Talk:Bobo doll experiment

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 April 2020 and 20 July 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Brando009.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 September 2019 and 18 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Toridel.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

1963 results
Is it normal that the 41963 results are currently (2010-09-26) exactly the same as the 1961 result, precise to a tenth of a unit? It looks like someone copypasted them instead of putting in actual results... Medinoc (talk) 09:22, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Mathematics??
In the "Method" section it says that Bandura used 33 boys and 33 girls, but it also says he divided them into three groups of 24. Obviously, 66 and 72 are not the same number; which one is wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.223.236.4 (talk) 01:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

apparently resolved? DMacks (talk) 20:13, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Epsy Group
Hi guys, I think this is the page we are supposed to be posting on, let me know if anyone sees this!Amyfonicello (talk) 15:01, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Perfect I see your post! I'm reading through this Wiki Page and think it would help to go into more detail about the social learning theory and how this experiment really supports that theory. Everyone let me know your thoughts!Kathrynhlywa (talk) 17:08, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Katie I think that's a really good place to start! I'll start looking at other sources to find content to add to this page Amyfonicello (talk) 21:21, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Aside from talking about social learning theory, we can also go more in depth about media effects and the role on children. Kathrynhlywa (talk) 14:22, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi guys! I apologize for not responding to you sooner, it took me a while to figure out how to use the talk page. I think you both proposed great ideas for our wiki page. I'd be happy to find some information on the role of media and how it affects children.Peckhoff (talk) 15:57, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure if that's too off topic/ far fetched for this Wiki page, otherwise we can stay a little more on topic and say how observational learning can negatively/positively affect children?Kathrynhlywa (talk) 13:53, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Hey guys! I just figured out how to use this talk page, sorry it took so long I was pretty confused!! I think these are some really good ideas and gives us an opportunity to edit and add our own person thoughts to this page. I will definitely start looking into research on this and I will let you know what I find!Kellybyrouty (talk) 15:17, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Hey guys! I finally found this. I've been writing in a talk page with myself I'm pretty sure! I think you all have good ideas. I think that we should start making revisions to the wiki page. I have some sources and things that I can add. Kennedyshook (talk) 16:37, 8 December 2017 (UTC)Kennedy Shook

I think we all have done a good amount of research. I will create a google doc to communicate and start writing our reflection in there. Kennedyshook (talk) 17:38, 10 December 2017 (UTC)Kennedy Shook

Our group created a section on the General Aggression Model and Cultivation theory and how these two influence media effects on children as well as the Bobo doll experiment. Kathrynhlywa (talk) 23:35, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Reinforcement?
Hi,

I'm a college student and I've been reading about this experiment in my psychology textbook's section on observational learning. My class' textbook is, Psychology:The Brain, The Person, The World. 2nd ed.

Observational learning is defined as "learning that occurs through watching others, NOT through reinforcement." (page 246) This seems to contradict what this wikipedia entry has to say, "One of the experiment's conclusions was that people can learn through vicarious reinforcement." I've also taken a quick glance at the external link that is provided at the bottom of this article, and I cannot find any reference to reinforcement or punishment that would warrant the conclusions that have been drawn in this wikipedia article.

I'm not a wikipedia member yet. But this article is fairly small and seems to need a bit of a cleanup. I may join wikipedia and make correcting this article my first project.

- signed, interested wikipedia reader


 * Nothing to do with this article, but I think it's funny that you wrote a letter to us Wiki users... :P Juru (talk) 02:14, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, welcome here. Please make any changes you see fit: the article does need cleanup and expansion from someone who knows about the subject. Just edit away, explaining any major changes here, and you'll be fine. Graham/pianoman87 talk 10:22, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I learned in psychology class that punishment was also a factor in the experiment. Some of the adults who acted aggressively were either punished or not punished and the kids were more likely to imitate the actions of the aggressive adults who weren't punished than the ones who were. Is this one of the four factors left out by the article? Because if it isn't addressed, than it's important that this element is included.
 * Also, the study concluded that kids are likely to imitate what they see in the media. But they also said that showing the kids a video of adults being violent had less of an effect on them than in person. Isn't that a bit contradictory? Wouldn't that mean that kids are more likely to imitate the actions of a violent parent than a violent person they saw on TV? ForestAngel 20:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

major edit
Hi all,

I am Sunil Shrestha from nepal and i am a person formaly known in this thread as "interested wikipedia reader". I have made some rather substancial edits to this article. My edits include: removiing terms such as reinforcement, concentrating more on the original 1961 experiement, and to a small explaining what a Bobo doll is.

