1Jandun. A. (2006). Autobiography. M. G. Lindzcy & W.M. Runyam (Eds.

) A
lfutoryo/JMYChdogy in uutQbiqgraphy (Vol. lX. pp.42-7S) Washington, D.C.:
American l'syebological Association
 2
Albert Bandura

It is llO( uncommon for fhM';"!S <0 .... empt t~msoelv~

(rom t~
,heor;oes <nq. ~lop to ,""plain how o<hcr follu btha"". Th", r.-I J
hay.. , ..".,Ied is V<11' much in kttping with .hoe "sentle perspective
toward human sdf-dtvelopmt'll, ad.pulian, and changt', which ,,~­
pins social cogniti"" theory. I was born C/«"mber 4, 192~, arid glTw
up in Mund"-...., a .iny Canadian ham""' in oor.h.ern Alben•. In a
venturesome ~, my ~ms emigl'\ltW as t<:'C'fl'lgel'$ from Ea:5.ern
Europe, my filthc-r from Poland and my mod...,. (rom Uk ... i~_ My
futhe. worked l"ying <rack for the <..os_Canada N1ilroad; my mother
workw in rhe genenol Store in lOwn. After rtw:y garnered sufficient
.."ins" <hey bought a I>omesr....d. Man""lly con""rting Inn<! fha' W"-'
h.,.",,;]y wooded and strewn wi.h OOo.,lden into a tillable f"rm ",;,h
";rc"ally no rnechaniurion _ an arduous ur>dernoking.
In addition to creating a worIcable farm, my fuher supervised rhe
layout "nc:! cons.ruction of <he mad sys,em in .hi. ""wly op"nI'<! home-
stead dinncr. Th" Ixginniog of this pio~r lif.. Wll.S a <ouSh s<roggle.

A few S<:elions in lhe aUlobiograpby ioclude revised and elabornted malerial from Bandu ...
(2005). For addiliOllal aulobiographica.l infonnalioo wilh pIlOlog<1lphic lIoCCompanirroenlS. see the
Web site: www.a1bertlx",dura.org.
11 II H ISTOP. Y OF PSYl;IiOlOGY IN IIlH0810G P.II Pit Y

