Vicarious Learning Amongst Children Within

¶ … vicarious learning amongst children within the age groups of 6-16, and see how they tend to pick up little habits or clues from children who are smarter in class and then apply it in their own study curriculum. These pupils will be divided into three groups pertaining to their age: group one will include pupils ranging from ages 6-9, group two will include pupils ranging from ages 10-12, and the last group will include pupils with ages ranging 13-16. One of the groups will be observed with prior experience of vicarious learning, namely the last group, while one will only be introduced to it for this particular research, namely the first group within the age group 6-9.

Vicarious learning can be divided into four different categories. It is important to know and recognize all of these forms as they are crucial in understanding how and why certain groups of learners react or employ certain methods over the other and what that choice suggests about them as a learner. These four forms of veracious learning procedures are categorized in the effects they have on the adapter: 1) Modeling Effect 2) Eliciting Effect 3) Dis-inhibitory Effect 4) Inhibitory Effect (Bandura, 1971).

The Modeling Effect is one where the observer is almost a prototype, in practice, of what he has observed. It is mainly an act that the viewer had not held back prior to seeing his model or mentor do it but did it more regularly after seeing it being done by the model. As a result, the viewer exhibits talents or improvements that had previously not transpired. A good example could be watching the news updates at a particular time everyday, which the viewer did first as well but did more attentively and regularly after observing his model do it (Bandura, 1971).

The Eliciting Effect is a little different form the modeling effect as the viewer is not a complete carbon copy of the model but inspires to do the same as his model only in a different mass or volume. A good example of this could be stretching the example given above, the viewer might watch the news more regularly and attentively but might not do it for as long a time duration (i.e. one hour, two hours, etc.) as the model and might not prefer different news to be updated about then their model (Bandura, 1971).

The Dis-inhibitory Effect is an act that was somewhat refrained in a student previously but was adopted after seeing no particular negative effect of the action from his/her model's employment. For instance, when pupils began to see that running around the halls did not really pose much threat from the teachers, everyone adopted it from time to time knowing they could not get into trouble (Bandura, 1971).

The Inhibitory Effect, as the name suggests is the exact opposite of the dis-inhibitory effect and results in the student refraining form a certain act if he sees a negative impact (in his/her own opinion) coming out of it as an outcome. For instance, a student may refrain form asking questions about certain topics after seeing a pattern emerge where the pupils who did ask questions were given assignments relating to the topic they were inquiring about to understand it better (Bandura, 1971).

Having come to terms with the four aspects of vicarious learning, we will now move on to discuss the available literature relevant to my research question. To reiterate the purpose of this thesis, it is important to note that the aim of this paper is to observe the effectiveness of vicarious learning amongst children within the age groups of 6-16, and see how they tend to pick up little habits or clues from children who are smarter in class and then apply it in their own study curriculum. As mentioned above, these pupils will be divided into three groups pertaining to their age: group one will include pupils ranging from ages 6-9, group two will include pupils ranging from ages 10-12, and the last group will include pupils with ages ranging 13-16. One of the groups will be observed with prior experience of vicarious learning, namely the last group, while one will only be introduced to it for this particular research, namely the first group within the age group 6-9.

Literature Review

Tarabulsy, Tessier, and Kappas in 1996 carried out a study that observed child behavior in an environment set up for vicarious learning. In this study they established that any and every response of an infant (or a student, in this study's case) is directly linked to the communal-emotive growth of the child. According to the conclusions they made in the study, all infants are emotionally responsive to the effect of their manners and conduct in both natural and determined environmental settings. Same may be the case with the students I will take into observation for my study; they are expected to be responsive and aware of the circumstances their actions create. Tarabulsy et al. In his study also noticed a decline in the expected reaction of the infants after the end of the vicarious learning procedure; this could also turn out to be one of the results in my study.