As this is my first edit on Wikipedia, I welcome any feedback that the rest of you have to offer. Regards Ycaps123 23:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the edits. Keep them up! I've just done some slight grammar tweaks. Graham/pianoman87 talk 04:08, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all of the positive encouragement! On e quick question... was it your intention to have a link to the 1961 study in both the references section and the external links section?  If not then I'll remove the duplicate it when I add some final touches to the article next week.  Thanks again. :~) Ycaps123 04:55, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * No it wasn't, I didn't notice it. Thanks, I'll remove the duplicate in the external links section. Graham/pianoman87 talk 06:34, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sunil,

As it happens it isn't necessarily that important to the argument - not to the extent that I will undo all your work! - but reinforcement is present in the experiment. The type of learning that the children experience is often called vicarious learning or vicarious reinforcement. The children learn the appropriate behaviour because of the positive reinforcement/positive punishment that the adults hitting the doll receive. The children are therefore positively reinforced only by observation rather than being directly reinforced. It is for these reasons that the experiment is really seen as a brdige between the cognitive and behaviourist paradigms Kiwifruitrulz (talk) 13:09, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, just to confirm that applies more readily to the follow-up study than the original, although Bandura's explanation of gender differences also has behaviourist overtones. Kiwifruitrulz (talk) 13:13, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

additional trivia and bibliography
I just added some additional info about the 1963 experiment's conclusions. I also added page numbers to the Kosslyn entry in the bibliography. In addition, I left the behaviour edit despite my preference for the americanized spelling (behavior). Ycaps123 21:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, I've changed that heading title to "The 1963 experiment", as that is what it contains, and a trivia section usually implies *extremely* trivial details in wikipedia like "the standard deviation of the weights of the children was 4.0 kg". A bit exaggerated but you get my point. I've removed the criticisms section, as it's quite shallow and doesn't give much information. Taking the Manual of Style literally, American spellings should be used, because they were used by the first major contributor to the article. However, Albert Bandura was Canadian, and in Canadian English, the spelling of "behaviour would still be used. But I don't see the experiment as having strong ties to Canada, as it was conducted in Stanford University. I don't personally care what spelling is used, though. Graham/pianoman87 talk 12:36, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

wikify
I've added this tag. Mainly, the lack of blue in the body of the article - we need some links. John (Jwy) 02:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Sounds good. Get to it! Lol. Your one true god is David P. A. Hunter, esq. III Talk to me! 05:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Criticism?
I miss some criticism on this experiment to balance out the bias. I know there is a lot of it, but I have only few sources on this matter and would like to see a more substantial text than the one I can provide.

SOMEONE PLEASE POST A VIDEO OF THE EXPERIMENT ON THIS PAGE! I NEED ONE!

apparently resolved? DMacks (talk) 20:13, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Gutted content
It seems that this article has significantly deteriorated since this version. Should we just restore that version? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Developmental psychology class
Hi, I will be updating this article for my developmental psychology class-- stay tuned! Amusico2 (talk) 01:04, 16 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, I would like to update the article, too. Maybe we can take different parts? That makes it easier and we don´t edit the same things.. Mara99 (talk)
 * Welcome, both of you!  Lova Falk     talk   13:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mara, yes I think we can work together and edit different parts. Amusico2 (talk) 22:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  22:39, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest that you discuss your edits here because you need to involve all editors here for consensus consensus. That is part of how our collaboration works.

Oh yes! Of course, sorry, just getting the hang of this! Thanks BereanAmusico2 (talk) 01:07, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey, I would like these changes in the next time. 1.	Add new reference. Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of a models´ reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 1.No.6, 589-595.

2.	Add a paragraph about the experiments in 1963. 3.	Change in the introduction for the article. Is that okay? Thanks :) Mara99 (talk) 00:37, 27 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Mara, I am ok with your #1 but just was wondering if we could compromise on your #2, The article I am hoping to use is about the film-mediated aggression, which is the experiment in 1963, which means I'll have to write a bit about it,  I had trouble finding an article, so I'd really like to use this one.
 * I was also wondering exactly what you meant for your #3- are thinking of improving the intro? If so, I'm totally fine with that! It needs some work!