In th~ !s. year, a layer of the rllatche<l roof no the house my bther
builr had to be dismantled and lixl CO the catele because of a severe
drought. Through laborious effort my fJthl:r added further sections to
.he &rm_ Before long he WIlli sporting a Model T Ford, an odd cultural
novelty a. tI>e time.
In social cognitive tlw:<;>ry, I di~tinguish among thr~ types of
environments: the imposed, selected, and con"rutle<!. Lif~ in .his
auStere homestead area plac<:d a premium on agentic capabili'ies for
construcring mosr of onoe's lire environment will. mea.ger n:sou~es
and no ilgricultural subsidies or in.urance coverag~ against wid~spread
crop destNCtion by unm~n::iful hail nnrms, early frosts. and severe
droughlS_ Constructionism was a vial lifestyle, oot an ahnrwct
psychological 'heoty to be debated in ilrcar>e languilge in leillned
cirdes.
Nor all was arduous labor. how~ver. These folb worked hilrd in th~
early building of ,he Canadian nation, but they also kr>ew how to
pa"y. They had many ""ints and religious events requiring festive
celebo.tions. My mo<her was a superb cook, and my fa,her played il
sprightly violin. I" ilnoxher mark of construcrional initiatiVl', rhe folb
in rhis area operared $lealth liqll()r-d.istilling syst~ms thilt helped to
lubrica'" ,heir communal festivities. This l«(uired C01lSiderahl" ing"·
nuity to escape the ~r-yigililllt Royal Canadian Moumed Police_ For
eXilmplr, one inoonti..., filrmer seclioned a portion of the boil~r in his
steam "ngine for his krmerlled mash SO he could distill the potcm
btew whil" performing the farming actiyities. This is a graphic early
eXilmple of "multiw;king.·
Wc were a close-knit family. I was rhe youngest with Bve oldet
sistets. Our family lost a young dilughler to the Au pandemic in 1918.
My mother walked from home ro home helping ro 'lutse back 10 h""lth
those who wen: fortunate enough to sutviv". We also lost a son in a
huming mishap wirh one of his friends. The Great Deprrssion took a
coil on my bther's fun-Ioying spirit when he losl a section of land he
had Cultinted so laboriously. It pained him to see SOll"lrbody else
&rming ,to
My parents had 110 schooling. bur rhey placed:o high va.lue Otl the:
ed"ciltion they missed.. My fathet rau8ht himself to read thttt l:ltIguages
:on<! served as :0 member of the school board in tho. diSttict whe"" we
livro. So thai w~ could be closer to school, my parents sold a portion
 ALBERT BANDURA
"
of the farm [0 purchase a freight delivery business, and a livery stable
in Mundare. All of rhe supplies for this town were broughr in by rail,
so our drayage service delivered the incoming supplies to the various
businesses. lbe town had a huge mill where farmen from the region
brought their grain ro be milled into flour. We provided a no-room-
service bunkhouse where the farmers could bed down for rhe night,
usually arrer an exrended visit to the loatl beer parlor. We also operated
a large livery stable where the farmers parked rheir horses. During the
summer momhs, my father worked on the farm, and I would pitch
in with the harvesting of the crops while my mother operated rhe
businesses in town.
The only school in town, which housed lirsr grade rhrough high
school, was woefully shorr of teachers and educational resources. Two
reathers had ro reach rhe enrire high school curriculum; they uied
their besr bur were nOt always fully informed in key subjecr areas. We
once pilfered the answer book for th.. trigonometry COUlSl', which
brought it to an abrupr halt. We had to take charge of our own
learning. Self-dirf:Cted learning was an essenrial means ofacademic self-
d..ve!opment, not a rheoretical absrracrion. The paucity of educational
resources turned out to be an enabling factor rhat has 5ervoo m..
welJ rarher rhan an insurmounrabl.. handicapping one. Th.. comem of
courses is perishabl.., bur self-regulatory skills have lasting functional
value whatever the pursuit might be.
During summer vacations in high school, my parems encouraged
me to seek I'Xperi..n(l'l; beyond the conlines of our hamlet. I workl'd
in a furnirur.. manufacruring plam in Edmonton. The carpentry skills
I acquirl'd helped to support me through college in part-time work_
During another high school summer break, I ventured ro the Yukon,
where I worked in one of the base camps. The workers prcv..nted the
Alaska highway from sinking into the inlirm muskeg by cominuously
resurfacing it with gravel. The camp containl'd an interesting mix of
characters fleeing creditors, probadonary officers, the military, and
angry ex-wives demafldmg alimony payments. Alcohol was th..ir prime
nutrient- They were brewing their own. One ~rly morning they left
Jubilantly to disrill their ferm..ntcd mash only to rerum profoundly
despondent. The grizzly bl'ars had partied on their alcoholic mash.
We were faced with animated grizzlies stumbling drunkenly in our
camp. Fortunately, they were [00 uncoordinated to do much damage.
_16 A HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY IN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

Life amid this fronc;.i.et, drinking, and gambling subculwte elevated

the survival value of personal resourcdulness and initiative. It provided
me with a uniquely broacl perspeocrivc On life.