Previous researches have either chosen a procedure driven by cognitive sense (e.g., Gekoski & Fagen, 1984; Tarabulsy et al. 1996), while some researches have utilized the procedure employing the non-cognitive sense, or in other words behavior-analytic interpretation (e.g., Gewirtz & Palaez-Nogueras, 1991; Masia & Chase, 1997). Both of these outlooks are different in their methodology, the behavior-analytic interpretation method has fewer members in numerous investigational assemblies and aims to get a stable reading of the members' actions before any changes are made in the environmental setting to observe the reactions thereof (Deguichi, Fujita, & Sato, 1988). Conversely, the cognitive method is the experiment session, which is short or restricted within a time zone and employs a huge number of members for observation, a lot like Lewis et al. (1985) and Millar et al. (1992).

There have been some interesting updates made by McSweeney, Hinson, and Cannon (1996) related to the behavior-analytic interpretation method. They brought forth an in-between changes profile in the members/participants while undergoing vicarious learning experiment that used the behavior-analytic interpretation method. They noticed that the initial high response of vicarious learning and its impact somewhat declined with time, and highlighted that the studies that employed the behavior-analytic interpretation approach overlooked this change and considered only the visible change at the end of the phases and sessions. Groves and Thompson (1970) were the first to structure the explanation of the habituation as the computation of two procedures: sensitization and habituation. McSweeney et al. In their study experimented with the dual-procedure habituation theory by employing it to illustrate the parallels among the mathematical utilities used to explain the sample of the rise and fall in responses.

Vicarious learning has another crucial research outlook of "carry-over" or "transfer" results of previous habituation on the student response level. For case in point, Watson (1971) in his study exhibited that the previous non-contingent or behavior-analytic familiarity of the students hindered learning in the later stages for the students mainly between the ages 8-12.

Gekoski and Fagen (1984) critically examined the simplification of the "carry-over" outcomes when they noticed that "carry-over" procedures were unable to recognize and record the unconstructive adoptions after the behavior-analytic pre-experience with 6- to 9-year-olds in a "leg kick/mobile turn" contingency assignment had been carried out. They concluded that the research did not point out which assignment or growth variables were vital for attaining conclusive carry-over results.

Another important part of the research topics addressed here the element of vicarious reinforcement (or observational reinforcement). These two terms are exchangeable as they both describe processes that aren't cognitive and the concepts employed are closely related to the descriptions Bandura gave in 1971 (e.g., Tarabulsy et al., 1996; Wentworth & Haith, 1992). This element has been studied with an exclusive reference to the students aged between 4 an 11 years of age (e.g., Bandura, 1965; Bol & Steinhauer, 1990; Ollendick & Shapiro, 1984), and obliquely with reference to the studies done on the impersonation habits of infants (e.g., Barr, Dowden & Hayne, 1996).

Bandura (1965) after conducting his study suggested that he could not gather a long-term constructive consequence of vicarious reinforcement when considering the activities of the child; he came to this conclusion when he was unable to find any arithmetical dissimilarity between impersonated reactions of the two factions of nursery going children he had observed for any kind of positive reinforcement. Other studies however, have shown a constant responsive pattern especially amongst school going children in the age of 4-7; they showed a gradual or heightened increase in their reactions to the behavior of their models, and these reactions then declined noticeably later on with the passage of time (Bol & Steinhauer, 1990; Ollendick, Shapiro, & Barrett, 1982; Ollendick, Dailey, & Shapiro, 1983).

Mostly in studies that are conducted to observe the impersonation qualities of a child in response to the observation of the behavior of their mentor or model do not normally take into account the element of reinforcement, however there are some studies as highlighted by Barr et al. (1996) that do not this particular element as a deciding factor in the procedures (e.g., Meltzoff, 1988).

Research Question will explore the dimension and effect of vicarious learning and its importance in today's world at a very early stage of a person's life: school life. Does vicarious behavior and observance or peer pressure/influence have an effect on the viewer or observer's behavior? Is this effect long-term or short-term, good or bad? How do the students adopting the behaviors and others around react to these changes?

Methodology

In order to see the practical implications of vicarious learning in students, we will observe them in strict everyday curriculum and extra curricular activities that are interlinked with their school activities. Even though they will be observed in familiar surroundings, the influence or modeling will be coming from both familiar and unfamiliar people and fellow students whether in the same age group or not (Bandura, 1977).

