooks - Psych in Real Life: The Bobo Doll Experiment
• Verywell Mind - What the Bobo Doll Experiment Reveals About Kids and Aggression

Bobo doll experiment , groundbreaking study on aggression led by psychologist Albert Bandura that demonstrated that children are able to learn through the observation of adult behaviour. The experiment was executed via a team of researchers who physically and verbally abused an inflatable doll in front of preschool-age children, which led the children to later mimic the behaviour of the adults by attacking the doll in the same fashion.

Bandura’s study on aggression—the experiment for which he is perhaps best known—was carried out in 1961 at Stanford University , where Bandura was a professor. For this study he used 3- and 5-foot (1- and 1.5-metre) inflatable plastic toys called Bobo dolls, which were painted to look like cartoon clowns and were bottom-weighted so that they would return to an upright position when knocked down. The subjects were preschoolers at Stanford’s nursery school and were divided into three groups: one group observed aggressive adult behaviour models; another group observed nonaggressive behaviour models; and the third group was not exposed to any behaviour models.

The three groups were then divided by gender into six subgroups in which half of the subgroups would observe a same-sex behaviour model and half would observe an opposite-sex behaviour model. In the first stage of the experiment, the children were individually seated at a table in one corner of an experimental room and presented with diverting activities that had previously been shown to be of high interest to the children (e.g., stickers, pictures, prints) in order to discourage active participation and encourage mere observation. The behaviour model was then taken to the opposite corner—which contained another table and chair, a mallet, a Tinkertoy set, and a 5-foot Bobo doll—and was told he or she could play with these materials. In the aggressive behaviour model groups, the model abused the Bobo doll both physically (e.g., kicked, punched, threw, and assaulted with various objects) and verbally (e.g., made aggressive statements such as “Sock him in the nose” and “Pow” or nonaggressive statements such as “He sure is a tough fella” and “He keeps coming back for more”). In the nonaggressive behaviour model groups, the model ignored the Bobo doll and instead quietly assembled the Tinkertoys. After 10 minutes had elapsed, the behaviour models in both groups left the room.

In the second phase of the experiment, the children were taken individually into a different experimental room, where they were presented with a new group of appealing toys (e.g., train, fire engine, cable car, jet airplane, spinning top , doll with wardrobe, baby crib, and doll carriage). To test the hypothesis that the observation of aggression in others would increase the likelihood of aggression in the observer, the children were subjected to aggression arousal in the form of being told after two minutes that they could no longer play with the toys. The children were then told that they could, however, play with the toys in another room, where they were presented with various toys that were considered both aggressive (e.g., 3-foot Bobo doll, mallet, and dart guns) and nonaggressive (e.g., crayons, paper, farm animals, tea set, ball, and dolls).

In the final stage of the experiment, the children’s behaviour was observed over the course of 20 minutes and rated according to the degree of physically and verbally aggressive behaviour they modeled, the results of which yielded significantly higher scores for children in the aggressive behaviour model groups compared with those in both the nonaggressive behaviour model and control groups. Subsequent experiments in which children were exposed to such violence on videotape yielded similar results, with nearly 90 percent of the children in the aggressive behaviour groups later modeling the adults’ behaviour by attacking the doll in the same fashion and 40 percent of the those children exhibiting the same behaviour after eight months.

Although the study yielded similar results for both genders, it nonetheless suggested at least some difference depending on the degree to which a behaviour is sex-typed—that is, viewed as more common of or appropriate for a specific gender. For example, the data suggest that males are somewhat more prone to imitate physical aggression—a highly masculine-typed behaviour—than are females, with male subjects reproducing more physical aggression than female subjects; there were, however, no differences in the imitation of verbal aggression, which is less sex-typed. Additionally, both male and female subjects were more imitative of the male behaviour models than of the female models in terms of physical aggression but were more imitative of the same-sex models in terms of verbal aggression.

Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment on Social Learning

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.

Learn about our Editorial Process

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.

During the 1960s, Albert Bandura conducted a series of experiments on observational learning , collectively known as the Bobo doll experiments. Two of the experiments are described below:

Bandura (1961) conducted a controlled experiment study to investigate if social behaviors (i.e., aggression) can be acquired by observation and imitation.

Bandura, Ross, and Ross (1961) tested 36 boys and 36 girls from the Stanford University Nursery School aged between 3 to 6 years old.

The researchers pre-tested the children for how aggressive they were by observing the children in the nursery and judged their aggressive behavior on four 5-point rating scales.

It was then possible to match the children in each group so that they had similar levels of aggression in their everyday behavior. The experiment is, therefore, an example of a matched pairs design .

To test the inter-rater reliability of the observers, 51 of the children were rated by two observers independently, and their ratings were compared. These ratings showed a very high-reliability correlation (r = 0.89), which suggested that the observers had a good agreement about the behavior of the children.

A lab experiment was used, in which the independent variable (the type of model) was manipulated in three conditions:

• Aggressive model is shown to 24 children
• Non-aggressive model is shown to 24 children
• No model is shown (control condition) – 24 children

Stage 1: Modeling

In the experimental conditions, children were individually shown into a room containing toys and played with some potato prints and pictures in a corner for 10 minutes while either:

• 24 children (12 boys and 12 girls) watched a male or female model behaving aggressively towards a toy called a “Bobo doll”. The adults attacked the Bobo doll in a distinctive manner – they used a hammer in some cases, and in others threw the doll in the air and shouted “Pow, Boom.”
• Another 24 children (12 boys and 12 girls) were exposed to a non-aggressive model who played in a quiet and subdued manner for 10 minutes (playing with a tinker toy set and ignoring the bobo-doll).
• The final 24 children (12 boys and 12 girls) were used as a control group and not exposed to any model at all.

Stage 2: Aggression Arousal

All the children (including the control group) were subjected to “mild aggression arousal.” Each child was (separately) taken to a room with relatively attractive toys.

As soon as the child started to play with the toys, the experimenter told the child that these were the experimenter’s very best toys and she had decided to reserve them for the other children.

Stage 3: Test for Delayed Imitation

• The next room contained some aggressive toys and some non-aggressive toys. The non-aggressive toys included a tea set, crayons, three bears and plastic farm animals. The aggressive toys included a mallet and peg board, dart guns, and a 3 foot Bobo doll.
• The child was in the room for 20 minutes, and their behavior was observed and rated though a one-way mirror. Observations were made at 5-second intervals, therefore, giving 240 response units for each child.
• Other behaviors that didn’t imitate that of the model were also recorded e.g., punching the Bobo doll on the nose.
• Children who observed the aggressive model made far more imitative aggressive responses than those who were in the non-aggressive or control groups.
• There was more partial and non-imitative aggression among those children who had observed aggressive behavior, although the difference for non-imitative aggression was small.
• The girls in the aggressive model condition also showed more physically aggressive responses if the model was male, but more verbally aggressive responses if the model was female. However, the exception to this general pattern was the observation of how often they punched Bobo, and in this case the effects of gender were reversed.
• Boys were more likely to imitate same-sex models than girls. The evidence for girls imitating same-sex models is not strong.
• Boys imitated more physically aggressive acts than girls. There was little difference in verbal aggression between boys and girls.

Bobo doll experiment demonstrated that children are able to learn social behavior such as aggression through the process of observation learning, through watching the behavior of another person. The findings support Bandura’s (1977) Social Learning Theory .

This study has important implications for the effects of media violence on children.

There are three main advantages of the experimental method .

• Experiments are the only means by which cause and effect can be established. Thus, it could be demonstrated that the model did have an effect on the child’s subsequent behavior because all variables other than the independent variable are controlled.
• It allows for precise control of variables. Many variables were controlled, such as the gender of the model, the time the children observed the model, the behavior of the model, and so on.
• Experiments can be replicated. Standardized procedures and instructions were used, allowing for replicability. In fact, the study has been replicated with slight changes, such as using video, and similar results were found (Bandura, 1963).

Limitations of the procedure include:

• Many psychologists are very critical of laboratory studies of imitation – in particular, because they tend to have low ecological validity. The situation involves the child and an adult model, which is a very limited social situation and there is no interaction between the child and the model at any point; certainly the child has no chance to influence the model in any way.
• Also, the model and the child are strangers. This, of course, is quite unlike “normal” modeling, which often takes place within the family.
• Cumberbatch (1990) found that children who had not played with a Bobo Doll before were five times as likely to imitate the aggressive behavior than those who were familiar with it; he claims that the novelty value of the doll makes it more likely that children will imitate the behavior.
• A further criticism of the study is that the demonstrations are measured almost immediately. With such snapshot studies, we cannot discover if such a single exposure can have long-term effects.
• It is possible to argue that the bobo doll experiment was unethical. For example, there is the problem of whether or not the children suffered any long-term consequences as a result of the study. Although it is unlikely, we can never be certain.

Vicarious Reinforcement Bobo Doll Study

An observer’s behavior can also be affected by the positive or negative consequences of a model’s behavior.

So we not only watch what people do, but we watch what happens when they do things. This is known as vicarious reinforcement. We are more likely to imitate behavior that is rewarded and refrain from behavior that is punished.

Bandura (1965) used a similar experimental set up to the one outlined above to test vicarious reinforcement. The experiment had different consequences for the model’s aggression to the three groups of children.

One group saw the model’s aggression being rewarded (being given sweets and a drink for a “championship performance,” another group saw the model being punished for the aggression (scolded), and the third group saw no specific consequences (control condition).

When allowed to enter the playroom, children in the reward and control conditions imitated more aggressive actions of the model than did the children in the punishment condition.

The children in the model punished group had learned the aggression by observational learning, but did not imitate it because they expected negative consequences.

Reinforcement gained by watching another person is known as vicarious reinforcement.

Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of models” reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses . Journal of personality and social psychology, 1(6) , 589.

Bandura, A., Ross, D. & Ross, S.A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models .  Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 63, 575-82.

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models . The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 66(1), 3.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Further Information

• Bandura’s Social Learning Theory
• Bobo Doll Study Summary
• BBC Radio 4 Programme: The Bobo Doll
• Bobo Doll Summary PowerPoint

• 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

What the Bobo Doll Experiment Reveals About Kids and Aggression

• The Experiment

The question of how children learn to engage in violent behavior has been of great interest to parents and researchers alike. In the 1960s, psychologist Albert Bandura and his colleagues conducted what is now known as the Bobo doll experiment, and they demonstrated that children may learn aggression through observation.

Aggression lies at the root of many social ills ranging from interpersonal violence to war. It is little wonder, then, that the subject is one of the most studied topics within psychology.

This article covers what the Bobo doll experiment is, its findings on childhood aggression, as well as its impact on psychology.

The Bobo Doll Experiment

The participants for the experiment were 36 boys and 36 girls enrolled at the Stanford University Nursery School. The children ranged in age between 3 and almost 6 years.

The experiment involved exposing one group of 24 children to an adult modeling aggressive behavior, and another group of 24 children to an adult modeling non-aggressive behavior. The final group of 24 children acted as the control group that was not exposed to adult models.

These groups were divided again into groups of boys and girls. Each of these subgroups was then divided so that half of the participants would be exposed to a same-sex adult model and the other half would be exposed to an opposite-sex adult model.

Each child was tested individually to ensure that their behavior would not be influenced by other children. The child was first brought into a playroom where there were a number of different activities to explore. The experimenter then invited the adult model into the playroom.

In the non-aggressive condition, the adult model simply played with the toys and ignored the Bobo doll for the entire period. In the aggressive model condition, however, the adult models would violently attack the Bobo doll.

The aggressive models would punch Bobo, strike Bobo with a mallet, toss the doll in the air, and kick it around the room. They would also use " verbally aggressive phrases" such as "Kick him" and "Pow." The models also added two non-aggressive phrases: "He sure is a tough fella" and "He keeps coming back for more."

After the ten-minute exposure to the adult model, each child was then taken to another room that contained a number of appealing toys including a doll set, fire engine, and toy airplane.

The children were permitted to play for a brief two minutes, then told they were no longer allowed to play with any of these tempting toys. The purpose of this was to build up frustration levels among the young participants.

Finally, each child was taken to the last experimental room. This room contained a number of "aggressive" toys including a mallet, a tether ball with a face painted on it, dart guns, and, of course, a Bobo doll. The room also included several "non-aggressive" toys including crayons, paper, dolls, plastic animals, and trucks.

Each child was then allowed to play in this room for a period of 20 minutes. During this time, researchers observed the child's behavior from behind a one-way mirror and judged each child's levels of aggression.

Predictions

Bandura made several key predictions about what would occur during the Bobo doll experiment.

• Boys would behave more aggressively than girls.
• Children who observed an adult acting aggressively would be likely to act aggressively, even when the adult model was not present.
• Children would be more likely to imitate models of the same sex rather than models of the opposite sex.
• The children who observed the non-aggressive adult model would be less aggressive than the children who observed the aggressive model; the non-aggressive exposure group would also be less aggressive than the control group.

The results of the experiment supported some of the original predictions, but also included some unexpected findings:

• Bandura and his colleagues had predicted that children in the non-aggressive group would behave less aggressively than those in the control group. The results indicated that while children of both genders in the non-aggressive group did tend to exhibit less aggression than the control group, boys who had observed a non-aggressive, opposite-sex model were more likely than those in the control group to engage in violence.
• Children exposed to the violent model tended to imitate the exact behavior they had observed when the adult model was no longer present.
• Researchers were correct in their prediction that boys would behave more aggressively than girls. Boys engaged in more than twice as many acts of physical aggression than the girls.
• There were important gender differences when it came to whether a same-sex or opposite-sex model was observed. Boys who observed adult males behaving violently were more influenced than those who had observed female models behaving aggressively.
• Interestingly, the experimenters found in same-sex aggressive groups, boys were more likely to imitate physical acts of violence while girls were more likely to imitate verbal aggression.