 * I would like to 1) Add new reference ; Bandura, A. Ross, D. Ross, S. (1963). Imitation of Film-Mediated Aggressive Models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol.66, No.1,3-11,
 * 2) I would also like to add some media to the article, whether the video of the experiment or some pictures
 * 3) I would also like to add more specific details into the methods sections (1961), like how many children they used and how the groups were organized...
 * Does that sound alright with you?
 * Thanks! Amusico2 (talk) 19:04, 28 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, I think it is okay if both of us write about the experiments in 1963 because they are different experiments with different results in that year. 3 means that I would like to improve the intro on the top of the page.


 * I already wrote something but I don´t like it, yet. I will post it here than you can see if it is okay and we write about different things. Is that okay? Thanks!!! Mara99 (talk) 18:51, 30 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mara99 (talk • contribs) 18:46, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Here it is but I will wait to post it on the regular side till we talked about it in class. Mara99 (talk) 18:51, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Great to see you working together. Can't wait to see how the article improves. Paul Conway, Instructor, Introduction to Child Development, Fall 2012, King's University College Canada 01:36, 5 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pauljosephconway (talk • contribs)

Experiment in 1963
Albrecht Bandura wanted to test in the if there are differences in learning or just in performing when children see a model being rewarded/punished or experienced no consequences for a  special behavior. The procedure of the experiment was almost the same like in 1961. Children watched a film-a mediated model punched and screamed aggressively at a Bobo doll. Depending on the condition the film ended with a scene in which the model was rewarded with candies or punished with the warning “Don´t do it again”. In the neutral condition the film ended right after the punching scene. Then the children stayed in a room with many toys and a bobo doll. The experimenter found out that the children showed less often the same behavior like the model when they have seen the punching end than in the other conditions. Boys showed more imitative aggression than girls. That is the measure of the performance and it supports the results of the experiments in 1961. After that, the experimenter asks the children to show what they have seen in the film. (In an earlier experiment with the same procedure the children were asked to describe the behavior. But imitation could/should be a better index for learning) He didn´t find differences in children´s demonstrating behavior depending on the watched movie. The experiment shows that rewards or punishment don´t influence the learning or remembering process, it just influences if the behavior is performed or not. The differences between girls and boys imitating behavior got smaller. That is a hint that girls inhibit the punished behavior more than boys do.

Introduction
The Bobo doll experiment was the name of experiments conducted by Albert Bandura in 1961 and 1963 studying children´s behavior after watching a model punching a bobo doll and getting rewarded, punished or no consequences for it. The experiment is the empirical demonstration of Banduras social learning theory. It shows that people not only learn by being rewarded or punished itself (Behaviorism), they can learn from watching somebody being rewarded or punished, too (observational learning). The experiments are important because they sparked many more studies on the effects of observational learning and they have practical implication e.g. how children can be influenced watching violent media.


 * Hi Mara, looks good! You were right, the experiments are different, so they will both be great additions to this article. Looks like we are all set! Amusico2 (talk) 01:04, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, that is perfect! Thanks you :) Mara99 (talk) 02:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mara, here is my piece on the other experiment in 1963!

Experiment in 1963, Are children influenced by film-mediated aggressive models?

 * For many years media violence has been a hot topic concerning the influence over children and their aggressive behavior. In one study, in 1963, Bandura, using children between the ages 3 and 6, tested the extent to which film-mediated aggressive models influenced imitative behavior.  48 girls and 48 boys were divided into 3 experimental groups and 1 control group. Group 1, watched a live model aggress the bobo doll.  Group 2, watched a film version of the human model aggressing the bobo doll and group 3 watched a cartoon version of a cat aggress the bobo doll.  Each child watched the aggressive acts individually. Following the exposure to the models all fours groups of children were then individually placed in a room with an experimenter where they were exposed to mildly frustrating situation to elicit aggression. Next the children were allowed to play freely in an adjoining room, which was full of toys, including the bobo doll and the “weapons” that were used by the models. The researchers observed the children and noted any interaction with the bobo doll.  Results showed that the children who had been exposed to the aggressive behavior, whether real-life, on film or cartoon, exhibited nearly twice as much aggressive behavior than the control group. It was also found that boys exhibited more total aggression than girls. The results of this experiment shed light on how influential media can be on children and their behavior.  Amusico2 (talk) 16:56, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Reference:
Hey, that looks good. I just made my changes on the article and I hope that is okay for you. If you have any other idea or something, just let me know! I am happy about critics :) Thanks Mara99 (talk) 00:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I tried to get the rights to use the actually pictures of the bobo doll experiment but have not heard back yet from their source. Therefore I am going to modify my second improvement; I am going to add a little section to the article explaining what a bobo doll is. I have also found a picture/diagram that I will add to this section.  I have also gone through the Methods section and corrected the grammar and expanded upon it. Amusico2 (talk) 17:42, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey again, I have question: Can I post a link to a youtube or is it against the wikipedia rules? I think that video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06fTnszze_Q&feature=fvwrel explains the methods really well and would help to improve the article. Thanks for your help Mara99 (talk) 22:50, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Mara99, I checked for you at WP:YOUTUBE and it said: "There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided). Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. Links to online videos should also identify additional software necessary for readers to view the content." I hope this helps?  Lova Falk     talk   08:19, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