All the three groups will be observed keeping in mind the changes that undergo a child's mind and mannerisms to react to behaviors and the changes will thereof be recorded and analyzed. All of the groups will be dealing with different forms of vicarious learning; some might be dealing with all, while others will deal with only a couple or less.

The three groups will be observed for a period of five weeks under different influences with changes being recorded in percentages i.e. percentage of increase in isolation, violence, mixing, grades, etc. After that, they will all be given user friendly and simple questionnaires to fill which will then be followed by a friendly and cordial interview regarding the students' personal views on the changes they might have underwent which will also be noted down. All the groups might show differences in their behavior that might be worth noting and all of them might correspond with their experience with situations where vicarious learning might be applicable.

Will the vicarious behavior and observance or peer pressure/influence have an effect on the viewer or observer's behavior? Will this effect be long-term or short-term, good or bad? How will the students adopting the behaviors and others around react to the changes? These questions will be raised and answers will be noted down during the five-week period of observation as well as after the questionnaires and interviews would have been conducted successfully.

Participants

There will be a total of 57 students observed in this research, 28 of whom will be females while 29 of them will be males, all students will be from the same schools in the same vicinity. The age groups, as mentioned before, will be three: a) 6-9, b) 10-12 and c) 13-16. Each group will have a growing number of even students: the first age group of 6-9 will include 18 students (M = 9, F = 9); the second age group of 10-12 will include 19 students (M = 10, F = 9); the last age group of 13-16 will include 20 students (M = 10, F= 10).

Apparatus

All the students will first be observed over a period of 5 weeks and changes in behavior along with influence will be noted down in percentages. During these five weeks, they will not only be brought face-to-face with their peers but will also be shown movies and cartoons which are expected to show certain changes in behavioral patterns in the first and second group particularly.

In the first phase, each of the students will first be observed individually and then in a group to see the difference in individual behavioral pattern that might be adopted through their own observation of the activities of other students and the group behavioral pattern that might be adopted. This will be done through a daily individual analysis of the student in a class setting, during breaks/lunch, etc., to see their level of correspondence with their contemporaries.

The second phase will involve a predetermined setup of environment where the students will be shown certain movies, cartoons and games as part of class activity and then the effect or influence of the subject matter on the child will be evaluated. These movies, cartoons and games will be made part of the class activity and one day in a week will be chosen for there premiere. Most of the movies, cartoons and games that will be utilized will be those that have a direct message for the youth and will either promote certain acceptable behaviors or prohibit those that are not acceptable.

All of the students will then be given already prepared questionnaires, of different levels and complexities for each group, followed by candid and honest interviews. The complied questionnaires will be distributed to a sample of 57 students between the ages 6-16. Questionnaires will be designed for self-completion and will be returned in pre-paid envelopes to me.

Questionnaires are advantageous in removing the influence of the researcher on the respondents as there is no face-to-face contact, however they also do not give any opportunity to check the honesty of the responses, and respondents may give answers that they feel the researcher is looking for. The use of standardized questions as a questionnaire, improves the reliability of research whereas interviews are more open to researcher bias in probing for specific responses (Denscombe, 1998).

In the third phase, I felt that the method of conducting interviews would be easy and convenient for the chosen subjects. Face-to-face interviews encourage openness and honesty on the part of the respondents, if conducted in private with an assurance of confidentiality; therefore semi-structured interview conducted in the vicinity of the school is the method chosen for my study. It will help me in understanding the experiences, attitudes, perceptions and responses of the subjects and in considering the different themes and patterns that emerge.

Interviews can take a variety of forms as they can be a list of structured closed questions, or be based on a schedule. In this research study, I carry out a semi-structured interview; I use a list of pre-prepared questions, which allows freedom to follow through on anything that the respondents raise. The advantage on using a schedule is that the interviewer is able to probe into areas of feelings and motives, and coax information needed from the interviewee. The disadvantage is that the interviewer may influence replies of the respondent in some way, and tend to be more time consuming (Denscombe, 1998).