Impact of the Bobo Doll Experiment

Results of the experiment supported Bandura's social learning theory.

According to Bandura's social learning theory, learning occurs through observations and interactions with other people. Essentially, people learn by watching others and then imitating these actions.

Bandura and his colleagues believed that the Bobo doll experiment demonstrates how specific behaviors can be learned through observation and imitation.

According to Bandura, the violent behavior of the adult models toward the dolls led children to believe that such actions were acceptable.

Bandura also suggested that as a result, children may be more inclined to respond to frustration with aggression in the future.

In a follow-up study conducted in 1965, Bandura found that while children were more likely to imitate aggressive behavior if the adult model was rewarded for his or her actions, they were far less likely to imitate if they saw the adult model being punished or reprimanded for their hostile behavior.

The conclusions drawn from the Bobo doll experiment may help explain human behavior in many areas of life. For instance, the idea that children will imitate the abusive behavior that they witness may provide insight into domestic violence .

Adolescents who grow up witnessing abuse in their homes may be more likely to display violent behavior themselves, and view aggression as an appropriate response to solve interpersonal problems.

Research has found that the Bobo doll experiment and its follow-up study shed light on bullying . For instance, when leadership doesn't give negative consequences for workplace bullying, the bullying is more likely to persist.

Therefore, it's important that aggressive or violent behavior is not tolerated by those with power—whether it's at the workplace, in schools, or at home—or else the aggression is likely to continue and may influence young people who witness it.

Criticism of the Bobo Doll Experiment

Critics point out that acting violently toward a doll is a lot different than displaying aggression or violence against another human being in a real-world setting.

In other words, a child acting violently toward a doll doesn't necessarily indicate they'll act violently toward a person.

Because the experiment took place in a lab setting, some critics suggest that results observed in this type of location may not be indicative of what takes place in the real world.

It has also been suggested that children were not actually motivated to display aggression when they hit the Bobo doll; instead, they may have simply been trying to please the adults. It's worth noting that the children didn't actually hurt the Bobo doll, nor did they think they were hurting it.

In addition, by intentionally frustrating the children, some argue that the experimenters were essentially teaching the children to be aggressive.

It's also not known whether the children were actually aggressive or simply imitating the behavior without aggressive intent (most children will imitate behavior right after they see it, but they don't necessarily continue it in the long term).

Since data was collected immediately, it is also difficult to know what the long-term impact might have been.

Additional criticisms note the biases of the researchers. Since they knew that the children were already frustrated, they may have been more likely to interpret the children's actions as aggressive.

The study may also suffer from selection bias. All participants were drawn from a narrow pool of students who share the same racial and socioeconomic background. This makes it difficult to generalize the results to a larger, more diverse population.

A Word From Verywell

Bandura's experiment remains one of the most well-known studies in psychology. Today, social psychologists continue to study the impact of observed violence on children's behavior. In the decades since the Bobo doll experiment, there have been hundreds of studies on how observing violence impacts children's behavior.

Today, researchers continue to ponder the question of whether the violence children witness on television, in the movies, or through video games translates to aggressive or violent behavior in the real world.

Bandura A. Influence of models' reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1965;1:589-595. doi:10.1037/h0022070

Xia Y, Li S, Liu TH. The interrelationship between family violence, adolescent violence, and adolescent violent victimization: An application and extension of the cultural spillover theory in China . IJERPH. 2018;15(2):371. doi:10.3390/ijerph15020371

Hollis LP. Lessons from Bandura’s Bobo doll experiments: Leadership’s deliberate indifference exacerbates workplace bullying in higher education . JSPTE. 2019;4:085-102. doi:10.28945/4426

Altin D, Jablonski J, Lyke J, et al. Gender difference in perceiving aggression using the Bobo doll studies . Modern Psychological Studies. 2011;16:2.

Bandura A, Ross D, Ross SA. Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models . Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1961;63:575-82. doi:10.1037/h0045925

Ferguson CJ. Blazing Angels or Resident Evil? Can violent video games be a force for good? Review of General Psychology. 2010;14(2) : 68-81. doi:10.1037/a0018941

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

Albert Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment (Explained)

The Bobo Doll Experiment was a study by Albert Bandura to investigate if social behaviors can be learned by observing others in the action. According to behaviorists, learning occurs only when a behavior results in rewards or punishment. However, Bandura didn't believe the framework of rewards and punishments adequately explained many aspects of everyday human behavior.

According to the Social Learning Theory, people learn most new skills through modeling, imitation, and observation. Bandura believed that people could learn by observing how someone else is rewarded or penalized instead of engaging in the action themselves.

In the hit television show Big Little Lies, tensions run high as an unknown child is accused of choking another student. The child is revealed as Max throughout the series (spoiler alert!). Max has an abusive father, and once Max’s mother realizes that her child is learning behaviors from her husband, she decides to take action. 

This cycle of abuse is sad but extremely common. Many abusers were abused themselves or grew up in an abusive household. These ideas seem obvious, but in the mid-20th century, evidence that supports these ideas was becoming known. 

What is the Bobo Doll Experiment?

In 1961, Albert Bandura conducted the Bobo doll experiment at Stanford University. He placed children in a room with an adult, toys, and a five-foot Bobo Doll. (Bobo Dolls are large inflatable clowns shaped like a bowling ball, so they  roll upward if punched or knocked down.)

Who Conducted the Bobo Doll Experiment?

This experiment made Albert Bandura one of the most renowned psychologists in the history of the world. He is now listed in the ranks of Freud and B.F. Skinner, the psychologist who developed the theory of operant conditioning . 

How Was The Bobo Doll Experiment Conducted?

Let’s start by discussing Bandura’s first Bobo doll experiment from 1961. Bandura conducted the experiment in three parts: modeling, aggression arousal, and a test for delayed imitation. 

Stage 1: Modeling 

The study was separated into three groups, including a control group. An aggressive adult behavior model was shown to one group, a non-aggressive adult behavior model to another, and no behavior models were shown to the third group. In the group with the aggressive adult, some models chose to hit the Bobo doll over the head with a mallet. 

The group with a nonaggressive adult simply observed the model playing with blocks, coloring, or doing non-aggressive activities. 

Stage 2: Aggression Arousal 

After 10 minutes of being in the room with the model, the child was taken into another room. This room had attractive toys; the researchers briefly allowed the children to play with the toys of their choice. Once the child was engaged in play, the researchers removed the toys from the child and took them into yet another room. It’s easy to guess that the children were frustrated, but the researchers wanted to see how they would release that frustration. 

Stage 3: Test For Delayed Imitation 

The third room contained a set of “aggressive” and “non-aggressive toys.” The room also had a Bobo doll. Researchers watched and recorded each child’s behavior through a one-way mirror. 

So what happened?

As you can probably guess, the children who observed the adults hitting the Bobo doll were more likely to take their frustration out on the Bobo doll. They kicked, yelled at, or even used the mallet to hit the doll. The children who observed the non-aggressive adults tended to avoid the Bobo doll and take their frustration out without aggression or violence. 

The Second Bobo Doll Experiment

Albert Bandura did not stop with the 1961 Bobo doll experiment. Two years later, he conducted another experiment with a Bobo doll. This one combined the ideas of modeling with the idea of conditioning. Were people genuinely motivated by consequences, or was there something more to their behavior and attitudes? 

In this experiment, Bandura showed children a video of a model acting aggressively toward the Bobo doll. Three groups of children individually observed a different final scene in the video. The children in the control group did not see any scene other than the model hitting the Bobo doll. In another group, the children observed the model getting rewarded for their actions. The last group saw the model getting punished and warned not to act aggressively toward the Bobo doll. 

All three groups of children were then individually moved to a room with toys and a Bobo doll. Bandura observed that the children who saw the model receiving a punishment were less likely to be aggressive toward the doll. 

A second observation was especially interesting. When researchers asked the children to act aggressively toward the Bobo doll, as they did in the movie, the children did.

This doesn’t sound significant, but it does make an interesting point about learned behaviors. The children learn the behavior by watching the model and observing their actions. Learning (aka remembering) the learning of the model’s actions occurred simply because the children were there to observe them.

Consequences simply influenced whether or not the children decided to perform the learned behaviors. The memory of the aggression was still present, whether or not the child saw that the aggression was rewarded or punished. 

Is The Bobo Doll Experiment An Example of Operant Conditioning or Classical Conditioning?

Neither! Since operant and classical conditioning rely on explicit rewards or penalties to affect behavior repetition, they fall short of capturing the full scope of human learning. Conversely, observational learning is not dependent on these rewards. Albert Bandura's well-known "Bobo Doll" experiment is a striking example.

This experiment proved that without firsthand experience or outside rewards and penalties, people might learn only by watching others. The behaviorist ideas of the time, which were primarily dependent on reinforcement, faced a severe challenge from Bandura's research.

Criticism of the Bobo Doll Experiment

A Reddit user on the TodayILearned subreddit made a good point on how the Bobo Doll Experiment was conducted: 

"A significant criticism of this study is that the Bobo doll is MEANT to be knocked around. It’s an inflatable toy with a weight at the bottom, it rocks back and forth and stands back up after it is hit.

How do we know that the kids didn’t watch the adults knock over the toy and say, 'That looks fun!' and then mimic them? These types of toys are still often sold as punching bag toys for kids. This study would have much more validity if they had used a different type of toy."

Bobo Doll Impact

There’s one more piece of the 1963 study that is worth mentioning. While some children in the experiment watched a movie, others watched a live model. Did this make a huge difference in whether or not the child learned and displayed aggressive behaviors?

Not really.

The Bobo Doll experiment has frequently been cited in discussions among psychologists and researchers, especially when debating the impact of violent media on children. A wealth of research has sought to determine whether children engage with violent video games and consume violent media, does it increase their likelihood to act out violently? Or, as suggested by the Bobo Doll experiment, do children merely internalize these behaviors and still maintain discretion over whether to act on them or not?

Multiple studies have aimed to tackle this question. For instance, research from the American Psychological Association has pointed to a link between violent video games and increased aggression, though not necessarily criminal violence. However, other sources, such as the Oxford Internet Institute , have found limited evidence to support a direct link between game violence and real-world violent actions. Despite the varying findings, the influence of Albert Bandura's introduction of observational learning and social learning theory cannot be understated. His Bobo Doll experiments remain pivotal in psychology's rich history.

Related posts:

• Albert Bandura (Biography + Experiments)
• 3 Theories of Aggression (Psychology Explained)

Observational Learning

• 40+ Famous Psychologists (Images + Biographies)
• Learning (Psychology)

Reference this article:

About The Author

Operant Conditioning

Classical Conditioning

Latent Learning

Experiential Learning

The Little Albert Study

Bobo Doll Experiment

Spacing Effect

Von Restorff Effect

PracticalPie.com is a participant in the Amazon Associates Program. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow Us On:

Youtube Facebook Instagram X/Twitter

Psychology Resources

Developmental

Personality

Relationships

Psychologists

Serial Killers

Psychology Tests

Personality Quiz

Memory Test

Depression test

Type A/B Personality Test

© PracticalPsychology. All rights reserved

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

Learn More Psychology

• Behavioral Psychology

Bandura's Bobo Doll Experiment

Albert bandura's influential bobo doll experiments reveal how children imitate tv violence and the behavior of others..

Permalink Print   |  

• Biological Psychology
• Body Language Interpretation
• Cognitive Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Dream Interpretation
• Freudian Psychology
• Memory & Memory Techniques
• Role Playing: Stanford Prison Experiment
• Authoritarian Personality
• Memory: Levels of Processing
• Cold Reading: Psychology of Fortune Telling
• Stages of Sleep
• Personality Psychology
• Why Do We Forget?
• Psychology of Influence
• Stress in Psychology
• Body Language: How to Spot a Liar
• Be a Better Communicator
• Eye Reading: Body Language
• Motivation: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
• How to Interpret your Dreams Guide
• How to Remember Your Dreams
• Interpreting Your Dreams
• Superstition in Pigeons
• Altruism in Animals and Humans
• Stimulus-Response Theory
• Conditioned Behavior
• Synesthesia: Mixing the Senses
• Freudian Personality Type Test
• ... and much more
• Unlimited access to analysis of groundbreaking research and studies
• 17+ psychology guides : develop your understanding of the mind
• Self Help Audio : MP3 sessions to stream or download

Best Digital Psychology Magazine - UK

Best online psychology theory resource.

• Bandura, A., Ross, D. and Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of Aggression Through Imitation of Aggressive Models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 63 , 575-582.
• Bandura, A., Ross, D. and Ross, S. A. (1961). Imitation of Film-Mediated Aggressive Models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 66 (1), 3-11.
• Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of Models’ Reinforcement Contingencies on the Acquisition of Imitative Responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 1 (6), 589.
• Huessmann, L. R., Lagerspetz, K. And Eron, L. D. (1984). Intervening Variables in the TV Violence-Aggression Relation: Evidence From Two Countries. Developmental Psychology , 20 (5), 746-775.

Which Archetype Are You?

Are You Angry?

Windows to the Soul

Are You Stressed?

Attachment & Relationships

Memory Like A Goldfish?

31 Defense Mechanisms

Slave To Your Role?

Are You Fixated?

Interpret Your Dreams

How to Read Body Language

How to Beat Stress and Succeed in Exams

Psychology Topics

Learn psychology.