IN SEARCH OF A BENIGN climate, I enrolled in the University

of British Columbia in Vancouvet. Iking shon of the coin of the realm,
I worked in a woodwork plant in the afternoons and took a heavy
<:ourse load in the mornings. I gr3duated ill 3 years with the University
Bola<:an Award in psy<:hology_ There was an element 0( fOfl;uity to my
entry into psy<:hology. I was in a carpool with premeds and engineers
who enroHed in classes at an unmercifully early hour. So while waiting
for my English class, I flipped through a course catalogue that happened
to have been Jeft on a table in the library. I noticed an imroducwry
psychology course that would bf- an early rime fiUer. I enrolled in it
and found my fumre profession.
When it came time to apply for gr3duate study I went to my
academic advisor and asked, "Where are .the swne tablets of psychol-
ogy?" He replied unhesitantly, "University of Iowa, of course." This
was the heyday of theorerical and experimental analyses of learning,
which was the phenomenon of cemral interest, with the HuJlian ap-
proach bf-ing the dominam theory at the time. Clark Hull had passed
on his theoretical baron to his illustrious ptot~gi, Kenneth Spence.
who presided masterfully over the psychology depanment at Iowa. So
I set my sights On the theoretical epicenter for graduate srudy. Iu I
was about to leave, my advisor explained that previous applicants had
found the docwral program at Iowa to be a taXing experieocc. His
portrayal made it cleat" that resilience and a tough hide would be handy
survival resou.-.:es.
As a Canadian, I did not qualify for fellowships because of the
citizenship requirement. Anhur Benton set up a fluid aid system that
kept me financially afloat until he could arrange more srable funding.
I dusted off my carpentry skills for constnlCtion projectS at Arthur's
home during this interim aid plOgram. When Judson BlOwn departoo
for his summer consulta,lCy at the LickJand Air Fo.-.:e Base, I was the
keeper of his house and amiable hound. I wrore to my undergraduare
advisor and informed him that rhe psychology depanmenr at Iowa
was, indeed, an intellectually demanding pl~. But it was also a highly
 J,.L2U.T E\ANOURA

suppoUlve one. I explained that my experience at Iowa reminded me

of Mark Twain's COmment about Wag~r's music:"il is not as bad as
it sounds!-
Unlike the all-too<ommon doctoral programs run on an eclectic
cafeteria Style, Iowa conducted a theoretically intense program that
had a scrong impact on smdems' professional careers. Ie was he~ that
students had the benefit of models of imense dedication 10 theoretical
analyses coupled with intricately designed expecimef\l5 to seide dis-
putes between tlval theories. Strong commitment to theoretical analysis
and respen for incisive experimenllltion became the hallmark of an
Iowa graduate. Diverse programs of research conducted by Kenneth
Spence, Judson Browll, and hadar Farber addressed d~ determinanrs
and mechanisms governing learning, motivation, and clinical phenom-
ena from the perspective of Hullian theory. Gusrav Bergmann, a relo-
cated member of the positivist Vienna Circle, provided the philosophi-
cal foundation for rhis line of lheori~illg. Arthur BenlOn, who directed
the clinical training program, added a cognitive neurosciem:e dimen_
sion 10llg before it became in vogue.
This was the era of contests between alternative grand theories. Do
contingent experiences build and srrengthen habits, as the Hullians
comended, Or C<ellte expectancies, as the Tolmanians argued~ Was
reinforcement necessary for learning? Experiments were desisned to
challense basic tenets of the comending theories. The leadins theorists
differed in their conceptual oriemations, but they subscribed to meth-
oxIological reductionism. Elementary processes were explored mainly
with animals on the assumpl:ion that the rudimentary prOCfiStS verified
in animal experimentation would explain psychosocial phenomena at
higher levels of complexity.
Although we g",duate students were products of the same doctoral
program, we did fI(K WQcship at the same theoretical altar. This was
suikingly iIlustI'llted at a me<'ting called by ,the National Institutes of
Health to discuss new developmen.s in theorizing in the field of
learning. Of {he seven invitees, five were Iowa docto"'tcs. Shep White
went the cognitive route, Sid Bijou and Jacob Gewirtz wem the opeI'llnt
conditioning route, Howard Kendler represcmed <he Hullian perspe<:-
tive, and I chose a social cognitive theoretical f",mework. We left Iowa
with the valun and tools 1O be productive scientists \~hatever future
throre'!ical course our scholarly pursuits look.
~8 I< tllSTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY IN I<UTODIOGRI<PI{I'