In effect, I will avoid forcing the proceedings of people's daily lives into a defined theory of cause. As an alternative, I seek to form an opinion on the meanings of events in relation to the question: What had been the experiencing person's thoughts and actions that developed during -- or as an outcome of -- "those the vicarious learning procedure (Denscombe, 1998)?

The aim of both the mediums used will be to highlight the changes in behavior to the participants and make them recognize it, as well as, voice their opinions as to why those changes might have occurred and then match their responses with the notifications that had been made earlier through observations. The speed with which the students responded and their openness to respond to the questions will also be taken into account when the final account is made (Denscombe, 1998).

It will be the most important factor that the interviewer keeps an unbiased view and is friendly without probing the students for certain kind of responses, however there will be certain questions that will be structured for particular kind of and expected responses. The questionnaires that will be filled out by the students might not reveal any difference of opinions in the interviews, most students might keep true to what they answer in the questionnaires but some might be able and chose to elaborate more on how and why they adopted certain habits and not all and to what extent (Denscombe, 1998).

Procedure

Before the study will be conducted, efforts will have to be made to assure that the three groups will be different in one key aspect, which might also serve as a deciding factor in their eventual responses: experience in and around a vicarious learning-friendly environment. In the first phase (Phase a), the first group will be given far less time (in terms of hours in school) with the opportunity to vicariously learn habits and behaviors. Even though their learning time might increase in Phases B. And C, it might nevertheless, in total, be half of the other two groups.

In the first phase, the students will be observed throughout the five weeks individually and then in a group to see the difference in individual behavioral pattern that might be adopted and the group behavioral pattern that might be adopted. This will be done through a daily individual analysis of the student in a class setting, during breaks/lunch, etc., to see their level of correspondence with their contemporaries.

The second phase will involve a predetermined setup of environment where the student will be shown certain movies, cartoons and games as part of class activity and then the effect or influence of the subject matter on the child will be evaluated. These movies, cartoons and games will be made part of the class activity and one day in a week will be chosen for there premiere. Most of the movies, cartoons and games that will be utilized will be those that have a direct message for the youth and will either promote certain acceptable behaviors or prohibit those that are not acceptable.

All the observations will be made with a clear understanding of the difference of environmental settings of the groups as well as their own mind settings. They will all be conducted with an unbiased view and the changes will be recorded in percentages that might show the increases or decreases in particular aspects of an individual's personality or behaviors.

The questionnaires and interviews will all be conducted with keen attention paid on the difference of the mind settings between the three groups. All the questions in both mediums will aim to get a personal view of the students observed for the study. The questionnaires will be conducted exclusively and in a candid friendly way so as to create a comfort and familiar zone between the interviewer and the interviewee (Denscombe, 1998).

The important things to remember with reference to the three phases that will be employed are: the first phase will mainly be an observation of the students participating in a vicarious leaning-friendly environment where each of the groups might be treated differently because of prior experience with vicarious learning and all three might have different approaches and methods to adopt or shun certain behavior patters; phase two will be mainly about observing the participants in predetermined situations to see how they use or employ the changes in an individual or group setting; the third phase will see the end of observations and the making or addition to notes, replaced by questionnaires and interviews to attain the personal views of the participants and their comparison with the notes that had been previously made.

Data Analysis

ANCOVE will be used as data analysis in this research. ANCOVA is also known as "analysis of covariance," which is a traditional name for this "linear regression model," which has one constant descriptive determinant along with one or more variables. The use of ANCOVA will help us in controlling irrelevant variables and also test whether some variables have an influence on the subjects (Denscombe, 1998).

Limitations of the Study

There might be certain limitations in this particular study that will need to be brought forth to understand its nature better. First and foremost could be the fact that the students' age might not be considered as a definitive variable, instead it might be taken as a sub-variable for the effects and approaches of the mannerisms and behaviors that will or will not be adopted.

Secondly, there will be certain situations created to induce certain changes, and, there could be certain questions in the questionnaires and interviews that will be asked to get specific responses from the students.

Another limitation of this case study has been the viewpoint assumed. This thesis has been primarily limited to revealing the effect of vicarious learning of students in a school setting between the ages of 6-16. The thesis has also considered additional observations and brief analysis of psychology and behavior.