Talk:Social cognitive theory

Merged "Social cogntivism" into this page

I merged a redundant page on "Social cogntivism" into this page "Social cognitive theory." However, I cannot read Chinese, and do not know if the language link on "Social cognitivism" is still valid.

This was the link: zh:社会学习论

Social learning theory

There is another article on Social learning theory which seems to cover the same topic. Could we handle the topic in the one article? ----Action potential ^{t c} 08:54, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

"Social Cognitive Theory" ? and the idea of merging with the Social Learning article

I've been in applied psychology for a number of years, as professional psychotherapist. Today is the first time I've ever heard of "Social cognitive theory". Heretofore, the term in my mind has always been "social learning...". "Social cognitive..." makes little sense to me, although I do see the phrase in the title of two of the Bandura references used in this article. I came to Wikipedia today to look up "Social Learning Theory" and was greatly surprised to see that the title has essentially be co-opted by a criminology perspective. Yet, the bulk of the material is clearly Social Learning Theory as I learned it in grad. school and have always thought of it.

Then I'm directed to this "social cognitive theory" article - that's just not a term I've ever heard of, AND I've never heard anyone else in professional or academic psychology use that term. My first reaction upon encountering it is annoyance, and then it's confusion. I fear that I'm not alone in this reaction.

So...I really have to agree that this article needs to be merged with the "Social learning" article, and the "Social cognitive..." title simply dropped. There's a lot of overlap in the two articles. Any more ideas about this? TomCloyd (talk) 20:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm a psychology undergraduate and my textbook says "Social Cognitive Theory". It says it's been called this since around 1986 but admits that it was originally called "social learning" as you said. It also says that it was Bandura himself that renamed it in 1986, after expanding on it. Citation: p.g. 131 of "Motivation" published 2010 by Sans and Torres — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.167.167.24 (talk) 17:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

It's me again, I also have an old Gleitman "Psychology" 5th edition text book from around 1999 and it says "social learning theory" with no mention of the other name despite directly referring to Bandura. Quite the mystery!

Proposed Addition to the Overview Section

Through research I have conducted on this learning theory for a University class, I feel that it is important to reference the fact that learning can occur without a change in behavior. In Human Learning (1999) Ormrod references the fact that Behaviorists say that learning must to be represented by a permanent change in an individual's behavior. conversely, social learning theorists say that, because people can learn through observation alone, their learning may not necessarily be shown in their performance. Learning may or may not result in a behavior change. Does anyone have any thoughts on this proposal? Tschuff (talk) 04:11, 16 June 2012 (UTC)