Learning by watching other people

Social learning theory is a psychological explanation of behaviour which proposes that people can learn by watching others and seeing the consequences of their actions. Learners don't simply copy everything they see. Cognitive processes shape what they notice and remember, as well as what they eventually perform.

Through Observational learning, an individual acquires information or behaviour by watching others. A model is a person whose behaviour gives an observer an example to learn from. Observers may encounter models directly or through media. The model need not intend to teach anything.

How observation becomes behaviour

Four processes help explain whether an observed action becomes part of someone's behaviour:

• Attention is the cognitive process of selectively focusing on information. The observer must notice the model's relevant actions. Models may attract more attention if they seem credible or successful, or if the observer sees them as similar to themselves.
• Retention is the memory process through which observed information is stored for later use. The observer needs to remember the sequence, especially if imitation happens after a delay.
• Reproduction is the process of translating a remembered action into performance. To carry out the action, the observer needs the necessary abilities. Practice or feedback may also be needed.
• Motivation is a psychological process that initiates, directs and sustains behaviour. The consequences an observer expects influence whether they choose to perform what they have learned.

These processes link observation to possible performance. Each provides a point at which a behaviour-change intervention can succeed—or fail.

Vicarious reinforcement is a process in which watching another person receive a reward increases the observer's likelihood of performing similar behaviour. Seeing a model punished can instead discourage imitation. Neither consequence has to happen to the observer personally.

Keep learning separate from performance. Someone may learn an action yet not perform it because they expect disapproval or have no opportunity. Removing an expected punishment may reveal behaviour learned earlier. A reward, then, is not necessary for the initial learning to occur.

Applying the theory to explain behaviour

Imagine a new member of a community workshop watching an experienced member check a tool before using it. The experienced member receives appreciative feedback for working safely. The newcomer notices the demonstration and remembers the checking sequence. They can carry it out and expect approval for doing so. Social learning theory explains the newcomer's safety checks through observation and the consequences experienced by the model.

Look at the causal explanation here. The model supplies the action to learn; the observed approval helps explain why the newcomer performs it. Saying only that the newcomer 'copied someone' leaves out most of the theory.

Applying the theory to change behaviour

To increase safe tool use, the workshop could choose a respected, relatable model. It could make the checking sequence clearly visible and give newcomers a chance to rehearse it. Recognition for the model's safe behaviour makes the positive consequences apparent. Feedback on newcomers' attempts supports accurate reproduction.

Competing models also need attention. A demonstration may have little influence if admired members routinely skip checks without consequences. Changing one model while leaving the surrounding social signals unchanged can weaken the intervention.

Social learning theory offers a practical explanation of how behaviour can spread without everyone learning through personal trial and error. Observation alone, though, does not establish causation. Newcomers might already value safety, or explicit rules might also influence what they do. Behaviour change is more convincing when changes follow the modelling intervention and plausible alternative explanations are considered.

When group membership becomes part of the self

Social identity theory offers a psychological explanation of behaviour: belonging to social groups contributes to the self-concept and can influence how people evaluate and treat themselves and others. Social identity is the part of a person's self-concept that comes from perceived group memberships, along with the value and emotional significance attached to them.

The shift is from thinking only as an individual to thinking as a member of 'us'. People can belong to several groups. Which membership matters most can change with the situation, and belonging to the same group doesn't mean everyone behaves identically.

Categorization, identification and comparison

Through social categorization, a cognitive process, people classify themselves and others into social groups. This simplifies the social world, though it can exaggerate perceived similarities within groups and differences between them. An in-group is a social group to which a person perceives themselves as belonging; an out-group is a social group to which that person perceives themselves as not belonging.

Social identification is the process through which a person incorporates group membership into their self-concept. Once this happens, the group's expectations can become personally meaningful. Its successes feel like 'our' successes, and its accepted ways of behaving can guide individual conduct.

When people evaluate themselves or their group in relation to others, they engage in social comparison. They may seek positive distinctiveness, a favourable difference between their own group and relevant comparison groups. A group identity that they value positively can support self-esteem.

These closely related processes connect group membership to behaviour. They aren't a rigid sequence that must consciously occur every time a person acts.

One possible outcome is in-group favouritism: giving one's own group more favourable evaluations or treatment than other groups. Open hostility isn't required. Offering more help to 'our members' can produce unequal treatment without actively attacking anyone else.

Applying the theory to explain behaviour

Imagine two student societies competing for access to a shared rehearsal space. Members start referring to themselves as 'our society' and to the other society as 'them'. They identify strongly with their own society and compare the groups' achievements. Praising their society as more committed makes membership feel valuable. Supporting its claim to extra rehearsal time favours the in-group.

Social identity theory explains why this dispute may become more than a scheduling disagreement: the group's standing now matters to members' sense of themselves. Competition over a genuinely scarce resource may also influence behaviour, though. Group identity is an explanation to assess, not a reason to ignore the situation.

Applying the theory to change behaviour

An intervention could bring a shared identity to the fore—for example, by presenting both societies as members of the same student arts community and organizing a joint production with shared recognition. Members would have a reason to see the previously separate groups as part of a broader 'us'. This may reduce preferential treatment based on the original division.

Cooperation could also become a valued expectation of that shared group. If being a good member means distributing rehearsal time fairly, identification can support fair behaviour rather than exclusion. The mechanism matters. The aim is to change the relevant group boundary and what valued membership involves, not merely to tell students to be nicer.

Change isn't guaranteed. A shared identity imposed on members may feel unconvincing if one society still receives greater recognition or control. For an intervention to be credible, it should let both groups retain valued identities while making their shared membership meaningful. Social identity theory predicts tendencies shaped by identification and context; it does not claim that every group member must show bias.