Basumc Boso

Ba*oune, A., Ross, D. & Ross, s.A.

(1961). Transmrssion of

aggression through imitation of aggressive models.

I ournal of Abno r mal and S o cial p sy cholog 6.3, 57 5 _g2.
A,

INrRonucrrox
This study looks at how aggressive behaviour develops in children.
It has
attracted a lot of attention from a number of academic disciplines
and
is still quoted in many texts despite its age. There are two social issues
that the study addresses. First, is aggression an innate feature of our
behaviour? And to look at qne particular aspect of this issue, can we
say that male aggression towards women is a feature of ,natural,male
behaviour or is it learnt? These questions have a bearing on how we
develop social policies to deal with aggressive behaviour. The second
issue, which follows on from the first, is if aggression is learnt then
how
is it learnt?
Banduras approach is an extension of behaviourisizr and basically
sees people as being moulded by their life experiences.
It looks at how
we are affected by the rewards and punishments that we experience
every day Bandura is a leading figure in social Learning Theory
which
attempts to extend the concepts used in operant and classical condi_
tioning to explain complex human social behaviour. Key concepts in
this approach are reinforcemenf and imitation.

THE Sruny
In this study, Bandura set out to demonstrate that if children are passive
witnesses to an aggressive display by an adult, they will imitate
this
aggressive behaviour when given the opportunity. More specificallSq
the study was guided by the following predictions:
. . . subjects exposed

to aggressive models will reproduce aggressive

acts resembling those of the models . .
.

. , . the observation of subdued non-aggressive models will have

a
generalized inhibiting effect on the subjects subsequent beha_
viour. .
.

MORAL DEVELOPMENT 247

. . . subjects will imitate the behaviour of a same-sex model
to a
greater degree than a model of the opposite sex. .
.

. . . boys

will be more predisposed than girls towards imitatine

aggression...
(p.

s7s)

Subjects

Thirty-six boys and 36 girls aged between 37 to 69 months were tested.

The mean age was 52 months. They used one male adult and one
female adult to act as role models.
Design
The study had three major conditions; a control group, a group exposed
to an aggressive model, and a group exposed to a passive model. The
children who were exposed to the adult models were further subdivided by their gender, and by the gender of the model they were
exposed to. In other words there were three independent variables. A
summary of the groups is shown in Table 13.2.
This is quite a complicated design that appears to cover a lot of
different possibilities. However, the number of children in each group is
quite small, and the results could be distorted if one group contained a
few children who are normally quite aggressive. The researchers triecl
Table

13.2

Banduras eisht experimental groups

Control group 24 subjects

Eight experimental groups (each with 6 subjects)
Aggressive model condition - 24 subjects

r
r

Non-aggressive model condition

24 subiects

Aggressive model condition

.,
i.
..

with
Same-sex
model

6 boys

with
sex
model
Non-aggress

with
same-sex
model

6 boys

with
same-sex
model

6 boys
opposite

with
sex
model

6 boys
opposite

6 girts

iv

6 girts with
opposite sex
model

e mod el control

with
same_sex
model

6 girls

6 girls with
opposite sex
rnodel

to reduce this problem by pre-testing the children and assessing their

aggressiveness. They observed the children in the nursery and
iudged
their aggressive behaviour on four 5-point rating scales. rh.-.ating

scales were:

(a) physicalaggression;
(b) verbal aggression;

(c) aggression towards inanimate

(d) aggressive inhibition.

objects;

A composite score for each child was obtained by adding the results
of
the four ratings. It was then possible to match the children in each
group so that they had similar levels of aggression in their everyday
behaviour. The observers were the experimenter (female), u ,r.,rr".u
school teacher (female), and the model for male aggression. The study
reports that the first two observers 'were well acquainted with thechii1r/
(p. )/b).
oren
A disadvantage of using rating scales in this way is that different
observers see different things when they view the same event. This
might mean that the ratings will vary from one observer to another. To
check the inter-rater reliability of the observations, 51 of the children
were rated by two observers working independently and their ratings
were compared. The high correlation that was achieved (r:.g9)
showed these observations to be highly reliable, suggesting tirat the
observers were in close agreement about the behavlouiof the children.
Procedure

The children were tested individually. In stage one they were taken to
the experimental room which was set out for play. one corner was
arranged as the child's play area, where there was a table and chair.
potato prints and picture stickers, which were all selected as
having
high interest for these children. The adult model was escorted to the
opposite corner where there was a small table, chair, tinker toy mallet
and Bobo (a flve-foot inflatable doll). The experimenter then left the

room.