• Access 2,200+ insightful pages of psychology explanations & theories
• Insights into the way we think and behave
• Body Language & Dream Interpretation guides
• Self hypnosis MP3 downloads and more
• Behavioral Approach
• Eye Reading
• Stress Test
• Cognitive Approach
• Fight-or-Flight Response
• Neuroticism Test

© 2024 Psychologist World. Home About Contact Us Terms of Use Privacy & Cookies Hypnosis Scripts Sign Up

All Subjects

study guides for every class

That actually explain what's on your next test, bobo doll experiment, from class:.

The Bobo Doll Experiment was a groundbreaking study conducted by Albert Bandura in the early 1960s, designed to investigate observational learning and the impact of modeling behavior. This experiment showcased how children imitate aggressive behavior they observe in adults, particularly in the context of social learning theory, which highlights the importance of observational learning in shaping behavior. The findings emphasized that individuals can learn not just through direct experience but also by watching others, significantly influencing theories of learning and development.

congrats on reading the definition of Bobo Doll Experiment . now let's actually learn it.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

• The Bobo Doll Experiment involved children observing an adult acting aggressively toward an inflatable doll named Bobo, which led to the children imitating similar aggressive behaviors when given the opportunity.
• Bandura's study revealed that children were more likely to imitate aggressive acts if they saw the adult being rewarded for that behavior or not facing any consequences.
• The experiment highlighted differences in gender responses, showing that boys tended to imitate more physical aggression than girls, while girls were more likely to mimic verbal aggression.
• The Bobo Doll Experiment demonstrated that exposure to violent behavior can increase aggression in children, sparking debates about media influence on behavior.
• Bandura's work with the Bobo Doll Experiment played a crucial role in changing perceptions about learning, illustrating that behavior can be learned socially rather than solely through conditioning.

Review Questions

• The Bobo Doll Experiment clearly shows how children learn through observational learning by demonstrating their tendency to imitate the aggressive behavior displayed by adults. When the children observed an adult behaving violently towards the doll, they later replicated those actions when given a chance. This highlights that children can acquire new behaviors simply by watching others rather than experiencing those behaviors firsthand.
• The findings from the Bobo Doll Experiment suggest significant implications for understanding aggression, particularly regarding how exposure to violent behavior influences children's actions. If children see adults being rewarded for aggressive acts or not facing consequences, they may view such behavior as acceptable and be more likely to emulate it. This has raised concerns about the impact of violent media content on children's behavior, emphasizing the need for responsible media consumption and parental guidance.
• Bandura's Bobo Doll Experiment has made a lasting impact on discussions surrounding social learning and behavioral modification techniques by establishing that behaviors can be acquired through observation rather than just reinforcement or punishment. This insight supports modern approaches to therapy and education that leverage modeling and observational learning for behavior change. It also encourages professionals to consider the social contexts that shape individual behaviors, influencing strategies used in various fields like psychology, education, and child development.

Related terms

Observational Learning : A type of learning that occurs by watching others and imitating their actions, rather than through direct experience.

Social Learning Theory : A theory developed by Albert Bandura that posits that people learn from one another through observation, imitation, and modeling.

Modeling : The process of learning behaviors by observing and imitating others, especially role models or individuals who are perceived as having authority.

" Bobo Doll Experiment " also found in:

Subjects ( 4 ).

• AP Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Intro to Psychology
• Media Effects

© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.

Ap® and sat® are trademarks registered by the college board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website..

Psych in Real Life: The Bobo Doll Experiment

Learning objectives.

• Describe the process and results of Albert Bandura’s bobo doll experiment

Bandura studied the impact of an adult’s behavior on the behavior of children who saw them. One of his independent variables was whether or not the adult was hostile or aggressive toward the Bobo doll, so for some children the adults acted aggressively (treatment condition) and for others they did not (control condition 1) and for yet other children there were no adults at all (control condition 2). He was also interested to learn if the sex of the child and/or the sex of the adult model influenced what the child learned.

Phase 1 of the Experiment: The Observation Phase

The observation phase of the experiment is when the children see the behavior of the adults. Each child was shown into a room where an adult was already sitting near the Bobo doll. The child was positioned so he or she could easily see the adult.

Phase 2 of the Experiment: Frustration

Dr. Bandura thought that the children might be a bit more likely to show aggressive behavior if they were frustrated. The second phase of the experiment was designed to produce this frustration. After a child had watched the adult in phase 1, he or she was taken to another room, one that also contained a lot of attractive, fun toys and was told that it was fine to play with the toys. As soon as the child started to enjoy playing with the toys, the experimenter said something.

Phase 3 of the Experiment: The Testing Phase

After the child was told to stop playing with “the very best toys,” the experimenter said that he or she could play with any of the toys in the next room. Then the child was taken to a third room. This room contained a variety of toys. Many of the toys were engaging and interactive, but not the type that encouraged aggressive play. Critically, the Bobo doll and the hammer that the model had used in the first phase were now in this new playroom. The goal of this phase in the experiment was to see how the child would react without a model around.

The child was allowed to play freely for 20 minutes. Note that an adult did stay in the room so the child would not feel abandoned or frightened. However, this adult worked inconspicuously in a corner and interacted with the child as little as possible.

During the 20 minutes that the child played alone in the third room, the experimenters observed his or her behavior from behind a see-through mirror. Using a complex system that we won’t go into here, the experimenters counted the number of various types of behaviors that the child showed during this period. These behaviors included ones directed at the Bobo doll, as well as those involving any of the other toys. They were particularly interested in the number of behaviors the child showed that clearly imitated the actions of the adults that the child had observed earlier, in phase 1.

Below are the results for the number of imitative physically aggressive acts the children showed on average toward the Bobo doll. These acts included hitting and punching the Bobo doll. On the left, you see the two modeling conditions: aggression by the model in phase 1 or no aggression by the model in phase 1. Note: Children in the no-model conditions showed very few physically aggressive acts and their results do not change the interpretation, so we will keep the results simple by leaving them out of the table.

The story is slightly, though not completely, different when we look at imitative verbal aggression, rather than physical aggression. The table below shows the number of verbally aggressive statements by the boys and girls under different conditions in the experiment. Verbally aggressive statements were ones like the models had made: for example, “Sock him” and “Kick him down!”

Note: Just as was true for the physically aggressive acts, children in the no model conditions showed very few verbally aggressive acts either and their results do not change the interpretation, so we will keep the results simple by leaving them out of the table.

CC licensed content, Original

• Authored by : Patrick Carroll for Lumen Learning. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution

CC licensed content, Shared previously

• Observational Learning. Provided by : Open Learning Initiative. Located at : https://oli.cmu.edu/jcourse/workbook/activity/page?context=df3e71c70a0001dc01587dcb723e2002 . Project : Psychology. License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike

General Psychology Copyright © by OpenStax and Lumen Learning is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Psych in Real Life: The Bobo Doll Experiment

Learning objectives.

• Describe the process and results of Albert Bandura’s bobo doll experiment

Bandura studied the impact of an adult’s behavior on the behavior of children who saw them. One of his independent variables was whether or not the adult was hostile or aggressive toward the Bobo doll, so for some children the adults acted aggressively (treatment condition) and for others they did not (control condition 1) and for yet other children there were no adults at all (control condition 2). He was also interested to learn if the sex of the child and/or the sex of the adult model influenced what the child learned.

Phase 1 of the Experiment: The Observation Phase

The observation phase of the experiment is when the children see the behavior of the adults. Each child was shown into a room where an adult was already sitting near the Bobo doll. The child was positioned so they could easily see the adult.

Figure 1 . Set-up of the Bobo Doll experiment.

Phase 2 of the Experiment: Frustration

Dr. Bandura thought that the children might be a bit more likely to show aggressive behavior if they were frustrated. The second phase of the experiment was designed to produce this frustration. After a child had watched the adult in phase 1, they were taken to another room, one that also contained a lot of attractive, fun toys and was told that it was fine to play with the toys. As soon as the child started to enjoy playing with the toys, the experimenter said something.

Phase 3 of the Experiment: The Testing Phase

After the child was told to stop playing with “the very best toys,” the experimenter said that they could play with any of the toys in the next room. Then the child was taken to a third room. This room contained a variety of toys. Many of the toys were engaging and interactive, but not the type that encouraged aggressive play. Critically, the Bobo doll and the hammer that the model had used in the first phase were now in this new playroom. The goal of this phase in the experiment was to see how the child would react without a model around.

The child was allowed to play freely for 20 minutes. Note that an adult did stay in the room so the child would not feel abandoned or frightened. However, this adult worked inconspicuously in a corner and interacted with the child as little as possible.

During the 20 minutes that the child played alone in the third room, the experimenters observed their behavior from behind a see-through mirror. Using a complex system that we won’t go into here, the experimenters counted the number of various types of behaviors that the child showed during this period. These behaviors included ones directed at the Bobo doll, as well as those involving any of the other toys. They were particularly interested in the number of behaviors the child showed that clearly imitated the actions of the adults that the child had observed earlier, in phase 1.

Below are the results for the number of imitative physically aggressive acts the children showed on average toward the Bobo doll. These acts included hitting and punching the Bobo doll. On the left, you see the two modeling conditions: aggression by the model in phase 1 or no aggression by the model in phase 1. Note: Children in the no-model conditions showed very few physically aggressive acts and their results do not change the interpretation, so we will keep the results simple by leaving them out of the table.

Table 1. Physical aggression results from Bandura’s experiment

The story is slightly, though not completely, different when we look at imitative verbal aggression, rather than physical aggression. The table below shows the number of verbally aggressive statements by the boys and girls under different conditions in the experiment. Verbally aggressive statements were ones like the models had made: for example, “Sock him” and “Kick him down!”

Note: Just as was true for the physically aggressive acts, children in the no model conditions showed very few verbally aggressive acts either and their results do not change the interpretation, so we will keep the results simple by leaving them out of the table.

Table 2 . Verbal aggression results from Bandura’s experiment

• Authored by : Patrick Carroll for Lumen Learning. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• Observational Learning. Provided by : Open Learning Initiative. Located at : https://oli.cmu.edu/jcourse/workbook/activity/page?context=df3e71c70a0001dc01587dcb723e2002 . Project : Psychology. License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike

Bandura and Bobo

• APS 24th Annual Convention (2012)
• APS Fellows
• Experimental Psychology
• History of Psychology
• Personality/Social

But when it was their own turn to play with Bobo, children who witnessed an adult pummeling the doll were likely to show aggression too. Similar to their adult models, the children kicked the doll, hit it with a mallet, and threw it in the air. They even came up with new ways to hurt Bobo, such as throwing darts or aiming a toy gun at him. Children who were exposed to a non-aggressive adult or no model at all had far less aggression toward Bobo.

Bandura’s findings challenged the widely accepted behaviorist view that rewards and punishments are essential to learning. He suggested that people could learn by observing and imitating others’ behavior.

Faye notes that the Bobo doll experiments were also influential outside of the scientific community. “Bandura’s findings were particularly important in 1960s America, when lawmakers, broadcasters, and the general public were engaged in serious debate regarding the effects of television violence on the behavior of children,” she says.

Today, questions about violent media and video games linger, so Bandura’s research on aggression remains relevant. His Bobo-inspired social learning theory also contributed to the development of cognitive-behavioral therapy. Bandura is a member of an elite group who received both APS lifetime achievement awards: the William James and James Mckeen Cattell Fellow Awards. He was also named among the top five most eminent 20 th century psychologists by the Review of General Psychology . It’s an impressive legacy for a project that began with a little creativity and an inflatable clown.

How can the Bobo experiment be a critique of behaviorism? Children cannot learn from watching unless they have experience, can they? And experience, obviously, is gained through behavior. Behaviorism appears to be merely a version of Russell´s knowledge by acquaintance as opposed to knowledge by description. Whilst description can probably substitute for behavior in a virtual world, it is less likely useful in the real world.

We perceive what we see, is that not an experience where acting out is the result of its cognitive beginning? I would say most people learn from watching, hearing, and doing. While the three are a classroom didactic exercise the other is a practical experience.

I agree with Brian, observation/vicarious learning as represented in the Bobo experiment shapes the behavior we assume will be called for in the future. The behavior is acted out immediately or the experience, our perception of the experience, is molded at that time for future enactment of the behavior, cognitive beginning most definitely.

I can imagine what it was like being one of those children watching the adult kicking and punching the crap out of the doll. Here was the exact opposite of what they had been taught their entire life. It must have been liberating and fun to have free license. Just as you or I might enjoy using a big hammer to smash a wall that has to come down. But not for a moment do I think it leads to aggression or violence. More like catharsis. If Bandura’s experiments had involved adults hurting cats, I do not believe those children would have imitated that

I DO AGREE With Albert Bandula’s That Man Tend To Imitate The Behaviours Of The Person He Observes Given That In The Social Learning Theory Man Is Bound To Copy The Behaviour Of Those Frequently With Them Hence Parents Adults And Teacher Need To Be Concious Of Their Actions.

I’m a Profesional Clown for 31 yrs. I grew up with that Clown Toy. I liked it. The problem with this Toy is many adults see a Clown as a Thing, not a Person. The symbolism of the Toy can bring out the Dark Side of some adults. “Pseudo Clown O Phobia” as I call it is fashionable. Some Unethical Media Shrinks actually are telling people that they should be scared. This is not about Clowns or Toys. As the Internet came in Junk Science has grown. I’m concerned about turning Clowns into evil characters & and the so-called Psychologists who are doing a major disservice, not just to Clowns but to the Real Science of Psychology.

