Vicarious Learning Term Paper

Pages: 15 (4857 words)  ·  Bibliography Sources: ≈ 22  ·  File: .docx  ·  Level: College Senior  ·  Topic: Teaching

¶ … vicarious learning amongst children within the age groups of 6-16, and see how they tend to pick up little habits or clues from children who are smarter in class and then apply it in their own study curriculum. These pupils will be divided into three groups pertaining to their age: group one will include pupils ranging from ages 6-9, group two will include pupils ranging from ages 10-12, and the last group will include pupils with ages ranging 13-16. One of the groups will be observed with prior experience of vicarious learning, namely the last group, while one will only be introduced to it for this particular research, namely the first group within the age group 6-9.

Vicarious learning can be divided into four different categories. It is important to know and recognize all of these forms as they are crucial in understanding how and why certain groups of learners react or employ certain methods over the other and what that choice suggests about them as a learner. These four forms of veracious learning procedures are categorized in the effects they have on the adapter: 1) Modeling Effect 2) Eliciting Effect 3) Dis-inhibitory Effect 4) Inhibitory Effect (Bandura, 1971).

Buy full Download Microsoft Word File paper
for $19.77
The Modeling Effect is one where the observer is almost a prototype, in practice, of what he has observed. It is mainly an act that the viewer had not held back prior to seeing his model or mentor do it but did it more regularly after seeing it being done by the model. As a result, the viewer exhibits talents or improvements that had previously not transpired. A good example could be watching the news updates at a particular time everyday, which the viewer did first as well but did more attentively and regularly after observing his model do it (Bandura, 1971).

The Eliciting Effect is a little different form the modeling effect as the viewer is not a complete carbon copy of the model but inspires to do the same as his model only in a different mass or volume. A good example of this could be stretching the example given above, the viewer might watch the news more regularly and attentively but might not do it for as long a time duration (i.e. one hour, two hours, etc.) as the model and might not prefer different news to be updated about then their model (Bandura, 1971).

Term Paper on Vicarious Learning Assignment

The Dis-inhibitory Effect is an act that was somewhat refrained in a student previously but was adopted after seeing no particular negative effect of the action from his/her model's employment. For instance, when pupils began to see that running around the halls did not really pose much threat from the teachers, everyone adopted it from time to time knowing they could not get into trouble (Bandura, 1971).

The Inhibitory Effect, as the name suggests is the exact opposite of the dis-inhibitory effect and results in the student refraining form a certain act if he sees a negative impact (in his/her own opinion) coming out of it as an outcome. For instance, a student may refrain form asking questions about certain topics after seeing a pattern emerge where the pupils who did ask questions were given assignments relating to the topic they were inquiring about to understand it better (Bandura, 1971).

Having come to terms with the four aspects of vicarious learning, we will now move on to discuss the available literature relevant to my research question. To reiterate the purpose of this thesis, it is important to note that the aim of this paper is to observe the effectiveness of vicarious learning amongst children within the age groups of 6-16, and see how they tend to pick up little habits or clues from children who are smarter in class and then apply it in their own study curriculum. As mentioned above, these pupils will be divided into three groups pertaining to their age: group one will include pupils ranging from ages 6-9, group two will include pupils ranging from ages 10-12, and the last group will include pupils with ages ranging 13-16. One of the groups will be observed with prior experience of vicarious learning, namely the last group, while one will only be introduced to it for this particular research, namely the first group within the age group 6-9.

Literature Review

Tarabulsy, Tessier, and Kappas in 1996 carried out a study that observed child behavior in an environment set up for vicarious learning. In this study they established that any and every response of an infant (or a student, in this study's case) is directly linked to the communal-emotive growth of the child. According to the conclusions they made in the study, all infants are emotionally responsive to the effect of their manners and conduct in both natural and determined environmental settings. Same may be the case with the students I will take into observation for my study; they are expected to be responsive and aware of the circumstances their actions create. Tarabulsy et al. In his study also noticed a decline in the expected reaction of the infants after the end of the vicarious learning procedure; this could also turn out to be one of the results in my study.

