wow, this is a great presentation, ive been thinking about this a lot actually. for years ive noticed that behavioral and psychological modelling are heavily used in the media. the news is a great example of this.
With the bo bo doll theory, I wonder was there a control group of children that did not see the video of the woman hitting the doll. How did they interact with the doll in comparison to the youth that saw the video?
Yes, there were three groups of children to be compared for the study. One with a non aggressive model, second with an aggressive model and third one was the control group with no model.
when one feels (awkward) or (shy) interacting, I think its the fear of saying something other people present there won't like, well when one sees people interacting, being loved , etc , you might wanna feel that free to interact. its the same as this theory's "positive modelling" part. when one's afraid to interact they feel like there should be a book of rules to what to say and what not, like now you can obviously correct me if im wrong but u may feel a little pulled back :) thank you for reading
This video is well made, but this theory, like most other theories from purely philosophical psychology, is just a load of nonsense that doesn't really say anything meaningful. It's seems to me that almost all psychologists are fools who were to stupid to become psychiatrists so instead they try to explain the human mind and behaviour using a bunch of pseudoscientific ideas that are too vague to mean anything and come from metaphysics.
This shows what a bigger fool you are. These, as you say, "meaningless, " and "pseudoscientific ideas" are actually the what makes psychiatrist and psychologists do their jobs. Without these, then treatment would be hard cause 1. They do not understand the cause of behavior, 2. They do not know how their treatment would influence behavior, and 3. They do not know why is that their behavior. Open a book once in your life. All of these theories are actually easier to understand cause, one way or another, you can apply it to your own life.
@@franceslilithgrey993 I did open many books, and unlike you I've read books that are based on the scientific method and that describe empirically observable facts. Facts such as that Vitamin D insufficiency causes Schizophrenia or that Diazepam affects the GABA receptors in the brain in a way that calms people and relaxes muscles, or that mood stabilizers slow down the passage of impulses in the brain which prevents mood swings and epilepsy. These are all real empirical facts that can be exactly measured, whereas these pseudoscientific claims of Albert Bandura, Sigmund Freud and other frauds that you so dogmatically defend are just metaphysical nonsense that are too vague to mean anything. And most psychiatrists do not even know who Albert Bandura is.
@@MultiBOZA how then can you say you opened a lot of books when you do not even know what these theories are used for? While most people would say science is based on emperical observable facts, all sciences first start as theories and not many even know and understand what these are. Furthermore, the reason why they are, as you say vague, is because, first of all, humans are complex beings. These psychological theories are used to explain personality in a way that people could understand. Additionally, you can not just say that mental illnesses all stem from one reason, or that medicine works for everyone. Also, are you a psychiatrist or know psychiatrists to actually say they do not know of Bandura?
Do you even know how long it takes for theories to become factual? Like some takes decades. These psychological theories just started to be published in 1950-1960s, and it would be a theory for decades as humans are ever evolving beings.
@@franceslilithgrey993 Well, 5 days ago I opened a new peer-reviewed science book which said that this theory by Bandura is too vague to mean anything, and that in reality this "learning" process depicted in this video was just an irrelevant little stimulus and that in reality the violent behaviour of children is caused by a group of external and mostly internal factors. Furthermore, that book claims that Richard Trembley has a much better theory for deviant and criminal behaviour of children, and that unlike Bandura's, Trembley's theory is supported by a lot of longitudinal and statistical studies.
Healthy Flakes are my favorite breakfast cereal! I've been eating them ever since I saw that commercial starring that well known actress demonstrating her weight loss. I love her performance in movies!
![BabyChiefDoit - Wonderful Time (Official Music Video) [Shot By @Rxllo]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_Bfqt3zV2KE/mqdefault.jpg)
thanks! this helped me "refresh" for a certification exam
Thank you for this, I've been burned out from a lot of reading and this is a breath of fresh air but still learning while watching 👌😁
Great video. Thank you. This is so true looking at what’s going on in our society these days.
wow, this is a great presentation, ive been thinking about this a lot actually. for years ive noticed that behavioral and psychological modelling are heavily used in the media. the news is a great example of this.
Excellent! I've read loads of the subject, but that really sold it, thanks.
I love that many of your examples were monkey based, as I think of Bandura as the "monkey see monkey do" guy for easy recall.
Great video. Simplified Bandura.
Nicely done! Thank you.
This was a great video, thank you.
Thanks for the explanation
Thanks a lot, it is easy to understand. Need more video like this.
thank you so much, this vid has saved my life :)
This was great, thank you
I love this explanation ❤️
Really well done- thank you!