Bandura and Bobo, is not about violence, but desensitization, in the manner media desensitizes the power of words, as well as actions. Yes children experiencing actual violence are more prone to participate in violence, but there is a percentage of desensitized children that “act out” what they have seen; “trauma trigger” this then effects the group by direct experience. This continues especially for those children mentioned above with no outlet for trauma; mass psychotherapy without boundaries, guidance, or professional observation; only the consequence of the penal system. It is proven society has had a large hand in creating the very individuals, that then fill the penal system with just this type of personality. Not everyone is effected, certainly not everyone is as sensitive, to the trigger: but the numbers are still alarming.

My friend and I want to do a science expo project on this issue of the Bobo Doll and Albert Bandura. And we think that adults should be conscious of their actions and their words because children will learn to be like them.

Hello all, does anyone know where I can purchase a vintage Bobo Doll or have a one made? I am a Psychology Major at Cedar Crest College and am doing a project for Psi Chi. We would love to purchase one but don’t know where to find one. Any advice is greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Evaluating the Bobo Doll experiment: Since the experiment was made using children and relying on these children’s judgement, in my humble opinion, is not a strong result. Children do not have a strong base of morality, they do not fully know what is right or wrong and merely rely and mimic what they hear and see (feeds)from adults. The experiment used a doll and this is understood by children as a toy (an inanimate object which could be deformed, thrown, etc). I believe that their actions were parts imitation and curiosity and at the same time liberation that they could do what they think they could do with the doll without being judged by the adult (since children’s actions are controlled by adults). Secondly, the experiment was a model of ‘conditioning’ and not free will. I think the result of this experiment would be different if adults were the participants. Even if the doll was substituted with a live cat (apologies-just an example), the children will still act out what adults did but it will not be true with adult participants. My conclusion for this experiment is that behaviour is truly learned from experiences (heard and seen) and the younger one learns an action, the more likely that it will be moulded into his being/behaviour/lifestyle. But an adult’s adaptation of new behaviour is his choice.

APS regularly opens certain online articles for discussion on our website. Effective February 2021, you must be a logged-in APS member to post comments. By posting a comment, you agree to our Community Guidelines and the display of your profile information, including your name and affiliation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations present in article comments are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of APS or the article’s author. For more information, please see our Community Guidelines .

Please login with your APS account to comment.

Does Psychology Need More Effective Suspicion Probes?

Suspicion probes are meant to inform researchers about how participants’ beliefs may have influenced the outcome of a study, but it remains unclear what these unverified probes are really measuring or how they are currently being used.

Science in Service: Shaping Federal Support of Scientific Research  

Social psychologist Elizabeth Necka shares her experiences as a program officer at the National Institute on Aging.

A Very Human Answer to One of AI’s Deepest Dilemmas

Imagine that we designed a fully intelligent, autonomous robot that acted on the world to accomplish its goals. How could we make sure that it would want the same things we do? Alison Gopnik explores. Read or listen!

Privacy Overview

Bobo Doll Experiment

• Reference work entry
• Cite this reference work entry

• Lynna Lan Tien Nguyen Do 3  

3985 Accesses

3 Altmetric

Description

The Bobo doll experiment was conducted by Albert Bandura in 1961 [ 1 ] and studied patterns of behavior associated with aggression. Additional studies of this type were conducted by Bandura in 1963 [ 2 ] and 1965. A Bobo doll is an inflatable toy that is approximately the same size as a prepubescent child.

The aim of Bandura’s experiment was to demonstrate that if children were witnesses to an aggressive display by an adult they would imitate this aggressive behavior when given the opportunity.

Bandura et al. tested 36 boys and 36 girls from a Stanford nursery school – aged between 37 and 69 months (mean = 4 years and 4 months). Their role models were one male adult and one female adult.

The children were matched on the basis of their pre-existing aggressiveness. They did this by observing the children in the nursery school and judged their aggressive behavior on four 5-point rating scales. It was then possible to match the children in each group so that they had similar levels...

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
• Durable hardcover 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

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggressions through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63 (3), 575–582.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66 , 3–11.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Clinical Psychology, Walden University, 3128 Isherwood Way, Fremont, CA, 94536, USA

Lynna Lan Tien Nguyen Do

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lynna Lan Tien Nguyen Do .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Neurology, Learning and Behavior Center, 230 South 500 East, Suite 100, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84102, USA

Sam Goldstein Ph.D.

Department of Psychology MS 2C6, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA

Jack A. Naglieri Ph.D. ( Professor of Psychology ) ( Professor of Psychology )

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Do, L.L.T.N. (2011). Bobo Doll Experiment. In: Goldstein, S., Naglieri, J.A. (eds) Encyclopedia of Child Behavior and Development. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79061-9_379

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79061-9_379

Publisher Name : Springer, Boston, MA

Print ISBN : 978-0-387-77579-1

Online ISBN : 978-0-387-79061-9

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Share this entry

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

• Foundations
• Write Paper

Search form

• Experiments
• Anthropology
• Self-Esteem
• Social Anxiety

• Psychology >

Bobo Doll Experiment

The Bobo Doll Experiment was performed in 1961 by Albert Bandura, to try and add credence to his belief that all human behavior was learned, through social imitation and copying, rather than inherited through genetic factors.

This article is a part of the guide:

• Social Psychology Experiments
• Milgram Experiment
• Stanford Prison Experiment
• Asch Experiment
• Milgram Experiment Ethics

Browse Full Outline

• 1 Social Psychology Experiments
• 2.1 Asch Figure
• 3 Bobo Doll Experiment
• 4 Good Samaritan Experiment
• 5 Stanford Prison Experiment
• 6.1 Milgram Experiment Ethics
• 7 Bystander Apathy
• 8 Sherif’s Robbers Cave
• 9 Social Judgment Experiment
• 10 Halo Effect
• 11 Thought-Rebound
• 12 Ross’ False Consensus Effect
• 13 Interpersonal Bargaining
• 14 Understanding and Belief
• 15 Hawthorne Effect
• 16 Self-Deception
• 17 Confirmation Bias
• 18 Overjustification Effect
• 19 Choice Blindness
• 20.1 Cognitive Dissonance
• 21.1 Social Group Prejudice
• 21.2 Intergroup Discrimination
• 21.3 Selective Group Perception

These findings are still debated about over 40 years later.

In the modern world, there are many concerns about the effect of social influences on the development and growth of a child's personality and morality.

Television, computer games, food additives, music and the lack of role models are all cited as reasons for a supposed breakdown in society, and an increased tendency towards violence.

These concerns have existed for many years, even before the media turned these factors into sensationalist stories, to try and sell more newspapers. During the 1960's, there was a lot of concern and debate about whether a child's development was down to genetics, environmental factors or social learning from others around them.

For this purpose, Bandura designed the Bobo Doll Experiment to try and prove that children would copy an adult role model's behavior. He wanted to show, by using aggressive and non-aggressive actors, that a child would tend to imitate and learn from the behavior of a trusted adult.

The Bobo doll is an inflatable toy about five feet tall, designed to spring back upright when knocked over.

Children were chosen as subjects for the study, because they have less social conditioning; they have also had less instruction and teaching of the rules of society than adult subjects.

Hypotheses and Predictions

Bandura had a number of predictions about the outcomes of the Bobo Doll Experiment, fitting with his views on the theories of social learning.

• Children witnessing an adult role model behaving in an overly aggressive manner would be likely to replicate similar behavior themselves, even if the adult was not present.
• Subjects who had observed a non-aggressive adult would be the least likely to show violent tendencies, even if the adult was not present. They would be even less likely to exhibit this type of aggression than the control group of children, who had seen no role model at all.
• Bandura believed that children would be much more likely to copy the behavior of a role model of the same sex. He wanted to show that it was much easier for a child to identify and interact with an adult of the same gender.
• The final prediction was that male children would tend to be more aggressive than female children, because society has always tolerated and advocated violent behavior in men more than women.

Setting Up the Experiment

For the Bobo Doll Experiment, Bandura selected a number of children from the local Stanford Nursery School, varying in age from 3 to 6 years, with the average age being 4 years and 4 months.

To test the prediction that boys would be more prone to aggression than girls, he picked 36 subjects of each sex.

The control group , which would not see an adult role model at all, consisted of 24 children, 12 boys and 12 girls.

The second group, which would be exposed to an adult showing aggressive tendencies, was similarly made up of 24 children of either sex. Both of the resulting groups of 12 were further divided; half would be tested with a female role model, half with a male role model.

The third group was structured in exactly the same way as the second, the only difference being that they would be exposed to a passive adult.

For the Bobo Doll Experiment, it was necessary to pre-select and sort the children, to try and ensure that there was an even spread of personality types across the test groups; some subjects already known to be more aggressive in personality than others.

For this, one of the teachers from the nursery worked with the experimenter, to rate each child's personality and attempt to construct well balanced groups.

It must also be noted that each subject was tested alone and individually, to ensure that the effects and reactions of their classmates would bear no influence on the final results or findings of the experiment.

The Bobo Doll Experiment proper began by placing one of the children from the test groups in a room with an adult. The subject sat in one corner of the room, with a few appealing toys to play with, such as potato prints and sticker activities.

The adult sat in the other corner of the room, with a few toys, as well as a Bobo doll and mallet. The child was not permitted to play or interact with these toys.

For the children in group two, after one minute of playing with the toys, the adult would begin to verbally and physically attack the doll for a period of 10 minutes.

For the third group tested, the adult would sit quietly and play peacefully with the toys for ten minutes.

The control group, of course, sat in the room for ten minutes with no adult present.

The next stage of the Bobo Doll Experiment was to take the subject into another room, which was filled with interesting toys. The child was not permitted to play with these toys, being told that they were reserved for other children to play with. This was intended to build up the levels of frustration within the subject.

The child was then taken into yet another room filled with interesting toys, some of an aggressive type, some non-aggressive; the room also contained the Bobo doll and the mallet. The subject was watched through a one-way mirror, and a number of types of behavior were assessed.

The first factor measured was physical aggression, consisting of hitting the doll with the mallet or punching, kicking or sitting on the doll.

Verbal aggression was also assessed, whether it was general abuse or an imitation of phrases used by the adult role-model.

The third measurement was the amount of times the mallet was used to display other forms of aggression than hitting the doll. The final behaviors studied were modes of aggression, shown by the subject, which were not direct imitations of the role-model's behavior.

The results for the Bobo Doll Experiment showed, as expected by prediction one, that children who were exposed to the aggressive model were more likely to show imitative aggressive behavior themselves.

Prediction four was proved correct in that boys were nearly three times more likely to replicate physically violent behavior than girls.

The measurements for verbally aggressive behavior again showed that children exposed to aggressive role models were more likely to imitate this behavior. The levels of verbal aggression expressed were about the same for boys and girls.

Subjects in the Bobo Doll Experiment exposed to the non-aggressive model, or no model at all, showed little imitative aggressive behavior. This finding partially proved prediction two, with children exposed to a passive role model showing less imitative aggression.

However, the results did not fully prove this prediction, as there was no discernible difference in the imitative aggression levels between groups one and three.

Male subjects exposed to non-aggressive role models were less likely to use the mallet to hit the Bobo doll. Strangely, male subjects placed with non-aggressive female models were more likely to use the mallet than the control group.

The findings of the Bobo Doll Experiment proved to be a little inconclusive with most of the predictions not being fully proved.

It is not certain that children learn socially, but it is likely that children observing an adult model utilizing violence are more likely to believe that this type of behavior is normal. They may, therefore, be more likely to use this type of action themselves when confronted by similar situations.

Bandura found that girls were much less likely to be physically violent, but were equally as prone to verbal aggression as boys. This is something often encountered in society, where bullying at school, by boys, is more often of a physical nature; intimidation amongst girls tends to be more verbal and social.

There were a few criticisms of the experiment; the Bobo doll springs back upright when it is hit and there is a strong possibility that the children saw it as a game rather than anything else.

There was a follow up experiment, in 1963, which used the same methodology but showed the subjects violence via video; this had a much less defined response than the initial experiment.

Another refinement of the Bobo Doll Experiment, in 1965, tried to establish the effects of rewarding or punishing bad and violent behavior. Children, who witnessed the model being punished for aggressive behavior, were much less likely to follow suit. Interestingly, there was no change in aggression when the model was rewarded for bad behavior.

• Psychology 101
• Flags and Countries
• Capitals and Countries

Martyn Shuttleworth (Mar 26, 2008). Bobo Doll Experiment. Retrieved Sep 25, 2024 from Explorable.com: https://explorable.com/bobo-doll-experiment

You Are Allowed To Copy The Text

The text in this article is licensed under the Creative Commons-License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) .

This means you're free to copy, share and adapt any parts (or all) of the text in the article, as long as you give appropriate credit and provide a link/reference to this page.

That is it. You don't need our permission to copy the article; just include a link/reference back to this page. You can use it freely (with some kind of link), and we're also okay with people reprinting in publications like books, blogs, newsletters, course-material, papers, wikipedia and presentations (with clear attribution).

Related articles

Social Learning Theory

Social Development Theory

Want to stay up to date? Follow us!

Save this course for later.

Don't have time for it all now? No problem, save it as a course and come back to it later.

Footer bottom

• Privacy Policy

• Subscribe to our RSS Feed
• Like us on Facebook
• Follow us on Twitter

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

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Albert Bandura's experiments on aggression modeling in children: A psychoanalytic critique

Introduction.