Previous researches have either chosen a procedure driven by cognitive sense (e.g., Gekoski & Fagen, 1984; Tarabulsy et al. 1996), while some researches have utilized the procedure employing the non-cognitive sense, or in other words behavior-analytic interpretation (e.g., Gewirtz & Palaez-Nogueras, 1991; Masia & Chase, 1997). Both of these outlooks are different in their methodology, the behavior-analytic interpretation method has fewer members in numerous investigational assemblies and aims to get a stable reading of the members' actions before any changes are made in the environmental setting to observe the reactions thereof (Deguichi, Fujita, & Sato, 1988). Conversely, the cognitive method is the experiment session, which is short or restricted within a time zone and employs a huge number of members for observation, a lot like Lewis et al. (1985) and Millar et al. (1992).

There have been some interesting updates made by McSweeney, Hinson, and Cannon (1996) related to the behavior-analytic interpretation method. They brought forth an in-between changes profile in the members/participants while undergoing vicarious learning experiment that used the behavior-analytic interpretation method. They noticed that the initial high response of vicarious learning and its impact somewhat declined with time, and highlighted that the studies that employed the behavior-analytic interpretation approach overlooked this change and considered only the visible change at the end of the phases and sessions. Groves and Thompson (1970) were the first to structure the explanation of the habituation as the computation of two procedures: sensitization and habituation. McSweeney et al. In their study experimented with the dual-procedure habituation theory by employing it to illustrate the parallels among the mathematical utilities used to explain the sample of the rise and fall in responses.

Vicarious learning has another crucial research outlook of "carry-over" or "transfer" results of previous habituation on the student response level. For case in point, Watson (1971) in his study exhibited that the previous non-contingent or behavior-analytic familiarity of the students hindered learning in the later stages for the students mainly between the ages 8-12.

Gekoski and Fagen (1984) critically examined the simplification of the "carry-over" outcomes when they noticed that "carry-over" procedures were unable to recognize and record the unconstructive adoptions after the behavior-analytic pre-experience with 6- to 9-year-olds in a "leg kick/mobile turn" contingency assignment had been carried out. They concluded that the research did not point out which assignment or growth variables were vital for attaining conclusive carry-over results.

Another important part of the research topics addressed here the element of vicarious reinforcement (or observational reinforcement). These two terms are exchangeable as they both describe processes that aren't cognitive and the concepts employed are closely related to the descriptions Bandura gave in 1971 (e.g., Tarabulsy et al., 1996; Wentworth & Haith, 1992). This element has been studied with an exclusive reference to the students aged between 4 an 11 years of age (e.g., Bandura, 1965; Bol & Steinhauer, 1990; Ollendick & Shapiro, 1984), and obliquely with reference to the studies done on the impersonation habits of infants (e.g., Barr, Dowden & Hayne, 1996).

Bandura (1965) after conducting his study suggested that he could not gather a long-term constructive consequence of vicarious reinforcement when considering the activities of the child; he came to this conclusion when he was unable to find any arithmetical dissimilarity between impersonated reactions of the two factions of nursery going children he had observed for any kind of positive reinforcement. Other studies however, have shown a constant responsive pattern especially amongst school going children in the age of 4-7; they showed a gradual or heightened increase in their reactions to the behavior of their models, and these reactions then declined noticeably later on with the passage of time (Bol & Steinhauer, 1990; Ollendick, Shapiro, & Barrett, 1982; Ollendick, Dailey, & Shapiro, 1983).

Mostly in studies that are… [END OF PREVIEW] . . . READ MORE

Two Ordering Options:

?
Which Option Should I Choose?
1.  Buy full paper (15 pages)Download Microsoft Word File

Download the perfectly formatted MS Word file!

- or -

2.  Write a NEW paper for me!✍🏻

We'll follow your exact instructions!
Chat with the writer 24/7.

Albert Bandura's Environmental Learning Theory Term Paper


Learning Theory Researchers Term Paper


Adolescent Learner Essay


Video-Based Instruction in Distance Learning Thesis


Education Theories Knowledge of Learning Styles Term Paper


View 200+ other related papers  >>

How to Cite "Vicarious Learning" Term Paper in a Bibliography:

APA Style

Vicarious Learning.  (2006, October 11).  Retrieved March 29, 2020, from https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/vicarious-learning/54220

MLA Format

"Vicarious Learning."  11 October 2006.  Web.  29 March 2020. <https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/vicarious-learning/54220>.

Chicago Style

"Vicarious Learning."  Essaytown.com.  October 11, 2006.  Accessed March 29, 2020.
https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/vicarious-learning/54220.