ALBERT BANDURA’S BOBO DOLL EXPERIMENT

*INTRODUCTION

The Bobo doll experiment was conducted by Bandura, Ross and Ross (1963) focusing on
vicarious reinforcement and imitative learning within children. The researchers hypothesised that
children who witness a model’s behaviour will be influenced on their own behaviour depending
on the consequences of the model. Vicarious reinforcement relates to individuals inferring how
the model behaviour can impact by oneself when watching and interpreting the consequences
(either rewarded or punished) experienced by the model (Fox & Bailenson, 2009).

Roberts (2010) defines imitative learning as the act of observing behaviours and reproducing
them within experiences, where the individual concentrates on and engages in the behaviour
demonstrated by the model. In contrast, Hoover and Giambatiasta (2012) posits that an
individual or group does not need to be directly experiencing the behaviour shown by the model
to be able to have the skills to reproduce it.

In regard to Bandura's experiment, children determine whether they want to replicate a model's
behaviour by evaluating the consequences of the model’s behaviour (Robert, 2010). The study
supported Hoover and Giambatista's idea since children did not need to experience it to be able
to reproduce it.

The independent variable, also known as the experimental group, is the consequences of their
behaviour. The dependent variable in this experiment is whether the children imitate the model
based on the vicarious reinforcements that the model receives.

This experiment also has two control groups. Control groups are the participants who are not
manipulated by any variables and therefore used as a comparison to the experimental group.

The experiment comprised of four groups: Aggressive Model Reward, Aggressive Model
Punished, Nonaggressive Model and a Control group with no model (refer to table 1 on method
tab).

*METHOD
Participants were 40 girls and 40 boys (aged 38-68 months) who were randomly assigned to an
experimental group or control group. Participants were either brought into a examination room to
watch a video of a model's behaviour or engage in free play whereby the video was not made
available.
Table 1.

Explanation of the experimental and control groups in the Bandura experiment

4 GROUPS Explanation
1. Aggressive Model Rewarded watching filmed In this group, children watched a video of Rocky (a
performance on TV model) encountering Johnny (another model) playing
with toys that Rocky wanted to play with. Johnny
(Experimental Group) refuses to allow Rocky to play with his toys and
consequently, Rocky exhibits the following behaviours:

 hitting Johnny with a rubber ball and striking

him various times with baton
 kicking the Bobo Doll around the room
 Shooting Johnny’s car and farm animals

Johnny tries to take back his toys but becomes

overpowered by Rocky. The scene ends with Rocky
obtaining the toys he initially wanted with Johnny
feeling defeated.

2. Aggressive Model Rewarded Children in this condition watched the same video as
the first group; however the sequence was rearranged.

The aggressive behaviour was reversed, this time

(Experimental Group) showing Rocky being punished by Johnny as he by
spanks and thrashes him.

In the end, Rocky is the one sitting in the corner

cowering. Johnny is now victorious.
3. Children in Non Aggressive Model Condition Children watched Rocky and Johnny’s vigorous play,
but it was not aggressive.

The activities that the models did were:

(First Control Group)
 Throwing the ball to each other by bouncing it
off the wall
 Dancing with the plastic doll
 Twirling and rolling with baton and hoola hoop.

The purpose of this group was to determine whether

children would be influence by their model's behaviours
without any consequences present.
4. Second Control group with no model These children had no model to watch, and relied on
their instincts to interact with the particular toys within
( Second Control Group) the room.

The children were placed in a test room that had a one way mirror for judges to observe the
children's behaviour for 20 minutes. The session was observed by two raters, one who rated all
the children and another who only observed 11 children's responses independently. Because of
the two raters, the interscorer reliabilities were high resulting in a product moment coefficient
0.90.

The experimenter was present in the corner of the test room, occupied with paper work in order
to prevent interactions between themselves and child. Their presence was needed to reduce
anxiety levels in children who at times, felt emotionally distressed when alone.

Children from all groups had access to the same toys seen in the television program such as: a
baton, hoola hoop, 5 ft. Bobo doll, three balls, lasso, dart guns, cars, and plastic farm
animals. However, a number of novel toys were provided including: a black board, doll
collection, and building blocks that promoted nonaggressive play.

Figure 2
*RESULTS

 Children were more inclined to reproduce the behaviour shown by the model if the model
was rewarded, compared to children who saw the model being punished for producing
that same behaviour.
 Boys restrained aggressive behaviour after seeing an aggressive model punished or had
not experienced aggression. However, the boys who watched the model being rewarded
for aggressive acts or those with high expressive models had increased aggressive acts, as
both responses such as throwing the ball (model expressive) or throwing to rival could be
considered aggressive (model reward).
 Children in the expressive model group elicited nonaggressive behaviours while playing
with toys deemed aggressive.

*DISCUSSION

 The result in the study supports the hypothesis that imitation is dependent on the
vicarious reinforcements of the model.
 Children who watched a model being rewarded for aggressive behaviour showed more
initiative to imitate such behaviours, compared to children in the aggressive punished
group who saw the model being punished for the same behaviour.
 Children in the Aggressive Model Reward group considered Rocky’s behaviour towards
Johnny as “rough”, “ bossy”, and “mean”, but identified how Rocky was able to gain
control of Johnny and take away his possessions. They criticised Johnny for being
“selfish”, “mean”, and “sulky” because he could not hold onto his toys and did not share
with Rocky.
 In the Aggressive Model Punished group, it was shown that criticism for Johnny was
absent as Rocky remained “a bad boy”. Perhaps the idea of Rocky being naughty was due
to the fact that he was inconsiderate towards Johnny therefore less favourable despite his
triumph. Even though the children may dislike the behaviour produced by the aggressive
model, the rewards can outweigh this causing them to reproduce the act even if they do
not think it is morally right.
 In terms of Bandura's Bobo study, children in the study that were witnessing a model's
behaviour shall review their skills and capabilities to determine whether the imitation is
possible, this is known as the theory of self efficacy. The theory of self efficacy was
recognised as a motivational factor that allowed individuals to perform the observed acts.
Chan and Lam (2008) additionally, based their study on this theory, where they believe
children who perceived themselves as high self efficacy are more likely capable of
repeating the behaviour, therefore boosting their confidence and persistence levels so that
they were able to perform the specific act shown and vice versa. Children can decide
whether or not to imitate the model depending on their assessment of their skills , not just
the vicarious reinforcements provided