In a series of innovative experiments, Bandura (1925–2021), renowned Psychology Professor at Stanford University, USA, and his collaborators (e.g., Bandura and Huston, 1961 ; Bandura et al., 1961 , 1963 ; Bandura, 1965 , 1969 ) showed that young children exposed to adults' aggression tend to behave aggressively. In these experiments, children observed adults, in vivo or in vitro , as well as cartoons, behaving aggressively toward a large, inflated doll (clown) named “Bobo doll”, for about 10 min. The findings of these studies are considered to support modeling, observational learning, or learning by imitation and provide evidence for Bandura's social learning theory, which belongs to the behaviorism paradigm. In this paper, we offer a psychoanalytic critique of these experiments with the aim of shedding light on the unconscious processes of children's imitation of aggression. Although Bandura ( 1986 ) later formulated the so-called social cognitive theory and focused on less observable processes (e.g., self-regulation, self-efficacy, beliefs, expectations), in presenting these early experiments he clearly opposed the existing psychoanalytic interpretations of aggression.

Key findings of Bandura's experiments on aggression in children

The key findings of Bandura's experiments on aggression in children (Bandura and Huston, 1961 ; Bandura et al., 1961 , 1963 ; Bandura, 1965 , 1969 ) are summarized below.

• Observation of an aggressive model is sufficient to elicit aggressive behavior in the young child. The model does not need to be a familiar or nurturant person. Moreover, there is no need to positively reinforce the aggression of either the adult model or the child. Because punishment does not follow the model's aggressive acts, the child receives the message that aggression is acceptable.
• The virtual world has great power. Children who watch a film showing aggressive people or cartoons tend to imitate this behavior.
• Imitation is inferred by the fact that children show verbal and/or physical aggressive acts that are very similar to those of the model.
• Children not only accurately imitate the observed behaviors but also show ingenuity, manifesting different, novice acts of aggression.
• Children transfer, by means of generalization, aggression into new, different contexts, even when the aggressive model is no longer present (delayed imitation).
• If the adult model is punished for his/her aggressive behavior, the probability that the child will show aggressive behavior is reduced. In contrast, positive reinforcement or no reinforcement of the model leads to increased aggression on the part of the child (vicarious/indirect learning).
• After observing the aggressive model, boys tend to exhibit more physical aggression than girls, whereas no gender difference is found for verbal aggression. Independent of gender, children are more likely to imitate a male physically aggressive model. According to gender stereotypes, this form of aggression is more acceptable for men than for women. In contrast, verbal aggression is more likely to be imitated when manifested by a same-sex model.

Taken together, these results imply that children's aggression can be caused—and probably eliminated—by external manipulations. However, are there interpretations other than this omnipotent behavioristic view?

Psychoanalytic views of children's aggression in Bandura's experiments

In the Bobo doll experiments, after presenting the aggressive model and before placing the child in the room with Bobo doll and other toys with the aim of recording the likelihood of imitation, the experimenters instigated the children's aggression. Specifically, an experimenter led children to another room, where she allowed them to enjoy some attractive toys. After a while, she told them that all toys were hers, that she would no longer let anyone play with them, and that she intended to give them to other children. After experiencing this frustration , the children were accompanied to the room where Bobo doll was.

Bandura (Bandura and Huston, 1961 ; Bandura et al., 1961 ) stated that he was seeking a more concise and parsimonious theoretical explanation than the one provided by identification with the aggressor , that is, the ego defense mechanism described by Anna Freud ( 1946 ), and attempted to outline alternative explanations (Bandura, 1969 ). However, if we look closely at specific aspects and manipulations of these experiments, we may discover that this mechanism may have more explanatory power for what happened in the laboratory than Bandura believed.

At first, it is reasonable to hypothesize that, in the eyes of the children, the experimenters were omnipotent adult figures with authority, prestige, and power. The strange laboratory setting may have elicited in children excessive arousal , associated with tension and anxiety. This overflow of excitation, that needed to be released, is likely to have resulted from the unprecedented experience, and, more specifically, from the following: separation from parents; presence in an unknown place with strange adults; alternation of unfamiliar rooms and buildings; many overwhelming stimuli, such as physical and verbal aggression exhibited by adults, in vivo or in vitro (i.e., film), or by cartoons within a colorful frame, full of imaginary stimuli; presence of new and exciting toys; and frustration and anger caused by adults who deliberately disrupted children's pleasurable play activity with the aim of provoking their aggressiveness. All these conditions imply that the experiments were not only about “observation of cues produced by the behavior of others” (Bandura et al., 1961 ; our emphasis). If only “cues” were given to children, then why it was assumed in another paper (Bandura et al., 1963 ) that vicarious learning had such a “cathartic function”? Indeed, Bandura may have aptly used this expression because catharsis implies release of tension caused by overwhelming vicarious experience such as in ancient Greek tragedy.

Second, identification with the aggressor is a defense mechanism that is typical of 3- to 6-year-old children—the participants' age in Bandura's experiments. Anna Freud ( 1946 , p. 113) argued that “by impersonating the aggressor, assuming his attributes or imitating his aggression, the child transforms himself from the person threatened into the person who makes the threat”. Children may have unconsciously experienced the aggressiveness of adults (quasi parental figures) toward a familiar playful object as a threat of punishment , possibly a threat of castration by proxy , for their own oedipal/incestuous and autoerotic/masturbatory phantasies, which usually prevail in this age period—the phallic phase of libidinal development (Freud, 1953 ). This explanation is further supported by the finding that males were more influential models regarding physical aggression. According to Anna Freud ( 1946 ), identification with the aggressor is the preliminary stage of superego formation, during which the aggressive drive is not yet directed against the subject but against the outer world. Projection of guilt, thus, supplements the immature superego and may interpret, at least partly, children's sadomasochistic relation with the doll.

Third, we contend that a seduction process of both caretakers and their children had taken place in the university laboratory. With their caretakers' consent, children were brought into an unknown adult place, where they were captivated by adults' passion, namely overt violence against a doll. The violent acts were exhibited in a ritualistic and self-reinforcing manner and in the context of symbolic play. According to Ferenczi ( 1949 ), who was not mentioned by Bandura but whose ideas on this issue inspired Anna Freud, when an adult becomes sexually seductive or violent against a child, a confusion of tongues between the two emerges, in other words, a confusion between child tenderness and adult passion . In these experiments, children experienced an indirect attack with a mild traumatic character: certain adults intruded and impinged on the territory of children's “innocent” play, and then coerced them to observe other adults having little control over their own instinctual (aggressive) drives toward an attractive object. Therefore, it was very likely that children reacted not just with imitation but with anxious identification with the adult. This introjection of the aggressor resulted in children exhibiting the same violent behavior. They seemed to “subordinate themselves like automata to the will of the aggressor” and “could only react in an autoplastic way by a kind of mimicry ” (Ferenczi, 1949 , p. 228, our emphasis), possibly introjecting the adults' unconscious guilt for their abusive behavior.

It is important to note that, contrary to identification with the aggressor, introjection of the aggressor is initially an automatic, organismic reaction to trauma—a mixture of rage, contempt and omnipotence—and only later becomes a defensive, agentic and purposeful process (Howell, 2014 ). In these experiments, children seemed to exhibit this automatic, procedural identification and mimicry. It has also been argued (Frankel, 2002 ) that identification with the aggressor is a universal and very common tactic used by people in mild traumatic situations and, generally, on several occasions where they are in a weak position relative to more powerful others. Although benign, this power may become a real threat: “If the adult got out of control and attacked the doll, could she attack me too?” Identification with the aggressor, then, serves an evolutionary function: survival is ensured if individuals conform to what others expect of them.

In the laboratory setting, children confronted what Lacan ( 1977 ) has called the enigma of the adults' desire : “Why are they behaving this way?”; “What do they want from me?”; “Why are they doing this to me?”. The laboratory setting and the adults' aggression toward the doll can be conceptualized as enigmatic signifiers , the Lacanian notion further elaborated by Laplanche ( 1999 ). These signifiers were verbal and non-verbal messages, doubly compromised and non-transparent to both sides of the communication because of the existence of the unconscious. The young participants found themselves in an asymmetrical relationship while their developmental abilities to metabolize what adults communicated to them were inadequate. They were somewhat helpless. Aggressive behavior was the way with which children attempted to translate adults' “alien” messages and derive meaning from the enigmatic situation.

The ingenuity and novelty—“creative embellishment” as Bandura said when describing the experiment in a short film 1 —which children showed in the aggressive use of toys may be regarded as proof of the playful character of the imitation. Children attempted to transform passivity into activity , to acquire mastery of new and challenging objects and experience pleasure in this play activity, as Freud ( 1955 ) argued, rather than be the subjects of uncanny, mildly traumatic experimental conditions and the spectators of adults' violence. Therefore, children seemed to compulsively repeat the activity in a ritualistic fashion. This view is in line with the emphasis given on transformation in Freud's ( 1946 ) definition of identification with the aggressor.

Bandura's experiments on aggression in children, après-coup

The aggression modeling experiments were conducted at a time when Psychology was striving, by “objective” measurements and laboratory experiments, to establish itself as a discipline. They have received criticism because they certainly raise the ethical issue of children's exposure to violence, with unknown short- and long-term consequences. Ethical concerns have also been expressed for other groundbreaking, or even notorious, experiments in the history of Psychology (e.g., Watson's Baby Albert experiment, Milgram's experiments on obedience to authority).

Despite the ethical and methodological flaws, these aggression experiments and the short films that depict them continue to have a great allure to the scientific community and the society at large. Besides, a degree of seduction, namely optimal seduction (Potamianou, 2001 ), is needed to awaken desire for scientific exploration and facilitate openness to the unknown. They inspired research and interventions and raised public awareness about the effects of children's exposure to violence (e.g., through media). These experiments are still regarded to provide indisputable evidence, by means of a “rigorous experimental design”, for young children's vulnerability to adults' violence. They also illustrate that, from early on, humans are capable of abusive acts, and that these acts can be easily provoked. Therefore, the work of civilization is to undertake every action to protect children from the transmission of violence.

However, the fact that scientists' reservations were not strong enough to prevent them from “using” children in such laboratory experiments, implies, paradoxically, that they believed in children's resilience to violence or trauma. Only a few years after World War II, Psychology seemed to engage in an unconscious attempt at reparation (Klein, 1975 ), perhaps on behalf of the whole humanity, through handling—at last!—violence within a controlled and protected but regressed-to-the-infantile laboratory setting.

Conclusions

This study aimed to approach Bandura's experiments on aggression modeling in children from the psychoanalytic perspective. A variety of psychoanalytic formulations were used to conceptualize the underlying processes and the phenomenology of children's imitation of aggressive acts. These formulations are not supported by research data, a fact that may be regarded also as a limitation of this study. However, they are based on the multitude and richness of clinical observations in the field of Psychoanalysis, which has an undeniably remarkable contribution to the understanding and treatment of human aggression.

Author contributions

EG conceived the idea and drafted the manuscript. KM reviewed key findings of Bandura's experiments and systematically edited the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqNaLerMNOE

• Bandura A. (1965). Influence of model's reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol . 1 , 589–595. 10.1037/h0022070 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A. (1969). “Social-learning theory of identificatory processes,” in Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research , ed D.A. Goslin (Chicago: Rand McNally; ), 213–262. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A., Huston A. C. (1961). Identification as a process of incidental learning . J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol . 63 , 311–318. 10.1037/h0040351 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A., Ross D., Ross S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models . J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol . 63 , 575–582. 10.1037/h0045925 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandura A., Ross D., Ross S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models . J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol . 66 , 3–11. 10.1037/h0048687 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferenczi S. (1949). Confusion of the tongues between the adults and the child (The language of tenderness and of passion) . Int. J. Psychoanal . 30 , 225–230. (Original work published 1933). [ Google Scholar ]
• Frankel J. (2002). Exploring Ferenczi's concept of identification with the aggressor: Its role in trauma, everyday life, and the therapeutic relationship . Psychoanal. Dialog. 12 , 101–139. 10.1080/10481881209348657 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Freud A. (1946). The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defence . New York, NY: International Universities Press. (Original work published 1936). [ Google Scholar ]
• Freud S. (1953). “Three essays on the theory of sexuality,” in The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud , Vol. 7 , ed Strachey J. (London: Hogarth Press; ), 125–243. (Original work published 1905). [ Google Scholar ]
• Freud S. (1955). “Beyond the pleasure principle,” in The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud , Vol. 8 , ed J. Strachey (London: Hogarth Press; ), 3–64. (Original work published 1920). [ Google Scholar ]
• Howell E. F. (2014). Ferenczi's concept of identification with the aggressor: understanding dissociative structure with interacting victim and abuser self-states . Am. J. Psychoanal . 74 , 48–59. 10.1057/ajp.2013.40 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Klein M. (1975). “Love, guilt and reparation,” in Envy and Gratitude and Other Works 1921-1945. The Writings of Melanie Klein, Vol. I , ed M. Klein (New York, NY: Free Press; ) (Original article published 1937), 306–443. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lacan J. (1977). The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-analysis . London: Hogarth. [ Google Scholar ]
• Laplanche J. (1999). Essays on Otherness . New York, NY: Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Potamianou A. (2001). Le Traumatique: Répétition et Élaboration . Paris: Dunod. [ Google Scholar ]

Bandura, Ross and Ross (1961) – The Imitative Aggressive Experiment 

Table of Contents

Last Updated on August 2, 2021 by Karl Thompson

This classic example of a laboratory experiment suggests that children learn aggressive behaviour through observation – it is relevant to the Crime and Deviance module, and lends support to the idea that exposure to violence at home (or in the media) can increase aggressive and possibly violent behaviour in real life.

