1

Randy Daoud

April 17th, 2018

Communication Theory

Social Cognitive Theory

Table of Contents

Social Cognitive Theory..................................................................................................................3

Social Cognitive Theory in Communication...................................................................................6

Theory Limitations........................................................................................................................10

Future Research.............................................................................................................................14

Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................17

Works Cited...................................................................................................................................19
 2

Learning and behavior change can be influenced by a number of factors, not the least of

which is observing another person engaging in a behavior that is rewarded in a way that is

meaningful to the observer. Social cognitive theory explains that individuals learn behaviors by

observing and emulating others, particularly those with whom they closely identify. Individuals

are also more likely to engage in a behavior is they perceive the rewards of doing so as

worthwhile and if they believe they have the ability to be successful at the behavior. Social

cognitive theory plays an important role in communications research, including that related to

education, social media, and marketing. This is not surprising, given the social nature of these

areas. The following discussion examines social cognitive theory in light of the communications

field. After providing background regarding the theory, an overview of current research is

presented. In addition, areas for future research and limitations of the theory in explaining

behaviors are discussed. With respect to the latter, while social cognitive theory adequately

explains much of human behavior, it should be updated to better reflect the integration of

technology in society. At the time the theory was developed, computers were scarce, the number

of different television shows on the air was limited compared with today, and Facebook was

nowhere to be found. Social cognitive theory should be updated to explain the factors that

promote engagement, modeling, and behavior change within the online environment.

Social Cognitive Theory

In contrast to the “magic bullet” effect espoused in the early 1900s, in which the mass media

simply implanted ideas and preferences into unthinking, socially isolated individuals, social

cognitive theory attempted to explain why individuals reacted to stimuli, such as mass

communication, in a particular way. Early behaviorists viewed human behavior in terms of

stimuli and responses, positing that humans learn through the process of operant conditioning.
 3

This refers to receiving either a reward or a punishment for a particular behavior. However,

while this type of learning may be effective in some cases, it does not necessarily apply to all

situations. For example, Miller noted that people do not typically learn that fire is dangerous and

painful through a system or rewards and punishments or even personal experience, but rather

may learn that lesson by observing other people have those experiences (252). Thus the idea of

social learning theory, later to be deemed social cognitive theory, was born.

This idea of observational learning is one of several key concepts in social cognitive theory.

Individuals learn by watching the behavior of others and the associated outcomes of that

behavior. These “others” may be family members or friends who are in close contact or people in

the media. Learning also occurs through modeling, or repetition of someone else’s behaviors. For

example, the foreign language teacher models how to correctly speak in another language, and

students imitate her accent. However, observation and modeling are not always enough to spark

learning, as sometimes rewards and punishments are the most effective method (Miller 253).

Reinforcement of behavior can be an effective means of achieving desired behavioral

outcomes. Reinforcement may be inhibitory, in which an individual decreases a behavior after

seeing another person punished for that same behavior, or disinhibitory, in which an individual

becomes more likely to perform a behavior due to observing another person be rewarded for that

same behavior. When an individual observes another person experiencing consequences for a

behavior, whether good or bad, that individual expects the same outcome if he then performs the

behavior. These expectations are associated with a particular value that is unique to the

individual. In other words, what one person perceives as a reward for a behavior, another person

may perceive as a punishment (Miller 253). For example, consider two high school students who

are failing a course and thus not able to attend a school field trip to see Hamlet. For one student,
 4

this is a punishment, as she loves Shakespeare. The other student, however, loathes live theater

and thus perceives this consequence as a welcome reward.

Two additional concepts are central to social cognitive theory. The concept of “identification”

explains that individuals are more likely to learn when they feel a strong connection to a model.

For example, people may imitate those whom they respect or greatly admire in an effort to be

more like them (Miller 253). A second concept is self-efficacy, which refers to the belief in one’s

ability to accomplish a goal. An individual is more likely to successfully model a particular

behavior if he believes he is capable of doing so (Miller 254).