Kennerh Spence micromanaged vin:ually every aspen of rhe depart·

memo From time ro-tcime we added a bie of levity and counterconrro(
to rhis otherwise inu'nsc donoral program. On one occasion, when
Olre of rhe bcasries drew its fmal brearh in in mazed world. wedeposircd

it in a makeshift rodent coffin adorned with =renrial wreaths on

rhe deparemenc bulletin board with the sign. "This ttU ran according
to Tolman's theory:' Kenneth was nor ar all amuscG by our ceremo-
nial burial.
Gusrav Bergmann had a colorful animared lecturing style. He would
wander rhroughout the class chain-smoking. wirh cigarette ash f100ting
down on the scudents seated below. He sruffed his pocket wirh wooden
matches and would light them with a flourish on his rhigh. His lectures
took on an emotive qrurlity when he addressed rheories he held in low
regard, which were quite a few. Gesralt theory was high on rhis list.
He soughr ro.dem~rify the notion that the whole is greater rhan rhe
sum of its parts. He characterized the ~whole" as re/leering emergem
properties that are the product nor only of the agsrcgate properties of
the constituellt dements bur also of their interactive elTecrs. It is
reporred thar on one occasion, while announcing in a dramatic ere·
~ndo, "If rhe whole is greater than rhe sum of the parts, rhen rhe
whole is a ghost, Gustav set himself on fire while vigorously slapping
M

his match-laden pocket. 1be student over whom he was hovering ar

the time sounded the alarm:
~Professm- Bergmann, you are on fire"
"You're clamn tight I am,~ he exclaimed, thinking dle scudenr was
speaking figuratively_
Blissfully oblivious to power differentials, ar the end ofeach academic
year we hosted rhe annual Regression Dinner. during which we made
ceremonial offerings to the faculty. For example. to the faculry member
who raught the psychotherapy coutsC from a nondirecrive perspective,
we offered a broom handle ropped with hands pointing in every direc~
tion. In recognition of his membership in the positivist Vienna Cirde,
we offered Gusrav a circle of balooey. In accepting our offering, he
remarked rhar this was operationalism at its material best. My graduare
peers were mainly World War II vetenns pursuing their educarion
on rhe GI Bill. Their combat experiences under Gcocral Patron and
other tough commanders undoubredly concribured ro the boldness of
our cohon.
 ALBERT RIlNOUIl.A

Given a lean cash flow, I o,,~ed for the same fast_rrack academic
pa£e I had adopc«l for my baccalaureate degrff and complec«l the
doctoral progr:otrl in 3 years. I lefr Iowa with more than a degrff,
however. 1bere is much that wedo designedly to exercise some measure
of oontrol Over our self-development and life circumsr:mces, bu~ ~here
is a lor of fortuity in the courses lives rake. Indeed, some of the fllOSl
important dcrermillllnts of life poiths oc(Ur through the mOSI trivial
of circumstiUlCes. People areohen inaugun.ted imo new life rn.jeaorin,
marital pannerships, and occupalional Cllr.-ers through fonuitous cit-
(Umstancn. A se-emingly insignificant fonuilous event can set in m0-
tion constellations of influences that alter rhe course of lives. lbese
branching processes alter the linear progression, continuity, and gradu-
alism of life-course lrajectorics.

I P REV ro us l ... 0 ESCIl. I BE0 How a fortuitous event gor me jn~o

psychology. At lowa I met my future wife, Vitginia Yarns, who was
on the teaching staff in the School of Nutsing, through a forruimus
even'. My friend and I were quite late gening to the golf course one
5uooay, so we were bumped to a Ia.er starring rime. 1bere were twO
women ahead of us. They Wete slowing down. We were speeding up.
Before long we became a genial foursome. I me. my wife in a sand
tn.p! The golf connec,;on had a ~rivial origin. The Universily of Brirish
Columbia require<! twO physical education courses fot graduation. I
selected outdoor physical education, imagining i. to be a wffimunioll
wi~h Mother NalUre at a leisurely pate. On being instructed in the
fitst session .0 run around the rrack to .he point of exhaustion JUSt
shon of cardiac arrC'$t, I opted for archery as more to my liking. To
fulfill the second reqUIrement, I selected indoor physical ed in which,
unexpec.edly, .hey nor only made us run around Dut climb ropes ~o
di~~ying heights. On my speedy descent I promptly swi.ched to a
more benign form of exerrioll-golf. Were it not for the bothersome
physical ed requiremem and tardiness in gening ro the golf links, our
lives would have taken entirely different courses.
Some yeats later, I deliverro a presidential address at the Wes.ern
Psychological Convention on the psychology of chance ellCOUntets and
life paths (Bandurn, 1982). At .h" convention the fallowing yeat, an
editor of one of the publishing houses explained tha, he had entered
W A HISTORY OF PSYCHOlOGY IN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