Bandura, Ross and Ross (1961) aimed to find out if children learnt aggressive behaviour by observing adults acting in an aggressive manner.

Stage one – making some of the children watch violence 

In this stage of the experiment, children were divided into three groups of 24 (12 boys and 12 girls in each group), and then individually put through one of the following three processes. 

Stage two – frustrating the children and observing their reactions

The children were then taken to a room full of nice of toys, but told that they were not allowed to play with them, in order to ‘frustrate them’, and then taken onto another room full of toys which consisted of a number of ‘ordinary toys’, as well as a ‘bobo doll’ and a hammer. Children were given a period of time to play with these toys while being observed through a two way mirror.

To cut a long story short, the children who had previously seen the adults acting aggressively towards the bobo doll were more likely to behave aggressively towards to the bobo doll in stage two of the experiment.

Strengths of the bobo-doll experiment 

Limitations of this laboratory experiment

Laboratory Experiments – advantages and disadvantages

Milgram’s Obedience Experiment – is the other ‘classic’ psychology experiment which usually gets wheeled out for use in sociology.

This post from Simply Psychology offers a much more detailed account of Bandura’s Imitative Aggressive experiment – NB if you’re an A-level sociology student, you don’t really need to know that much detail for this experiment, this link is just for further reading.

Share this:

Leave a reply cancel reply, discover more from revisesociology.

Albert Bandura, 1925-2021: The Social Psychologist Who Transformed How We Think of Learning and Morality

Albert Bandura, a world-renowned social cognitive psychologist who changed the nature of his field and whose name and work became cornerstones of introductory psychology classes everywhere, died on July 26 at the age of 95 in his home in Stanford, California. He passed in his sleep from congestive heart failure, according to his daughters Carol Bandura Cowley and Mary Bandura. Widely regarded as one of the most influential psychologists of all time , Bandura was best known for his Bobo doll experiments. While he conducted the experiment early in his career, the conclusions of the Bobo doll experiments not only laid the groundwork for his future work but also changed the landscape of the psychology of learning as we know it.

Bandura conducted his famous Bobo doll experiments early in his career at Stanford University with two colleagues in the 1960s. In these experiments, Bandura presented preschool-age children with televised footage of adults hitting, punching, and essentially abusing an inflatable Bobo clown doll. When compared to same-age children who did not see the aggressive footage, the children who saw adults abuse the doll were more likely to do the same, and to be more violent towards the doll when presented with the opportunity to play with it.

The Bobo doll studies contributed to Bandura’s overarching theory of social learning, in which he proposed that individuals learn by observing the behaviors of others and mimicking those learned behaviors, attitudes, and emotions. This was a landmark finding for the psychology of learning; until then, the primary theory of behaviorism, or behavioral learning, had been the primary psychological explanation for learning. Behaviorism, championed by B.F. Skinner, proposed the idea that learning any type of behavior was dependent on conditioning through the reinforcement of either punishments or rewards.

Bandura’s Bobo doll experiment was radical for its time as it challenged Skinner’s preexisting theory and built upon it, by suggesting that environmental and cognitive factors interacted with one another to influence human learning and behavior. While this may seem like common sense to most people today, it was a novel and groundbreaking perspective the time that Bandura had first proposed it.

“It makes a lot sense to people today because Al Bandura made it make sense,” said Laura L. Carstensen , a fellow professor of psychology at Stanford.

While the academic merit is evident, Bandura’s research became increasingly relevant during the 1960s and ‘70s , as an increased public anxiety about the effect of televised violence on children, especially as the Vietnam War raged on and dominated news programs. Prior to this era, the primary mental health belief at the time ­– psychoanalysis – was that watching aggressive violence would serve as a catharsis, thus diminishing the desire to physically act out in an aggressive manner. The Bobo doll experiments, however, suggested otherwise, implying that watching acts of aggression would potentially encourage children to similarly mimic the violence they watched onscreen.

Bandura was brought before the public, his work scrutinized as he testified before Capitol Hill on the detrimental effects of televised violence on children. Though he was criticized by broadcast networks, his research and testimony helped the Federal Trade Commission set new standards for televised advertising and televised content depicting children.

The Bobo doll experiments were foundational for the rest of the work that Bandura would do in his research studying social learning theory and social modeling, which overall “enabled people to change their lives for the better,” Bandura wrote in his book , Communication of Innovations , in 2006.

He was also known for developing the theory of self-efficacy, which asserts that how a person views their own abilities is a key component to how they think, act and feel, and the concept of moral disengagement, which explains how people can detach themselves from ethical standards in order to justify immoral and harmful acts.

Through his research, Bandura introduced and reexamined theories of personality formation, cognition and the treatment of mental disorders, which were then applied to reforms in education, public health and drug and alcohol abuse awareness campaigns. For several years, Bandura worked with the Population Media Center , a U.S. nonprofit organization, to create televised programs that modeled positive outcomes for situations such as family planning, climate change, and protection against HIV/AIDS.

“[Bandura was] also one of the most important social scientists in history,” Arthur C. Evans Jr., the chief executive of the American Psychological Association, said in a statement . “His contributions have substantially influenced our understanding of human behavior today.”

Born on December 4, 1925 in Mundare, Canada to Eastern European immigrants, Bandura was the youngest and only son among six children. While his town had scant educational resources, Bandura’s parents instilled a sense of hard work in him and he found ways to take charge of his own educational path.

He later wrote in his autobiography that “while the content of courses is perishable … self-regulatory skills have lasting functional value whatever the pursuit might be.”

Bandura attended the University of British Columbia for his undergraduate studies, where he happened upon a course catalogue and chose to enroll in an introductory psychology class by chance because it fit in his schedule.

After finishing his undergraduate degree in three years, Bandura attended the University of Iowa, the then-epicenter of psychological research, for his graduate degrees in psychology, where he graduated with his M.A. in 1951 and his Ph.D. in 1952. At Iowa he met Virginia Varns, and they married in 1952 after Bandura received his Ph.D. and had accepted a teaching position at Stanford University.

As an academic, Bandura spent the entirety of his 57 year-long career at Stanford University, where he had been the David Starr Jordan Professor of Social Science in Psychology, Emeritus, in the School of Humanities and Sciences until his death. Over his tenure, he published hundreds of scientific papers, wrote 17 books, was awarded 19 honorary degrees, named the president of the American Psychological Association in 1974 and elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1980. Bandura’s awards and honors include the Outstanding Lifetime Contribution to Psychology Award from the American Psychological Association, the James McKeen Cattell Award from the American Psychological Society and the Gold Medal Award for Distinguished Lifetime Contribution to Psychological Science from the American Psychological Foundation. In 2014, he was made an Officer of the Order of Canada, and in 2016, was awarded the National Medal of Science by President Barack Obama.

Towards the end of his life, Bandura was heavily invested in climate change research, and studying how moral disengagement among businesses contributed to and sustained environmentally harmful behaviors and practices.

“He was a moral figure,” said Carstensen. “He believed that science should be directed toward improving societies.”

In 2002, the Review of General Psychology ranked Bandura fourth among the most-cited psychologist of the 20 th century, just behind Sigmund Freud, B.F. Skinner and Jean Piaget.

“It is difficult to put into words the impact he had on psychology,” said Patrick Baillie , former president of the Canadian Psychological Association.

Bandura is survived by both of his daughters, Carol and Mary Bandura, and two grandsons. In lieu of flowers or gifts, Bandura’s family requested that donations instead be made to the  Natural Resources Defense Council , the  Population Media Center  or  Young Voices for the Planet .

Stephanie Tom

Stephanie Tom is studying people, culture, media and technology at Cornell University. She is the social science communications intern at SAGE Publishing.

Related Articles

Research Assessment, Scientometrics, and Qualitative v. Quantitative Measures

Paper to Advance Debate on Dual-Process Theories Genuinely Advanced Debate

Partnership Marks Milestone in Advancing Black Scholarship 

This Anthropology Course Looks at Built Environment From Animal Perspective

2024 Henry and Bryna David Lecture: K-12 Education in the Age of AI

The slow, relentless creep of computing is currently in overdrive with powerful artificial intelligence tools impacting every aspect of our lives. What […]

Webinar: Fundamentals of Research Impact

Whether you’re in a research leadership position, working in research development, or a researcher embarking on their project, creating a culture of […]

Deadline Nears for Comment on Republican Revamp Proposal for NIH

Republican legislators in the U.S. House of Representatives, arguing that “the American people’s trust in the National Institute of Health has been broken,” have released a blueprint for reforming the agency.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

ICISSS 2024: International Conference on Interdisciplinary Social Sciences Studies

Webinar: banned books week 2024, 2024 ssrc katznelson fellow lecture: the economist as plumber.

• Societal Impact of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts 2024

ESRC Festival of Social Science

Aera brown lecture: brown v. board of education and the democratic ideals, growing up digital: how today’s youth navigate life on screens and at school, cspc 2024: 16th canadian science policy conference.

Customize your experience

Select your preferred categories.

• Announcements
• Business and Management INK

Communication

Higher education reform, open access, recent appointments, research ethics, interdisciplinarity, international debate.

• Academic Funding

Public Engagement

• Recognition

Presentations

Sage research methods, science & social science, social science bites, the data bulletin.

New Fellowship for Community-Led Development Research of Latin America and the Caribbean Now Open

Thanks to a collaboration between the Inter-American Foundation (IAF) and the Social Science Research Council (SSRC), applications are now being accepted for […]

Social, Behavioral Scientists Eligible to Apply for NSF S-STEM Grants

Solicitations are now being sought for the National Science Foundation’s Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics program, and in an unheralded […]

With COVID and Climate Change Showing Social Science’s Value, Why Cut it Now?

What are the three biggest challenges Australia faces in the next five to ten years? What role will the social sciences play in resolving these challenges? The Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia asked these questions in a discussion paper earlier this year. The backdrop to this review is cuts to social science disciplines around the country, with teaching taking priority over research.

Felice Levine to Leave AERA in 2025

Social psychologist Felice Levine, who has served as executive director of the American Educational Research Association for more than 22 years, will step down in 2025.

Karine Morin Takes Helm of Canada’s Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences

Karine Morin, whose experience in the policy world spans health and health research, the physical sciences and equity, diversity, and inclusion, has been named the new president and CEO of Canada’s Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences

Nominations Open for 2025 Sage-CASBS Award

The award recognizes achievement in the social and behavioral sciences that advances understanding of pressing social issues. Deadline: September 16, 2024.

New Podcast Series Applies Social Science to Social Justice Issues

Sage (the parent of Social Science Space) and the Surviving Society podcast have launched a collaborative podcast series, Social Science for Social […]

Big Think Podcast Series Launched by Canadian Federation of Humanities and Social Sciences

The Canadian Federation of Humanities and Social Sciences has launched the Big Thinking Podcast, a show series that features leading researchers in the humanities and social sciences in conversation about the most important and interesting issues of our time.

The We Society Explores Intersectionality and Single Motherhood

In a recently released episode of The We Society podcast, Ann Phoenix, a psychologist at University College London’s Institute of Education, spoke […]

Seventh Edition of ‘The Evidence’: The Rise of Unsafe Abortions after Roe v Wade 

In this month’s edition of The Evidence newsletter, Josephine Lethbridge explores reproductive rights after the end of Roe v Wade, highlighting research on the potentially unsafe methods used in self-managed abortions. 

Sixth Edition of ‘The Evidence’: We Need a New Approach to Preventing Sexual Violence

In this month’s installment of The Evidence newsletter, journalist Josephine Lethbridge explores recent research into sexual violence prevention programs and interviews experts […]

Fifth Edition of ‘The Evidence’: Do Peacebuilding Practices Exclude Women?

The June 2024 installment of The Evidence newsletter puts post-war conflict resolution practices under the microscope – taking a closer look at how women are adversely affected by these peacebuilding exercises.

A Social Scientist Looks at the Irish Border and Its Future

‘What Do We Know and What Should We Do About the Irish Border?’ is a new book from Katy Hayward that applies social science to the existing issues and what they portend.

Brexit and the Decline of Academic Internationalism in the UK

Brexit seems likely to extend the hostility of the UK immigration system to scholars from European Union countries — unless a significant change of migration politics and prevalent public attitudes towards immigration politics took place in the UK. There are no indications that the latter will happen anytime soon.

Brexit and the Crisis of Academic Cosmopolitanism

A new report from the Royal Society about the effects on Brexit on science in the United Kingdom has our peripatetic Daniel Nehring mulling the changes that will occur in higher education and academic productivity.

Utilizing Academic-Practitioner Partnering for Societal Impact

In this article, co-authors Natalie Slawinski, Bruna Brito, Jennifer Brenton, and Wendy Smith reflect on the inspiration behind their research article, “Reflections on deep academic–practitioner partnering for generative societal impact,” published in Strategic Organization.

Trippin’ Forward: Management Research and the Development of Psychedelics

Charlie Smith reflects on his interest in psychedelic research, the topic of his research article, “Psychedelics, Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy and Employees’ Wellbeing,” published in Journal of Management Inquiry.

Using Ethnography to Explore Entrepreneurial Extracurricular Activities

Co-authors Birgitte Wraae and Nicolai Nybye reflect on the inspiration behind their research article, “Learning to Be “Me,” “the Team,” and “the Company” Through Entrepreneurial Extracurricular Activities: An Ethnographic Approach,” published in Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy.

Where Did We Get the Phrase ‘Publish or Perish’?

The origin of the phrase “publish or perish” has been intriguing since this question was first raised by Eugene Garfield in 1996. Vladimir Moskovkinl talks about the evolution of the meaning of this phrase and shows the earliest use known at this point.