The tenets of social cognitive theory are relevant to communications media. Individuals in the

media, such as athletes and movie stars, may model behaviors that others, who admire them,

desire to imitate. However, this phenomenon may not always be positive. Miller noted that some

role models may model negative behaviors, such as violent characters in some video games. The

game player may or may not imitate such behaviors depending on the extent to which he or she

identifies with the model and whether or not the model’s behavior resulted in punishment or

reward. Other applications of this theory within the media include television shows that serve the

dual purpose of entertaining and educating the public on a particular issue (Miller 254). For

example, Law and Order: Special Victims Unit not only entertains but also educates the public

about sexual assault and victims’ rights. Marketing is another area that utilizes social cognitive

theory (Miller 255). For example, a medical alert service may, in one scene, depict an elderly

woman who falls at home and becomes injured but has no way to contact anyone for help. In the

next scene, the same woman falls but is able to press a medical alert button on her bracelet, thus

summoning help right away. Elderly individuals and the children of those individuals may

identify with the model, witness the positive outcome associated with having and using the
 5

medical alert product, and thus be more inclined to purchase the product. Social cognitive theory

can play an important part in influencing the public through communications, an issue explored

in greater depth in the next section.

Social Cognitive Theory in Communication

Social cognitive theory occupies several roles within the field of communications, including

within education, social media, and marketing. Several studies addressed the use of this theory to

encourage healthy eating habits in children and smoking cessation among adults. Hall, et al.

developed an instrument to measure the impact of programs which employed social cognitive

theory on the primary constructs of the theory (Hall, Citation?). The authors developed the

assessment instrument for the purposes of measuring knowledge, behavior, and self-efficacy

among children between the ages of 9-12 years who received a healthy eating intervention (2).

The subjects in this particular study did not participate in the intervention, but instead were used

merely to evaluate the validity and reliability of the assessment tool. One finding from this study

was that students with higher degrees of self-efficacy reported eating greater amounts of fruits,

dairy products, and breakfast. In addition, higher self-efficacy was associated with planning

family meals and higher scores on measures of healthy eating. Self-efficacy demonstrated a

moderate but significant correlation with behavior but not knowledge (7). This study supported

the tenets of social cognitive theory in that self-efficacy predicted the likelihood of engaging in a

particular behavior, which in the case of this study was healthy eating.

Two additional studies fell within the realm of education. Ahn, et al. tested the impact of a

virtual dog in promoting fruit and vegetable consumption in 7-13 year-old children. The subjects

observed the results of their food choices on the virtual pet, whose physical and mental health

changed in accordance with fruit and vegetable consumption. While children who interacted with
 6

the virtual pet asked to be served more fruits and vegetables than the control group, they did not

actually consume significantly more nor did their food preferences differ significantly from that

of the control group (90). In another study, Mason, Gilbert, and Sutton compared the

effectiveness of a web-based intervention for smoking cessation with and without a basis in

social cognitive theory. Individuals in the intervention group received personalized messages

which addressed the aspects of social cognitive theory, including self-efficacy and outcome

expectations. Results indicated that no differences existed between the intervention and control

groups with respect to smoking cessation (2187).

Another research area is marketing. Wagner, et al. (2016) used social cognitive theory as a

framework for analyzing eight websites promoting the use of implantable medical devices to

consumers. The authors reported that in addition to inappropriate reading levels and the failure to

apply health literacy construct, most of the websites did not utilize any of the social cognitive

theory constructs to promote decision-making. Most sites did incorporate outcomes expectations

as a means to illustrate risks and benefits to using devices. In addition, while 75% of the sites

addressed self-efficacy by attempting to promote confidence in adopting a device, few of the

sites used observational learning or reinforcement. The authors noted the value of social

cognitive theory in marketing products and recommended that these sites incorporate more of the

theory’s constructs in its marketing strategies (124).

Johnstone and Hooper investigated how consumers are influenced by the social environment

to practice green consumption behaviors. Participants in this qualitative study reported that they

modeled the use of green practices in their homes in the hopes that others would follow suit and

were influenced by others in the environment to both follow green practices and not follow them

(836). In fact, some individuals reported that they would not follow green habits, such as reusing
 7

or recycling, until they witnessed others doing it (842). Ratten also applied a social cognitive

framework but to the sales of eBook readers, such as the Amazon Kindle. The authors’

conceptual model explained that the media, models, and outcome expectancy led to both a

learning (desires to learn new things) and an entrepreneurial orientation (engages in risk-taking

activities), both of which in turn led to purchasing the device. Findings indicated that only

marketing and an entrepreneurial orientation were associated with the likelihood of purchasing

an ereader but not modeling, outcomes expectancies, or a learning orientation (12).

A third area explored in the research literature is social networking or social marketing.

Kapidzik and Martins explored the influence of media consumption, including television and

magazines, on amount of clothing worn and the degree of gaze aversion on pictures posted on

Facebook (283). Results aligned with social cognitive theory in that television exposure (but not

magazine exposure) predicted the amount of clothing worn and the direction of the gaze (287).

The authors concluded that individuals who view televisions often model the stereotypes of

sexual attraction portrayed in the media by imitating them in Facebook profile pictures (293).

Yap and Gauer reported that individuals who perceive that social media is useful and simple to

use possess more positive attitudes towards Facebook than those who find social media difficult

to use (177). These findings suggest that self-efficacy may play a role in the use of social

networking tools. Finally, Xu reported that the use of an academic library’s social media depends

on information seeking experience, attitudes towards information sources, and the relevancy of

the content (47-48).

Theory Limitations

While social cognitive theory does provide support for some of the findings in the

communications research literature, limitations do exist. For example, Ahn, et al. used a virtual
 8

dog to demonstrate the effects of eating fruits and vegetables and to promote greater fruit and

vegetable consumption. The children who served as research subjects participated in a vicarious

experience in which they observed the results of their food choices on the virtual dog. According

to social learning theory, which as a foundation of social cognitive theory, observing another

individual’s behavior and seeing positive outcomes can increase self-efficacy for performing that

behavior. Thus, the researchers contended that if children viewed positive outcomes on their

virtual pet when they ate fruits and vegetables, this would motivate them to continue the

behavior (88). One outcome was that children who observe their virtual pet requested more fruits

and vegetables at meals than members of the control group. However, they did not actually eat

the requested foods. The results indicated that no significant differences existed in the actual

amount of food eaten between the virtual dog and control groups (90). Therefore, while social

cognitive theory predicted choices made by students, it did not predict actual change in behavior.

Similarly, Mason et al. compared two groups of subjects based on the tenets of social

cognitive theory and with respect to smoking cessation. The intervention group received tailored

messages based on smoking beliefs, self-efficacy, outcomes expectancies, and social support,

while the control group received general messages. No statistically significant differences were

observed after six months between the two groups with respect to smoking cessation (2189).

Thus, social cognitive theory was not able to predict a change in behavior in this situation. The

researchers did not assess for changes in intention to stop smoking, so it is unclear whether or not

social cognitive theory played any role in these results.

At least in these two cases, social cognitive theory did not predict behavior change. This

theory explains that individuals learn behaviors by observing others performing those behaviors

and the punishments or rewards they receive. In the case of the virtual pet, the children were
 9

directly able to view the consequences associated with their own behaviors on the virtual pet. In

the case of the smoking cessation study, the research participants did not observe others

performing desirable or undesirable behaviors, so that component of the theory was excluded

from this study. In addition, social cognitive theory explains that one is more likely to engage in

a modeled behavior if she or he identifies with the model. It is possible that the children could

identify with the virtual pet. Some of them may have real pets and others may be used to playing

online games with virtual pets. Conversely, in the smoking cessation study, there was no model

present with which the subjects could have identified.

Self-efficacy is a major component of the theory. The authors of the smoking cessation study

attempted to address self-efficacy by providing tailored information aimed at promoting behavior

change. In the virtual pet study, the authors attempted to improve the self-efficacy of the subjects

by demonstrating positive consequences for the dog after the child ate more fruits or vegetables.

However, in both cases, the application of techniques consistent with social cognitive theory

were not effective at inducing behavioral change.

It is difficult to speculate the reason why the theory did not apply in these cases. It is possible

that the use of an online environment may have impacted the study results. For example, subjects

in the virtual pet study reported that they enjoyed playing with their virtual pet (Ahn, et al. 91). It

is possible that the use of a virtual environment is distracting in some way. It is also possible that

in spite of increasing self-efficacy and observing positive outcomes associated the desirable

behavior, the subjects were simply not mentally ready to engage in change. Smoking is a

difficult habit to break due to the addictive nature of nicotine. It is possible that for highly

addictive substances such as this, more than self-efficacy or observation of rewards being

modeled is needed to promote cessation.

 10

One additional comment relative to the smoking cessation study is that the use of only some

components of the theory may not be enough to fully promote behavior change. This study did

not incorporate modeling, nor did it examine differences in outcome expectancies for different

subjects. Self-efficacy and knowledge seemed to be the main focuses of the study. It is possible

that the use of all theory components has a synergistic effect and can promote behavior change

while the use of only one or two aspects of the theory does not foster change.

Future Research

Based upon the literature reviewed, opportunities for additional research exist. Mason et al.

noted that the attrition rate was high in their study of using an online intervention to promote

smoking cessation (2189). The authors suggested finding strategies to retain users and keep them

engaged after their first visit (2190). Future research could utilize social cognitive theory to

determine the factors that keep users engaged in a website. For example, perhaps users could

experience a reward based upon the time they spend physically logged in to a site.

A second area for research and one related to the previous issue is an examination of other

factors associated with a web page that promote engagement. These factors should include

modeling and factors that promote self-efficacy. For example, Wagner noted that the reading

level of the website used to promote the use of implantable medical devices was above the level

of many of the readers (125). It is possible this could affect self-efficacy and thus the

individual’s ability to make a decision regarding a behavior. It would be interesting to learn more

about what factors or design aspects of a website best foster self-efficacy.

Another avenue for research involves intrinsic motivation and the adoption of new products.

Ratten created a conceptual model to explain why individuals would adopt the new technology

of an eBook reader. In this study, the researchers reported that the use of these readers was not
 11

impacted by modeling of the behavior by others, which was an interesting find given that

younger individuals are often heavily influenced by their peers. In addition, outcome expectancy

did not play a role in the decision to adopt the technology. The authors suggested that youth may

base their expectations off of the media rather than their own experiences (12). Thus, one

suggestion for future research is the influence of the intrinsic learning system on learning and

adopting new technologies. Self-efficacy may be one part of intrinsic motivation, but the other

components of social learning theory may be more associated with extrinsic rewards. This

particular study failed to demonstrate an effect on two components that may be more related to

extrinsic rewards and learning, modeled behavior and outcome expectancies. However, it is

possible that the adoption of new technology among youths is influence more by intrinsic factors

than extrinsic ones.

Another piece of technology is social networking sites, such as Facebook. Kapidzic and

Martins reported that viewing the way people dress on television influenced the amount of

clothes worn in a Facebook profile picture. From a social cognitive theory perspective, more

attractive television personalities are more likely to be rewarded with compliments than less

attractive individuals. Viewers observe the rewards that accompany a certain look or dressing a

certain way and then desire to emulate that wardrobe strategy. Similarly, overweight or

unattractive individuals may be ridiculed, thus the viewer associates a punishment with being

overweight and chooses not to follow that path (293). However, the use of television had no

effect on where one places his gaze in the Facebook picture, in spite of the individual observing

different television shows with different levels of direct gazing into the camera or at another

character. Thus, future research could be conducted to gain insight into why modeling and the

observation of rewards or punishments influences some behaviors and not others.

 12

Finally, one last area for future research is the impact of age on the influence of the tenets of

the social cognitive theory in influencing behavior change. Two of the studies discussed in this

paper utilized children as subjects. Hall, et al., included fifth grade students to develop an

assessment tool for a nutrition education program, while Ahn, et al. included children to test the

effectiveness of a virtual pet in changing fruit and vegetable consumption. What if these subjects

had been young adults or elderly individuals? Given that individuals from different age groups

may have different likes and dislikes and perceive outcomes differently, it is likely that the same

strategies would not be effective across all age groups.