rhe lecrure hall as i! was rapidly filling up and seized an empty chair
near the enrfJI.nce. In rhe coming wa-k he would be marrying the
woman who happened to be seated neX[ to him. With only a mornenrary
change in time of corry, searing consrellations would have a1teted, and
this intersect would nor have occuned. A mariml partnership was rhus
fortuitously formed at a talk devored lO fortuirous dererminants of
tife paths!
ForcuilOus influences are ignored in the causal structure of the social
sciences even rhough rhey play an imporram role in life cou=. The
physical sciences acknowledge indererminacy at the quantum level in
the physical world. Fortuitous evenrs introduce an clemI'm of inderer.
minacy in the behavioral sciences. TIlC" separ:ate paths in a chance
encounter have their own deteuninants, bur they ar-e causally uncon·
nected until their interse<:tion, at which point the encounter creates a
•
unique confluence of influeoces dlltt have causal impact. FOrTuitous
occurrences may be unforeseeable, bur having occurred, the conditions
they creare enter as contributing fanoes in causal processes in the same
way as prearranged ones do_ I rook the fortuitous c~[er of life
seriously, provided a preliminary <:onceptual scheme for predit:ting the
psychosocial impacr of such evenrs •.hrough the interaction of personal
and environmenral properties, and specified ways 10 which people can
capimlize agenrically on fortuitous opportunities (Bandura, 1982,
1998).
Fortuity does nor mean unconnollability of irs ...[fe([s. People can
make chance happl"n by pursuing an activ... life that increases the
number and type of fortuitous erKountees they will experierK.... Chance
favors the inquisitive and venruresom... who go places, do things, and
explore new activities. Peopl... also make dlltnce work for them by
cultivating their interests, enabling beliefs and compet...ncies. These
personal resources allow them to make the most of opportunities that
artse uneIpectedly. Pasteur pur it weI( when he nored, "Chance favors
only the prepared mind." Even that distinguished lay philosopher,
Groucho Man, insightfully observed that people can influence how
they play the hand thar {(muiry deals r1ll"ffi, "You have to be in rhe
right place at the right time, but when it coml"S, you better have
somethiug on the baU." $elf-<levelopmeor gives pcopl... a hand in shap-
ing the courses their livl"S take.
 "
Mrcr receiving my docmrarc, I complcm:l a I-year internship lit
rhe Wichita Guidance Center. I was llUroctoo to this progTllJll for twO
main l'fiSOOS. The cemer was diU<:too by a psychologist, Joseph Brewer,
which J reasoned would dampen excessive me<:!iealizalion of common
problems of living. This was a time when chI' field of clinical psychology
was Ilfivily intrapsychically oriemed under t:he reign of psychoanalytic
thoory. The center was embedded in a diverse Ill.'twork of communiry
services. The societal conoectedness provided a brooder perspcClive 00
how people Jive their lives. It was a year well spent.
I joined the faculty a( Stanford University in 1953_ My first meeting
wirh the renowned lISSemblage of faculty members-Bob Sears, Jack
Hilgard, Quinn McNemar, Calvin SlOlle, Paul Farnsworth, and Doug
Laurence, rh!l':<' of whom wt,:rc former American Psychological Associa-
tion (APA) presidents-was an awed experience. I had been weaned
on their textbooks, so they were larger thao life. My appointment was
for 1 year as an acting instnJcror. Halfway through we academic term,
I went to I30b Sears, the chair of the department, and explained that
I was considering an offer in Santa Rosa, Ilear the bucolic wine region,
combining clinical work in a community service center with part-time
teaching at the Sanrn Rosa Junior College. In his forcdul response,
Bob explained that I would be re<:eiving a ~-ycarassistant professorship,
and that in the interim, he would place me under self-protective "house
arrCSt" to forestall an irrational decision.
During this time, Stanford was in the early throes of launching
an expansive transformational change under the adroit leadership of
its proVOSt, Fracl Terman. He was the son of lewis Tetman, who
creatacl the Stanford-Binet tCSt and launchacl the produerive longitudi-
flal study into the ljfe courses of intellectually gifted children. Flushed
with ample reserves and discretionary funds from an ambitiollS fund-
raising campaign, Fred put into overdrive his theory of "steeples of
excellence.·· He instruered search comminees in '!:Very division of the
university to go for the best. Renownacl faculty, he argued, would
anraer promising young faculty members, excellent grnduare studenrs,
and plentiful research grams. He would wander into search committtt
meetings 10 be greeted, all too often, with r«ital5 of why the foremost
scholar in a given field would not be movable. Ftacl would remind
the faculty that they were charged with finding the bes.r arn<!jnate,
52 A HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY IN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