National Academies Seeks Experts to Assess 2020 U.S. Census

The National Academies’ Committee on National Statistics seeks nominations for members of an ad hoc consensus study panel — sponsored by the U.S. Census Bureau — to review and evaluate the quality of the 2020 Census.

Will the 2020 Census Be the Last of Its Kind?

Could the 2020 iteration of the United States Census, the constitutionally mandated count of everyone present in the nation, be the last of its kind?

Will We See A More Private, But Less Useful, Census?

Census data can be pretty sensitive – it’s not just how many people live in a neighborhood, a town, a state or […]

Revisiting the ‘Research Parasite’ Debate in the Age of AI

The large language models, or LLMs, that underlie generative AI tools such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT, have an ethical challenge in how they parasitize freely available data.

Three years ago, on the heels of a Black Lives Matter Movement energized after the horror of George Floyd’s murder, the global academic publisher Sage partnered with the Black-owned Universal Write Publications (UWP).  

Free Online Course Reveals The Art of ChatGPT Interactions

You’ve likely heard the hype around artificial intelligence, or AI, but do you find ChatGPT genuinely useful in your professional life? A free course offered by Sage Campus could change all th

NSF Seeks Input on Research Ethics

In a ‘Dear Colleague’ letter released September 9, the NSF issued a ‘request for information,’ or RFI, from those interested in research ethics.

Let’s Return to Retractions Being Corrective, Not Punitive

The retraction of academic papers often functions as an indictment against a researcher’s reputation. Tim Kersjes argues that for retractions to function as an effective corrective to the scholarly record, they need shed this punitive reputation.

Uncovering ‘Sneaked References’ in an Article’s Metadata

The authors describe how by chance they learned how some actors have added extra references, invisible in the text but present in the articles’ metadata, when those unscrupulous actors submitted the articles to scientific databases.

As book bans and academic censorship escalate across the United States, this free hour-long webinar gathers experts to discuss the impact these […]

In this Social Science Research Council Katznelson Fellow Lecture, Nobel Prize-winner Esther Duflo of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology will share her […]

Brown v. Board of Education is one of the most important Supreme Court decisions in United States history. But how should we […]

Exploring ‘Lost Person Behavior’ and the Science of Search and Rescue

What is the best strategy for finding someone missing in the wilderness? It’s complicated, but the method known as ‘Lost Person Behavior’ seems to offers some hope.

New Opportunity to Support Government Evaluation of Public Participation and Community Engagement Now Open

The President’s Management Agenda Learning Agenda: Public Participation & Community Engagement Evidence Challenge is dedicated to forming a strategic, evidence-based plan that federal agencies and external researchers can use to solve big problems.

AI Upskilling Can and Should Empower Business School Faculty

If schools provide the proper support and resources, they will help educators move from anxiety to empowerment when integrating AI into the classroom.

Reflections of a Former Student Body President: ‘Student Government is a Thankless Job’

Christopher Everett, outgoing student body president at the University of North Carolina, reflects on the role of student governance in the modern, and conflicted, university

Universities Should Reimagine Governance Along Co-Operative Lines

Instead of adhering to a corporate model based on individual achievement, the authors argue that universities need to shift towards co-operative governance that fosters collaborative approaches to teaching and research

The creation of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) has led to a heated debate on the balance between peer review and evaluative metrics in research assessment regimes. Luciana Balboa, Elizabeth Gadd, Eva Mendez, Janne Pölönen, Karen Stroobants, Erzsebet Toth Cithra and the CoARA Steering Board address these arguments and state CoARA’s commitment to finding ways in which peer review and bibliometrics can be used together responsibly.

Psychologists Jonathan St. B. T. Evans and Keith E. Stanovich have a history of publishing important research papers that resonate for years.

Title of course: Space/Power/Species What prompted the idea for the course? A few years ago, I came across the architect Joyce Hwang’s […]

The Public’s Statistics Should Serve, Well, the Public

Paul Allin sets out why the UK’s Royal Statistical Society is launching a new campaign for public statistics.

Infrastructure

Philosophy Has Been – and Should Be – Integral to AI

Philosophy has been instrumental to AI since its inception, and should still be an important contributor as artificial intelligence evolves..

Daron Acemoglu on Artificial Intelligence

Economist Daron Acemoglu, professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, discusses the history of technological revolutions in the last millennium and what they may tell us about artificial intelligence today.

The Perils of (Even Very Minor) Celebrity

David Canter considers the confusions inherent in being (even very moderately) well-known. That has implications for the considerably greater misinformation that gets linked to those who are very well-known indeed.

The Future of Business is Interdisciplinary 

By actively collaborating with industry, developing interdisciplinary programs and investing in hands-on learning opportunities, business schools can equip graduates with the specific skills and experiences that employers are seeking.

Civilisation – and Some Discontents

The TV series Civilisation shows us many beautiful images and links them with a compelling narrative. But it is a narrative of its time and place.

Video Interview: Analyzing, Understanding, and Interpreting Qualitative Research from Interviews

Qualitative data analysis is a way of creating insight and empathy. Strategies for data analysis and interpretation are tools for meaning-making and […]

Video Interview: Exploring Visual Research with Gillian Rose

Sometimes a book jumps off my shelf and comes to life. Visual research is easier said than done. It seems simple, in […]

A Behavioral Scientist’s Take on the Dangers of Self-Censorship in Science

The word censorship might bring to mind authoritarian regimes, book-banning, and restrictions on a free press, but Cory Clark, a behavioral scientist at […]

NSF Looks Headed for a Half-Billion Dollar Haircut

Funding for the U.S. National Science Foundation would fall by a half billion dollars in this fiscal year if a proposed budget the House of Representatives’ Appropriations Committee takes effect – the first cut to the agency’s budget in several years.

Digital Transformation Needs Organizational Talent and Leadership Skills to Be Successful

Who drives digital change – the people of the technology? Katharina Gilli explains how her co-authors worked to address that question.

Six Principles for Scientists Seeking Hiring, Promotion, and Tenure

The negative consequences of relying too heavily on metrics to assess research quality are well known, potentially fostering practices harmful to scientific research such as p-hacking, salami science, or selective reporting. To address this systemic problem, Florian Naudet, and collegues present six principles for assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure.

Book Review: The Oxford Handbook of Creative Industries

Candace Jones, Mark Lorenzen, Jonathan Sapsed , eds.: The Oxford Handbook of Creative Industries. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. 576 pp. $170.00, […]

Artificial Intelligence and the Social and Behavioral Sciences

Intelligence would generally be reckoned as the province of the social and behavioral sciences, so why is artificial intelligence so often relegated […]

Pandemic Nemesis: Illich reconsidered

An unexpected element of post-pandemic reflections has been the revival of interest in the work of Ivan Illich, a significant public intellectual […]

How ‘Dad Jokes’ Help Children Learn How To Handle Embarrassment

Yes, dad jokes can be fun. They play an important role in how we interact with our kids. But dad jokes may also help prepare them to handle embarrassment later in life.

Canadian Librarians Suggest Secondary Publishing Rights to Improve Public Access to Research

The Canadian Federation of Library Associations recently proposed providing secondary publishing rights to academic authors in Canada.

Webinar: How Can Public Access Advance Equity and Learning?

The U.S. National Science Foundation and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have teamed up present a 90-minute online session examining how to balance public access to federally funded research results with an equitable publishing environment.

Open Access in the Humanities and Social Sciences in Canada: A Conversation

Five organizations representing knowledge networks, research libraries, and publishing platforms joined the Federation of Humanities and Social Sciences to review the present and the future of open access — in policy and in practice – in Canada

The Long Arm of Criminality

David Canter considers the daily reminders of details of our actions that have been caused by criminality.

The Added Value of Latinx and Black Teachers

As the U.S. Congress debates the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, a new paper in Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences urges lawmakers to focus on provisions aimed at increasing the numbers of black and Latinx teachers.

A Collection: Behavioral Science Insights on Addressing COVID’s Collateral Effects

To help in decisions surrounding the effects and aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, the the journal ‘Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences’ offers this collection of articles as a free resource.

Susan Fiske Connects Policy and Research in Print

Psychologist Susan Fiske was the founding editor of the journal Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences. In trying to reach a lay audience with research findings that matter, she counsels stepping a bit outside your academic comfort zone.

Mixed Methods As A Tool To Research Self-Reported Outcomes From Diverse Treatments Among People With Multiple Sclerosis

What does heritage mean to you?

Personal Information Management Strategies in Higher Education

Working Alongside Artificial Intelligence Key Focus at Critical Thinking Bootcamp 2022

SAGE Publishing — the parent of Social Science Space – will hold its Third Annual Critical Thinking Bootcamp on August 9. Leaning more and register here

Watch the Forum: A Turning Point for International Climate Policy

On May 13, the American Academy of Political and Social Science hosted an online seminar, co-sponsored by SAGE Publishing, that featured presentations […]

Event: Living, Working, Dying: Demographic Insights into COVID-19

On Friday, April 23rd, join the Population Association of America and the Association of Population Centers for a virtual congressional briefing. The […]

The Decameron Revisited – Pandemic as Farce

After viewing the the televised version of the The Decameron, our Robert Dingwall asks what the farce set during the Black Death says about a more recent pandemic.

Public Policy

Crafting the Best DEI Policies: Include Everyone and Include Evidence

Organizations shouldn’t back away from workplace DEI efforts. Rather, the research suggests, they should double down, using a more inclusive approach that emphasizes civility and dialogue – one aimed at finding common ground.

Economist Kaye Husbands Fealing to Lead NSF’s Social Science Directorate

Kaye Husbands Fealing, an economist who has done pioneering work in the “science of broadening participation,” has been named the new leader of the U.S. National Science Foundation’s Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences.

Jane M. Simoni Named New Head of OBSSR

Clinical psychologist Jane M. Simoni has been named to head the U.S. National Institutes of Health’s Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research

Canada’s Federation For Humanities and Social Sciences Welcomes New Board Members

Annie Pilote, dean of the faculty of graduate and postdoctoral studies at the Université Laval, was named chair of the Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences at its 2023 virtual annual meeting last month. Members also elected Debra Thompson as a new director on the board.

A Milestone Dataset on the Road to Self-Driving Cars Proves Highly Popular

The idea of an autonomous vehicle – i.e., a self-driving car – isn’t particularly new. Leonardo da Vinci had some ideas he […]

Public Interest Attorney Bryan Stevenson to Receive 2024 Moynihan Prize

Public interest attorney Bryan Stevenson, the founder and executive director of the Alabama-based Equal Justice Initiative, will receive the 2024 Daniel Patrick Moynihan Prize from the American Academy of Political and Social Science.

National Academies Looks at How to Reduce Racial Inequality In Criminal Justice System

To address racial and ethnic inequalities in the U.S. criminal justice system, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine just released “Reducing Racial Inequality in Crime and Justice: Science, Practice and Policy.”

Survey Examines Global Status Of Political Science Profession

The ECPR-IPSA World of Political Science Survey 2023 assesses political science scholar’s viewpoints on the global status of the discipline and the challenges it faces, specifically targeting the phenomena of cancel culture, self-censorship and threats to academic freedom of expression.

Report: Latest Academic Freedom Index Sees Global Declines

The latest update of the global Academic Freedom Index finds improvements in only five countries

Analyzing the Impact: Social Media and Mental Health 

The social and behavioral sciences supply evidence-based research that enables us to make sense of the shifting online landscape pertaining to mental health. We’ll explore three freely accessible articles (listed below) that give us a fuller picture on how TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, and online forums affect mental health. 

The Risks Of Using Research-Based Evidence In Policymaking

With research-based evidence increasingly being seen in policy, we should acknowledge that there are risks that the research or ‘evidence’ used isn’t suitable or can be accidentally misused for a variety of reasons. 

Surveys Provide Insight Into Three Factors That Encourage Open Data and Science

Over a 10-year period Carol Tenopir of DataONE and her team conducted a global survey of scientists, managers and government workers involved in broad environmental science activities about their willingness to share data and their opinion of the resources available to do so (Tenopir et al., 2011, 2015, 2018, 2020). Comparing the responses over that time shows a general increase in the willingness to share data (and thus engage in Open Science).

Megan Stevenson on Why Interventions in the Criminal Justice System Don’t Work

Megan Stevenson’s work finds little success in applying reforms derived from certain types of social science research on criminal justice.

How Social Science Can Hurt Those It Loves

David Canter rues the way psychologists and other social scientists too often emasculate important questions by forcing them into the straitjacket of limited scientific methods.

Maintaining Anonymity In Double-Blind Peer Review During The Age of Artificial Intelligence

The double-blind review process, adopted by many publishers and funding agencies, plays a vital role in maintaining fairness and unbiasedness by concealing the identities of authors and reviewers. However, in the era of artificial intelligence (AI) and big data, a pressing question arises: can an author’s identity be deduced even from an anonymized paper (in cases where the authors do not advertise their submitted article on social media)?

Hype Terms In Research: Words Exaggerating Results Undermine Findings

The claim that academics hype their research is not news. The use of subjective or emotive words that glamorize, publicize, embellish or exaggerate results and promote the merits of studies has been noted for some time and has drawn criticism from researchers themselves. Some argue hyping practices have reached a level where objectivity has been replaced by sensationalism and manufactured excitement. By exaggerating the importance of findings, writers are seen to undermine the impartiality of science, fuel skepticism and alienate readers.

