Today in class, we watched a video clip of an experiment conducted by Albert Bandura on aggression. In the experiment, some children were shown a video of an adult hitting an inflatable doll, while others were not. Later, all of the children were placed in playrooms, each with the same kind of inflatable doll as in the video. It was found that the children who watched the video clip were more likely to hit and otherwise abuse the doll, while the others did not. They concluded that the children acted this way because they had seen the video clip right before.
While this makes perfect sense, I wonder if there were some internal factors in each of the children causing them to act the way that they did. Did some of the children who watched the video clip not abuse the doll, perhaps because of their personality dictating against it? And vice versa, did some of the children who did not watch the video still abuse the doll, against because of their inner personalities? Also, did this experiment have any effect on the children in the future, perhaps making them more aggression, acting as a kind of classical conditioning? I just wonder if there was more to the experiment than we were shown.
I think you bring up a very valid point, Emily. I believe that there are most definitely other factors that lead the children to hit the doll. I like the idea of personality that you brought up, but I'm wondering if maybe the children in the video were too young to have that strong of a personality to dictate their actions. Kids at this age are more likely to follow authority figures, but there will always be those who don't. I think another factor could be the extent of their prior exposure to violence and what kind of people (emphasis on authority figures) did or did not condone this type of behavior. There is also most definitely more to the experiment than we were shown, much like the baby Albert conditioning. I don't mean to digress from this video; I just want to compare the two experiments. They did not show us the effects of the experiment. I think that in the case of Albert, he was so young and impressionable that, yes, he was relatively easy to train into fearing rats and other furry objects. But it's likely that as he grows up he won't remember fearing rats or this experiment. The children in this video, however, will likely remember the experiment more, and, therefore, it will affect their lifestyle from then on. As I answer this, I realize that I have brought up another interesting point. I believe that baby Albert, being younger than the children in this video, may not be able to remember this experiment as a grows up, but he may still have the deep-seated fear of rats and other furry objects and not understand how or why he acquired this. Emily, or anyone else commenting, what do you think?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both of you, Emily and Ryan. While the video did posses many valid points, I do think that there were internal factors that caused some children to behave the way that they did. Children who are already aggressive who see behavior like this are more likely to respond aggressively to the doll than others. So while the video is valid, it does possess some flaws.
ReplyDelete