In the non-aggressive condition, the model assembled the tinker

toys in a quiet, subdued manner, ignoring Bobo. In the aggressive condition the model started to assemble the tinker toys, but after one minute
turned to Bobo and was aggressive to the doll in a stylized and distinctive way The aggression 'was both physical (for example ,raised the

MORAL DEVELOPMENT 249

Bobo doll, picked up the mallet and struck the doll on the head', p.576),
and verbal (for example,'Pow!', and'Sock him in the nosei p.576). After
10 minutes the experimenter returned and took the child to another
games room.
In stage two, the child was subjected to'mild aggression arousall The
child was taken to a room with attractive toys, but after starting to play
with them the child was told that these were the experimenter's very
best toys and she had decided to reserve them for the other children.
Then the child was taken to the next room for stage three of the
study The experimenter stayed in the room btherwise a number of children would either refuse to remain alone, or would leave before termination of the sessionl In this room there was a variety of toys, both
non-aggressive (three bears, crayons and so forth) and aggressive toys
(for example, a mallet peg board, dart guns, nnd a three-foot Bobo). The
child was kept in this room for 2o minutes, and their behaviour was
observed by judges through a one-way mirror. observations were made
at five-second intervals giving 240 response units for each child.
The observers recorded three measures of imitation in which they
looked for responses from the child that were very similar to the displav
by the adult model:

(1) imitative for physical aggression;

(2) imitative verbal aggression;
(3) imitative non-aggressive verbal responses.
They also looked at two types of behaviour that were incomplete imitations of the adult model:

(1) mallet aggression;

(2) sits on Bobo.
In addition, they recorded three types of aggressive behaviour that were
not imitations of the adult model:

(i)

punches Bobo;

(2) non-imitative physical and verbal aggression;

(3) aggressive gun play.
By looking at the results we can consider which children imitated the
models, which models they imitated, and r,vhether they showed a general increase in aggressive behaviour rather than a speci{ic imitation of
the adult behaviours.

REsulrs
The results are sulrlmarised inTable 13.3. They show that:

o
o
.
e
o

the children who saw the aggressrve model made more aggressive
acts than the children who saw the non-aggressive model;
boys made more aggressive acts than girls;
the boys in the aggressive conditions showed more aggression if the
model was male than if the model',vas female;
the girls in the aggressive conditions also showed more physical
aggression if the model was male but more verbal aggression if the
model was female;
the exception to this general pattern was the observation of how
often they punched Bobo, and in this case the effects of gender
were reversed.
Table

13.3

Mean'aggiession scores for experimental and control subjects

Experimental groups

Aggresslve

Response categorY

Female
model

Male

Control

group
Non-aggresslve

model Female

Male model

model

lmitative physical aggression

subjects
Male subjects

o.0

4a
t.z

25.8

2.5
o.2

_L-3

2.O

I3.7

2.O

o.3

L2.7

r.7

0.0
o.0

o.7

4.3

5.5

7.2

1-2.4

Female

lmitative verbal aggression

subjects
subjects

Female

Male

1".7

Mallet aggression
Female subjects
Male subjects

77.2
15.5

L8.7

0.5

o.5

L5.-L

28.8

LB.7

6.7

13.5

Punches Bobo
Female sublects
Male subjects

6.3
18.9

16.5
11.9

,13.O

r+.41

L7.7
L5.7

7.2

1A

Non-imitative aggression
z)-.J
Female subjects
LO.t
Male subjects

36.7

Aggressive gun play

Female subjects
Male subjects

1.8

4.5

7.3

15.9

Source:

8.4

Bandura, Ross & Ross (1961)

5.8

lo.r
2.6
8.9

6.1
lL+

.o

2.5

3.7

LO. i

!4.3

MORAL DEVELOPMENT

251

Drscusstox
One of the issues commented on by Bandura, Ross and Ross is the affect
that the gender of the model had on the children. They noted that the
aggression of the female model had a confusing effect on them. For
example one of the children said,'Who is that lady? Thats not the way
for a lady to behave. Ladies are supposed to act like ladies . . 1 (p.581),
and another child said,'You should have seen what that girl did in
there. She was just acting like a man. I never saw a girl act like that
before. She was punching and fighting but no swearing' (p.581). On the
other hand, the aggressive behaviour of the male model fitted more
comfortably into a cultural stereotype of appropriate behaviour. For
example, one boy said,Al's a good socker, he beat up Bobo. I want to sock
like Al' (p.581), and one of the girls said,'That man is a strong fighter,
he punched and punched and he could hit Bobo right down to the floor
and if Bobo got up he said, "Punch your nose". Hes a good fighter like
Daddy' (p.581).
If we lqok back at the questions we raised in the background section
of this summary, then what can we learn from the study? First, is
aggression innate? Like all examples of the nature-nurture debate, it
is very hard to get clear evidence one way or the other, This study shows
that aggressive behaviour can be learnt, but it does not offer any evidence on the question of whether some features of aggression are also
innate. On the issue of male violence, it is rvorth noting that the children in this study already had an expectation that men will behave
more aggressively than women. This was shown by the childrens
comments.

The second question rvas how is aggression learnt? Bandura

believes that we can learn by being witnesses to the behaviour of
others, and his study offers some support for this idea. if this is so, then
it would suggest that the regular viewing of violent behaviour on television programmes would encourage the learning of violent behaviour
in the viewer. A later variation of the experiment (Bandura, Ross &
Ross, 1963) showed the children the violent behaviour on a video rather
than in real life, and he found they were still likely to imitate the aggression behaviour torvards the Bobo doll.
There are, however, a number of reasons wh1'we should be cautious
about making too many connections betwcen this study and the everyday experience of children. F'or example, we harre no evidence about
any long-term effects of the study, anci also, it is very uncommon for

children to be in a situation where they are alone with strangers. Much

of their experience will be with people they know who will give their
opinions on whatever is going on.

ouEs?Iol{s

1
2
3
4

How is aggression measured in this study?

How else could it be meaSured?

What are the three independent variables?

What ethical guidelines does Bandura appear to break?

SuggestedAnswers start at P'455