Developing AFIRE – Platform Connects Research Funders with Innovative Experiments

The Accelerator For Innovation and Research Funding Experimentation (AFIRE) is a new tool dedicated to boosting and revitalizing the design, synthesis, and implementation of experiments through innovation and research funding.

Using Video Data Analysis in the 21st Century

In 2011, anti-government protests and uprisings erupted in Northern Africa and the Middle East in what is often called the “Arab Spring.” […]

Exploring Hybrid Ethnography with Liz Przybylski

Dr. Liz Przybylski was thinking ahead when she wrote Hybrid Ethnography: Online, Offline, and In Between. They unwittingly predicted that we would […]

Iris Berent on the Innate in Human Nature

How much of our understanding of the world comes built-in? More than you’d expect. That’s the conclusion that Iris Berent, a professor of psychology at Northeastern University and head of the Language and Mind Lab there, has come to after years of research

Responsible Management Education Week 2024: Sage Asks ‘What Does It Mean to You?’

Sage used the opportunity of Responsible Business Management week 2024 to ask its authors, editors, and contacts what responsible management education means to them.

Tejendra Pherali on Education and Conflict

Tejendra Pherali, a professor of education, conflict and peace at University College London, researches the intersection of education and conflict around the world.

Immigration Court’s Active Backlog Surpasses One Million

In the first post from a series of bulletins on public data that social and behavioral scientists might be interested in, Gary Price links to an analysis from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse.

Webinar Discusses Promoting Your Article

The next in SAGE Publishing’s How to Get Published webinar series focuses on promoting your writing after publication. The free webinar is set for November 16 at 4 p.m. BT/11 a.m. ET/8 a.m. PT.

Webinar Examines Open Access and Author Rights

The next in SAGE Publishing’s How to Get Published webinar series honors International Open Access Week (October 24-30). The free webinar is […]

Ping, Read, Reply, Repeat: Research-Based Tips About Breaking Bad Email Habits

At a time when there are so many concerns being raised about always-on work cultures and our right to disconnect, email is the bane of many of our working lives.

AI Database Created Specifically to Support Social Science Research

A new database houses more 250 different useful artificial intelligence applications that can help change the way researchers conduct social science research.

New Tool Promotes Responsible Hiring, Promotion, and Tenure in Research Institutions

Modern-day approaches to understanding the quality of research and the careers of researchers are often outdated and filled with inequalities. These approaches […]

Watch The Lecture: The ‘E’ In Science Stands For Equity

According to the National Science Foundation, the percentage of American adults with a great deal of trust in the scientific community dropped […]

Watch a Social Scientist Reflect on the Russian Invasion of Ukraine

“It’s very hard,” explains Sir Lawrence Freedman, “to motivate people when they’re going backwards.”

Dispatches from Social and Behavioral Scientists on COVID

Has the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic impacted how social and behavioral scientists view and conduct research? If so, how exactly? And what are […]

Contemporary Politics Focus of March Webinar Series

This March, the Sage Politics team launches its first Politics Webinar Week. These webinars are free to access and will be delivered by contemporary politics experts —drawn from Sage’s team of authors and editors— who range from practitioners to instructors.

New Thought Leadership Webinar Series Opens with Regional Looks at Research Impact

Research impact will be the focus of a new webinar series from Epigeum, which provides online courses for universities and colleges. The […]

• Impact metrics
• Early Career
• In Memorium
• Curated-Collection Page Links
• Science communication
• A Black History Addendum to the American Music Industry
• Addressing the United Kingdom’s Lack of Black Scholars
• Alex Edmans on Confirmation Bias 

Subscribe to our mailing list

Get the latest news from the social and behavioral science community delivered straight to your inbox.

Thanks! Please check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Albert Bandura Biography, Theories, and Impact

Categories History

Albert Bandura was an influential Canadian-American psychologist known for his social learning theory, the Bobo doll experiment, observational learning, and self-efficacy. Throughout his long career, he left an indelible mark on the field of psychology and influenced other areas such as education and psychotherapy.

In this article, learn more about Albert Bandura, including his early life, research, and impact on psychology.

Table of Contents

Albert Bandura Biography

Albert Bandura was born in Mundare, Canada, a small town in Alberta, on December 4, 1925. He was the youngest of six siblings born to his parents, who immigrated to Canada as teens, his father was from Poland, and his mother was from Ukraine. Two of his older siblings died in childhood—one due to the flu and the other in a hunting accident.

While his parents were not formally educated, they instilled in him a love for learning. He attended a tiny school with only two teachers and few educational materials. As a result, he found that he had to direct much of his own educational pursuits through his own efforts and curiosity.

It was when he started school at the University of British Columbia that he became fascinated with psychology. He had started taking electives to fill extra time, which was how he started with his first psychology course.

After completing his degree in 1949, he went to the University of Iowa for graduate school. He completed his master’s degree in 1951 and his doctorate in clinical psychology in 1952. In 1953, he began teaching at Stanford University, where he would continue to teach for the rest of his career.

Albert Bandura’s Theories

No Albert Bandura biography would be complete without taking a closer look at his influential theories. He developed a social learning theory that emphasized the importance of social learning theory as part of the learning process. During much of the first half of the 20th century, behaviorism dominated the field of psychology.

Bandura believed that conditioning processes, including association and reinforcement , were important, but they couldn’t account for all learning on their own, as behaviorists such as B. F. Skinner suggested.

Among Bandura’s most influential theories, ideas, and research include:

Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiments

These experiments involved children observing adults behaving aggressively toward a toy Bobo doll. When the children later played with the same doll, they imitated the violent actions the adults previously modeled.

Observational Learning

Observational learning describes the process of observing and imitating others as a way of learning. As Bandura’s experiments demonstrated, this can involve direct and indirect demonstrations.

Social Learning Theory

Social learning theory describes how people learn by observing and imitating others. Bandura later renamed his approach social cognitive theory to emphasize the cognitive factors, including attention and memory, that play a role in social learning.

Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy is a person’s belief in their own ability to succeed. Bandura was the first to demonstrate that a person’s self-belief influenced what people are close to doing, how they feel about what they do, and how much effort they put in.

His work on self-efficacy had notable parallels to his own life.

“Self-directedness has really served me very well throughout my whole career,” he suggested in a 2012 episode of Inside the Psychologist’s Studio .

“In a way, my psychological theory is founded on human agency, which means that people have a hand in determining the course their lives take, and in many respects, my theory is really a reflection of my life path.”

Albert Bandura’s Impact 

Bandura is widely regarded as one of the most influential psychologists of the 20th century. In a 2002 survey published in the General Review of Psychology , Bandura was named the fourth most influential psychologist of the 20th century.

The other psychologists who ranked ahead of him were Sigmund Freud, Jean Piaget, and B.F. Skinner. 

Throughout his almost 60-year career, Bandura wrote hundreds of scientific papers, and several books, and influenced thousands of students.

His many awards and honors included:

• The Outstanding Lifetime Contribution to Psychology Award from the American Psychological Association
• The James McKeen Cattell Award from the American Psychological Society 
• The Gold Medal Award for Distinguished Lifetime Contribution to Psychological Science from the American Psychological Foundation

He was also made an Officer of the Order of Canada in 2014. In 2016, President Barack Obama presented Bandura with the National Medal of Science.

Bandura died on July 26, 2021, at the age of 95. 

Haggbloom SJ. The 100 Most Eminent Psychologists of the Twentieth Century . PsycEXTRA Dataset. 2001. doi:10.1037/e413802005-787

Maccormick HA. Stanford psychology professor Albert Bandura has died . Published July 30, 2021.

Did the Bobo Doll Studies Teach Us About Aggression?

We should stop telling students these studies are aggression studies at all..

Posted March 21, 2020 | Reviewed by Ekua Hagan

• How Can I Manage My Anger?
• Take our Anger Management Test
• Find a therapist to heal from anger

Among the classic tales we tell psychology students every semester is that of the fabled Bobo doll. In the typical story, young children are brought to a psychology laboratory. There, they watch adult actors either beating a Bobo doll (a balloon toy with a weighted bottom that rebounds when hit like a punching bag) or playing calmly and peacefully. Those kids that watch the adult attack the Bobo doll are more likely to swat the Bobo doll themselves when given the chance. Thus, kids learn to be aggressive by watching adult models. And this applies to video games and movies and everything else. At least that’s the story we tell students. But what if it’s all wrong?

Classic psychology studies have taken a beating in recent years. The Stanford Prison experiment is all but dead , due to accusations researchers coached participants on how to behave. The famous Milgram electroshock studies of obedience have come under criticism for validity problems , mainly that findings were driven primarily by participants who knew the experiment was fake . And a study I personally loved, the Rosenhan study of psychiatric hospitals that wouldn’t let students who faked a mental illness go once they returned to normal behavior, has been accused of basically being fraudulent .

Nobody’s accusing Bandura of fraud by any means. But these origin stories of modern psychology generally aren’t faring well, so I’m less willing to take any of them at face value. And they are often taught to students as powerful exemplars of psychology’s wonderfulness. Often, students aren’t told of these studies’ major limitations or controversies over their validity. That’s marketing , not education .

With that in mind, I propose this controversial observation: The Bobo doll studies aren’t aggression studies at all, and because of this, they likely impeded rather than informed our knowledge of aggression.

The methods of the Bobo doll studies have actually been criticized for decades. Indeed, as one 1996 evaluation put it, “The Bobo modeling paradigm may not examine aggression at all, rather, imitative behavior of ‘rough and tumble play’ in which there is no intent to harm.” They are absolutely right, and this is something we need to teach students. In fact, even this synopsis may be generous.

The Bobo doll studies were useful as a scientific demonstration of imitative learning. Granted, most people in the general public probably were aware kids imitated, but psychology at the time was mired in Operant Conditioning Theory which required direct rewards and punishments to learn. Operant conditioning happens, of course (just as classical conditioning , the pairing of two stimuli together, also happens) but it doesn’t explain all or perhaps even most human learning. The Bobo doll studies showed that kids can learn through imitation without being directly reinforced.

But why did they learn and what did they learn, exactly? The Bobo doll studies were often perceived as demonstrating that aggression was learned and that this could possibly apply to things like movie violence and violent crime . It turns out this was a terrible wrong turn for psychology and the idea that movie or video game violence contributes to real-world aggression is now largely in decline , probably part of psychology’s replication crisis . How did the Bobo doll studies result in such a gross misunderstanding of aggression?

Well, the Bobo doll studies aren’t studies of aggression at all. They’re simply studies on how kids follow directions. Basically, kids were brought into the laboratory and forced to watch adults play. Given no other instructions, the kids probably just thought that whatever the adults did were instructions for what they should do next. In other words, they weren’t motivated to be aggressive, they were just doing whatever they thought would make the adults happy.

The Bobo doll studies are a bit weird in some other aspects. First, often omitted from the story, the kids were purposefully frustrated at one point by being shown a bunch of toys they weren’t allowed to play with. Why would this even be necessary if imitation is so automatic? A follow-up 1963 study showed that kids only imitated aggression when the adult actor was rewarded and were less likely to behave aggressively when the model was punished even when the model was punished with aggressive behavior himself! So even young kids don’t just imitate aggressive behavior but understand the context in which it occurs.

The other obvious problem with the Bobo doll studies is the Bobo doll itself. It’s a toy that is entirely intended to be hit. Hitting a Bobo doll tells us nothing about physical aggression toward other people in the real world. The sample sizes of the studies were also pretty small, so we’ve banked a huge amount of our understanding of aggression on some fairly small and obviously flawed studies.

Given the spectacular flame-out of other “classic” psychology studies, I’d be curious to see the raw data and notes from the Bandura studies. I actually emailed Bandura and his personal assistant several times inquiring if such data existed. Unfortunately, I did not receive a reply. Granted, that data would be 60 years old at this point, so it wouldn’t be surprising if it’s just gone after all this time. But, to be frank, I’m no longer confident of the integrity of these old studies given the “wild west” standards of psychology in which they were developed (and which too often remains true to this day).

None of this is to say that imitative learning plays no role in aggression. But it’s probably far less than we thought, mainly due to these flawed Bobo doll studies. Behavioral genetics studies of aggression suggest that “shared” environmental factors, which would be a prime grounds for imitative learning, tend to have very weak value in predicting aggression. Causes of aggressive behavior are complex, including genetic, mental health , stress , and other social inputs. But it appears that, in large part because of the bobo doll studies, psychology put too much emphasis on imitative learning, leading to entirely wrong paths such as beliefs in media violence effects.

So why do we keep teaching students about such a flawed study, particularly in a way that appears to reify it as some kind of sacrosanct holy writ? Here again, the reasons are myriad. Probably, it’s just a great story, like the many rubbish but cool stories we tell students. These misleading fantasy tales include the parable of the witnesses who didn’t intervene in the murder of Kitty Genovese (a story largely made up ), or that Phineas Gage’s personality changed dramatically after a metal rod pierced his skull (Gage’s personality changes have been at least somewhat exaggerated ). In a sense, we use stories like the Bobo doll experiment to show students how “cool” psychology can be. Unfortunately, in our efforts to market our field, sometimes truth and critical thinking get lost along the way.

It’s probably time to retire the Bobo doll studies as an exemplar of psychological research. At best, they show that kids look to adults for instructions, something people largely already knew. At worst, the grossly misinformed us about how aggression develops. And we should be honest with students about that.

Christopher J. Ferguson, Ph.D. , is a Professor of Psychology at Stetson University.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

It’s increasingly common for someone to be diagnosed with a condition such as ADHD or autism as an adult. A diagnosis often brings relief, but it can also come with as many questions as answers.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience