Something I was confused about was the environmental characteristics. They are kind of similar in the way the book explained it and the examples given made it hard to remember which paired with which effect. Response facilitation effect, response inhibition effect and response disinhibition effect all sound super similar, so if there was an easy was to differentiate and distinguish, it would definitely help a lot.
A model can be anyone who an observer looks up to. They can be someone the observer knows, or someone they don’t. They can even be a fictional character. The observer notes the models behavior and mimics in through their own behaviors. This can promote learning. If a model does something or act a certain way, the observer will assume that that action is correct and would then note it for next time a situation similar would come up like that for them. This can be positive for learning but can also be negative. For example, a model can do good deeds, like pick up litter off the grass and the observer would want mimic those deeds. On the other hand, the model could be smoking or drinking a lot and the observer would believe that that is the cool and right thing to do, teaching them bad behaviors.
There have been a bunch of strong models in my life. When I was very young, my cousin, who is 4 years older than me was definitely my model. I would talk like her, dress like her, listen to the same music she did, because I thought she was cool. I would mimic everything about her. She hated it and would bully me around… which I mimicked as well, to my poor younger sister! My mom has been a great model to me all my life, she has taught me so much through just how she acts in situations. She’s the lady that makes real friends with the cashier at the grocery store and the hairdresser, and I’ve always loved how it came so naturally to her. So I’ve strived to be like that as well.
I'm not sure if I can explain the information any differently from the book, but I will try. With the environmental characteristics, the odds that a student will imitate another's behavior will either increase or decrease based on whether that child sees someone else get punished or rewarded for the behavior. That was kind of confusing phrasing on my part. With the response facilitation effect and the vicarious reinforcement, a behavior will be imitated MORE frequently if the model has been reinforced for the behavior. Meaning, student 1 will see student 2 finish the homework packet and get free time on the computer. Student 1 will want to complete the homework packet so he/she can receive the same 'reward' of computer time. With the response inhibition effect and the vicarious punishment, a behavior will be imitated less frequently if the model has been punished for the behavior. In the classroom, we could see this happening when student 1 sees that student 2 had 5 minutes of recess taken away because he was talking in class. Student 1 will not imitate this behavior because she/he doesn't want to suffer the same punishment. With response disinhibition effect, a behavior that should be punished (and stopped) is not. The book gives a good example of this: a student is cheating on an exam, but hasn't gotten caught. The student will continue to preform this behavior (and perhaps others will imitate it) because although the behavior is bad, it hasn't resulted in the child being punished (so they'll continue to do it.)
ReplyDeleteDoes this help at all? I do hope so.