Conclusion

Social cognitive theory provides an effective framework for understanding why people

engage in behaviors and how people learn behaviors. According to this theory, individuals

observe behavior in others that is either rewarded or punished. This outcome and the value that

the individual places on the rewards and punishments determine in part whether or not the person

will emulate the initial behavior. Two addition key factors which determine behavior include the

degree to which the observer identifies with the model and the degree of self-efficacy one

possesses in accomplishing a particular goal. However, in spite of its usefulness, social cognitive

theory should be updated to explain the factors that promote engagement, modeling, and

behavior change within the online environment. While the basic tenets of the theory may hold

true in this environment, there may be other factors unique to that setting which influence

behavior. This suggestion is supported by two studies in the literature in which websites created

based on the components of social cognitive theory failed to promote a change in behavior

among viewers. The field of communications is certainly a social one, even more so with the

onslaught of various digital technologies. Adapting social cognitive theory to incorporate any
 13

unique elements of the online environment, such as the immediacy of information or the amount

of information and choices available, may provide valuable insights into mass communication.
 14

Works Cited

Ahn, Sun Joo (Grace), et al. "Using Virtual Pets to Increase Fruit and Vegetable Consumption in

Children: A Technology-Assisted Social Cognitive Theory Approach." Cyberpsychology,

Behavior & Social Networking, vol. 19, no. 2, Feb. 2016, pp. 86-92. EBSCOhost,

doi:10.1089/cyber.2015.0224.

Hall, Elisha, et al. "Development and Validation of a Social Cognitive Theory-Based Survey for

Elementary Nutrition Education Program." International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition

& Physical Activity, vol. 12, Apr. 2015, pp. 1-12. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1186/s12966-015-

0206-4.

Johnstone, Micael-Lee and Stephanie Hooper. "Social Influence and Green Consumption

Behaviour: A Need for Greater Government Involvement." Journal of Marketing

Management, vol. 32, no. 9-10, Aug. 2016, pp. 827-855. EBSCOhost,

doi:10.1080/0267257X.2016.1189955.

Kapidzic, Sanja and Nicole Martins. "Mirroring the Media: The Relationship between Media

Consumption, Media Internalization, and Profile Picture Characteristics on Facebook."

Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, vol. 59, no. 2, June 2015, pp. 278-297.

EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/08838151.2015.1029127.

Mason, Dan, et al. "Effectiveness of Web-Based Tailored Smoking Cessation Advice Reports (I

Quit): A Randomized Trial." Addiction, vol. 107, no. 12, Dec. 2012, pp. 2183-2190.

EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03972.x.

Miller, Katharine. Communication Theories: Perspectives, Processes, and Contexts. New York:

McGraw Hill, 2002.

 15

Ratten, Vanessa. "Social Cognitive Theory and the Adoption of E-Book Devices." International

Journal of E-Business Management, vol. 4, no. 2, Nov. 2010, pp. 3-16. EBSCOhost

Wagner, Teresa, et al. "Implantable Medical Device Website Efficacy in Informing Consumers

Weighing Benefits/Risks of Health Care Options." Journal of Health Communication,

vol. 21, 2016 Supplement 2, pp. 121-126. EBSCOhost,

doi:10.1080/10810730.2016.1201173.

Xu, Qiong. "Diffusion of Social Media Adoption in Everyday Academic Information Seeking."

International Journal of Technology, Knowledge & Society, vol. 9, no. 4, July 2013, pp.

41-60. EBSCOhost.

Yap, Sheau-Fen and Sanjaya Singh Gaur. "Integrating Functional, Social, and Psychological

Determinants to Explain Online Social Networking Usage." Behaviour & Information

Technology, vol. 35, no. 3, Mar. 2016, pp. 166-183. EBSCOhost,

doi:10.1080/0144929X.2015.1035336.