and it was his respilnsibility ro figure out how to aw:act them

to Stanford.
This was a period of accelerared groweh in excellence. Programs
in rhe humanities were being enlarged with recruired distinguished
professors from ehe Ivy League universities. Nobellaureares were added,
and Stanford grew its own Nobelisrs with rhe young schoLars they
brought with them. The psychology department was given two new
billers, which brought Loon Festinget and Bill Esu:s ro Stanford. In
shorr order the department added Dick Atkinson, Gordon Bower,
Eleanor Maccoby, Walr Mischel, and Phil Zimbardo to its faculry.
The medical school was relocated from San Francisco to tbe Sranford
campus to link it more closely to rhe basic sciences, with expanded
opporruniries for collaborarive teaching and research. Being an astute
judge ofin(l(lvii\riveoess, Terman encouraged graduate students to trans-
late theoretical ideas into businesses developing !leW technologies, thus
laying the foundation for Silicon Valley with attracrive consulting
an:angements for the faculty.
WIthin a relatively short time, Stanford was transformed into a
university of rhe highese rank. 1.$ a visiting faculty member at Stanford
in 1906, William James apdy described rhis wondrous place as near
"uropian,~ where "tbere couldn't be imagined a better envIronment
for an intellectual man to teach and work," with the added benefit of
"perfection of weather" Uames, 19(6). Stanford offered a wonderful
aca.demic environment in 19~3 and got even bener with time. I was
blessed wirh illustrious colleagues, gifred studencs, considerable free-
dom to go wherever my curiosity might lead, and a university ethos
rhar approached scholarship not as a matrer of publish or perish bur
with puzuement that the pursuitofknowlcdge should rC<Cjuire cocrcion.
The many atcflletions in the spectacular San Ffllncisco Bay area made
it easy to maintain a balance in the competing priotities of life. In
reflecling on their life course, people rypically express regrets over the
things they shortchanged in pmsuir of their career. The late Senator
Tsongas pUt it well when he remarked, ~No one on their death bed
ever expressed regret for not having spent more time in the office. ~
My wife and twO daughters, Mary, a clinical psychologist, and Carol,
the dIrector of a dinic for adolescent children of migrant workers and
the neglecred poor, made sure we kept rhe retrospective regrets to a
 ALBERT BAN DURA
"
mimmum. We hiked the Bay UN ridge trails, camped amidst the
starely redwoods, worked in grassroots conservation movements, ex_
plored rhe regional culinary shrines, cheered rhe melodious operatic
divas lind philharmooias, applauded the baroquel'$ ac the Cannel Bach
festivals, sampled the noble grape in the bucolic Napa Valiey, and
«plored che grandeur of the High Sierras. Nothiog beau communing
with che muses atop Vogelsang Peak [0 place petty concerns in cosmic
persplXtive. 'fbe reach of work life has undergone transformat,ive
changes with the advent of wireless technologies. People are now wired
to their workplace, makiog it more diflieult to keep the mobile office
from intruding inco family, social, and recreational life.