edit to the description of the experiment
I worked on the description of the experiment and made it a little less word-y. I also was able to read it aloud and edit it so the sentences flow better. -Toridel (talk) 17:10, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Synthesis Section
Hello All. Although the information included in the synthesis seems like an accurate account, it is unclear where the information in this synthesis is being derived from. Does anyone have a source that they can add to this section to further support the information presented? --Dustin Dyke (talk) 21:53, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I agree that this section needed a source. I added a reference to this section and revised a sentence. Shawna Echols (talk) 01:27, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Theories of Movie Violence Effects
Hi folks. The section on theories is not very good. For one thing it appears to repeat some stuff about the 1963 experiment already covered. Also a lot of it seems to be opinion and primary research. The theories covered, the GAM and Cultivation are both very controversial. And there are many nuances in movie violence research including studies that don't find effects. I could attempt some changes, but figured I'd tag and discuss first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:9001:D06:AF00:F092:1AAA:6B62:61D (talk) 14:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Removed as WP:SYNTH. None of the sources dscussed the bobo doll experiment in detail. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 12:57, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Bandura's 1963 and 1965 Studies
The article incorrectly fuses the 1963 and 1965 studies into one, saying Bandura tested the effects of watching violence modeled by a filmed model that was later punished or rewarded by the end of the film. Bandura's 1963 study examined the effects of viewing aggressive behavior portrayed by a filmed model, and his 1965 study examined the effects of watching a live model display aggressive behavior followed by a reinforcement or punishment. I plan on dissecting the information in the 1963 study section, separating out certain parts into a 1965 study section, and filling the gaps where needed. Brando009 (talk) 03:32, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

BPS code of ethics
I noticed in this edit that you mentioned you couldn't find a copy of the BPS code of research ethics. Here it is from internet archive:. I think it's okay for organisations from other countries to posthumously criticise experiments under their own code of ethics, so long as the criticism itself is substantive and notable. I will agree though that the uncited claim of violating BPS code of research ethics seemed to be original research. In general it seems most of the ethical analyses seem to be essays or blog posts which is not great for supporting the article.

I'll also mention I'm planning to make some more substantial edits to this article sometime soon. Darcyisverycute (talk) 02:02, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at King's University College supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2012 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 15:57, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: PSYC 115 General Psychology
— Assignment last updated by Treeluver20 (talk) 18:28, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Add a new sentence for the social learning theory
Adding more information in the Social Learning Theory section.

We added new sentences: "The Bobo doll experiment enhanced people's understanding of the factors and issues that contributes to aggression" and "The Bobo doll experiment provides a template for understanding various aspects of human behavioral development." Then we provided citations for the two sentences added. We also added on to a sentence "...they drive individuals to shape their own behavior after the actions of models."

We are wondering if the edit is relevant. We are having difficulty citing, could somebody help out.

These are the references we will add:

Edinyang, S. D. (2016).

Graham et al

--Anonymous viki (talk) 19:53, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Mass Media and Society
— Assignment last updated by Aivenrd (talk) 20:17, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

The "Issue" with the Article
I do not believe that using a primary source for this wiki page is necessarily wrong as the page specifically discusses the process of this singular study. This isn't to say that there shouldn't be secondary sources. There should be greater discussion of secondary sources discussing the importance of the research and what it could mean for future research and how the results play a role in social learning theory. SV066 (talk) 05:02, 10 February 2024 (UTC) SV066 (talk) 05:01, 10 February 2024 (UTC) SV066 (talk) 05:01, 10 February 2024 (UTC)