With the bo bo doll theory, I wonder was there a control group of children that did not see the video of the woman hitting the doll. How did they interact with the doll in comparison to the youth that saw the video?
Yes, there were three groups of children to be compared for the study. One with a non aggressive model, second with an aggressive model and third one was the control group with no model.
Classical conditioning, social proof
can anyone please share the original text of social cognitive theory of Albert Bandra with me?
Great video! Very informative while being short.
Thank you. very helpful
thank you!!!!!!!!
Thanks.❤
Useful, thanks👍
Great vid !! It was very helpful, keep it up :) Would you mind adding some references on descriptions ?
study.com/academy/lesson/social-cognitive-learning-theory-definition-and-examples.html
You may check this link
Thanks for this vid, can you put Indonesian subtitles please? Coz my english is just a suck
Ta potente
It's works on noveloty, not known things
Thanks a lot 😭🙏🏼
What about phobias of interaction with people?
Don't know the answer but relatable
when one feels (awkward) or (shy) interacting, I think its the fear of saying something other people present there won't like, well when one sees people interacting, being loved , etc , you might wanna feel that free to interact. its the same as this theory's "positive modelling" part. when one's afraid to interact they feel like there should be a book of rules to what to say and what not, like now you can obviously correct me if im wrong but u may feel a little pulled back :)
thank you for reading
Yes, I am afraid of snakes.😆🙈
Side note, what accent is this? It sounds like a mixture of valley girl American English and British English lmao
good
thanks a lot!
I Hateu Snakeu.
Vrinda Sugandhi jhopeee
even during studying he haunts me *sings pied piper in the background*
I hate snakeuu
Hlo mam.is it complete theory?
its just the overall intro
i Snakes
This video is well made, but this theory, like most other theories from purely philosophical psychology, is just a load of nonsense that doesn't really say anything meaningful. It's seems to me that almost all psychologists are fools who were to stupid to become psychiatrists so instead they try to explain the human mind and behaviour using a bunch of pseudoscientific ideas that are too vague to mean anything and come from metaphysics.
This shows what a bigger fool you are. These, as you say, "meaningless, " and "pseudoscientific ideas" are actually the what makes psychiatrist and psychologists do their jobs. Without these, then treatment would be hard cause 1. They do not understand the cause of behavior, 2. They do not know how their treatment would influence behavior, and 3. They do not know why is that their behavior. Open a book once in your life. All of these theories are actually easier to understand cause, one way or another, you can apply it to your own life.
@@franceslilithgrey993 I did open many books, and unlike you I've read books that are based on the scientific method and that describe empirically observable facts. Facts such as that Vitamin D insufficiency causes Schizophrenia or that Diazepam affects the GABA receptors in the brain in a way that calms people and relaxes muscles, or that mood stabilizers slow down the passage of impulses in the brain which prevents mood swings and epilepsy. These are all real empirical facts that can be exactly measured, whereas these pseudoscientific claims of Albert Bandura, Sigmund Freud and other frauds that you so dogmatically defend are just metaphysical nonsense that are too vague to mean anything. And most psychiatrists do not even know who Albert Bandura is.
@@MultiBOZA how then can you say you opened a lot of books when you do not even know what these theories are used for? While most people would say science is based on emperical observable facts, all sciences first start as theories and not many even know and understand what these are. Furthermore, the reason why they are, as you say vague, is because, first of all, humans are complex beings. These psychological theories are used to explain personality in a way that people could understand. Additionally, you can not just say that mental illnesses all stem from one reason, or that medicine works for everyone. Also, are you a psychiatrist or know psychiatrists to actually say they do not know of Bandura?
Do you even know how long it takes for theories to become factual? Like some takes decades. These psychological theories just started to be published in 1950-1960s, and it would be a theory for decades as humans are ever evolving beings.
@@franceslilithgrey993
Well, 5 days ago I opened a new peer-reviewed science book which said that this theory by Bandura is too vague to mean anything, and that in reality this "learning" process depicted in this video was just an irrelevant little stimulus and that in reality the violent behaviour of children is caused by a group of external and mostly internal factors. Furthermore, that book claims that Richard Trembley has a much better theory for deviant and criminal behaviour of children, and that unlike Bandura's, Trembley's theory is supported by a lot of longitudinal and statistical studies.
Healthy Flakes are my favorite breakfast cereal! I've been eating them ever since I saw that commercial starring that well known actress demonstrating her weight loss. I love her performance in movies!
You have said not just what my mind was thinking, but what my soul was trying to say. Thank you, Charles Miller. So spot on.
Has it improved your performance in the bedroom? Cause cocaine is a hell of a drug!