I ROS" THROUGH Ttl" RANKS at$tanford, chaired the depart_

ment briefly, and was awarded die David Starr Jordan Professot of
Social Science in Psychology endowed chair, named aftet the first
president of the university. In 1973, my cloistered work life in academia
cook a sharp turn to an unat:cuscomed trajectory. One day, Ken Little,
the executive officer of the AI'A, called, explaining thar the association's
call for nominations placed my oame on rhe presidential ballot. I
regarded this comest as providing Warhol's 15 minutes of fame with
virtually no risk of electability, be<:ause I had 00 involvement in the
organizational llCtiviries and politkaJ machinations of the association.
On a bright Saturday morning while J was pruning atOp a mulberry
tr«, I was called to the phone, where KnI announced, 'You'te it:
with no option for a recOWtl. This was the fastest evolutionary descent
from the trees to a ptofessiooal boardroom. Rober/'r Ruin of Ord8
displaced PJYfhological Rei/in.; as the reading of choice.
This was a difficulr time for our profession both internally and
publicly. A media frenzy was whipping up public fear of the looming
peril of behavior modification. In his disaffC'Ction with the social sci-
nIces, President Nixon issuro an exC'Cutive order terminating psychol-
ogy training grantS. PsychologiStS had 00 effa:tive vehicle for s~ing
in a colleclive voice on legislat'ive initiatives and sociopolitical influ-
ences that affected our discipline. Through reluctance {O engage in
publIC activities and fear of jeopardizing OUr tax StatuS, we were accom-
plices to our own quiescence III the public arena. To remedy this lack,
H A HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY IN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

-
we created a separate advocacy organization, the Association for the
Advancement of Psychology, to address ($Sues affe<:tmg our profession
and to bring our scientific knowledge to bear on public policies and
social practices that affect people's lives,
This newly formed organization was quickly put to use to counteract
effOttS by rhe AmetiOlll Psychiatric Association {O limit lhe auronomy
of psychologists to practice psychotherapy. The twO associations had
agreed nOt to infringe on each olher's turf in Iegislarive mauel'$, In
violation of this accord, they were lobbying fot a bill in Consress
to allow psychologists to pflll:tice psychotherapy only under medical
authorizarion, on the grounds rbat only medical psychotherapy can
trear mind and body. We defeated this professional infringement,
The DepartmentofDefense Cut rhe budget for psychological $ervices
for dependents of veterans. TI,e American Psychiarric Association was
promoting a !iCt of guidelines that would have placed limits on the
use of psychology providers, We nor only defeared this effon: but, on lilt
basis ofour congressional resrimony, the chairman of the congressional
committee overseeing the program invited us to help draft the $er-
vice guidelines.
The main thrust of my presidency centered on creating mechanisms
for bringing psychological knowledge ro bear on public policies and
informing the general public about rhe relevance of our discipline for
ma([ttS of societal concem. We established our credibility in congres-
sional circles as a reliable source of information, not JUSt as promoters
ofguild self-inu:rests, We testified regularly on pending bills, informed
congressional staffs in the drafting of legislarive regulations, and placed
psychology congressional fellows on the staffs of key senarors and House
members who presided over committees relevant to our field.
The APA was on the brink of dissolution, with festering conHicr
between academicians and activist practitioners seeking ro gain control
of the association. The commi$Sion appointed by the API\. board to
consider restrucruring the association recommended a federalisr model,
gtanting theconstiruent units a fairamouot ofautonomy to pursue their
parochial interesrs with a cemral board co address issues of common
importance and to speak wirh one voice to rhe public. A 2-year rrial,
marred by distrustful machinations, ended in divorce and the formation
of [he American Psychological S<x:ie(y,
 ALBERT BANDURA
"
My INITIAL PROGRAM OF RESEARCH at S=ford focused on
the centrality of social modeling in human self-devc:lopment aoo
change. The pre:VlIiliog analyses of learning focused almOSt Clltirely on
learning through the effects of one's octions. The explanatory mecha-
nisms were cast in terms of pc:ripheI'llI association of environmentlll
stimuli to responses. I found chis behavioristic chc:ocizing discordant
with the obvious social reality that much of what we learn is through
the power of social modc:ling. I could not imagine a culture in which
its language; mores; familial CUStoms and practices; occupational com-
petencies; and educational, religious, and political pCllCtices were: gradu-
ally shaped in each new membet by rewarding and punishing conse-
quences of theit trial-and-error pc:oorffillm:es.
Despite the centraliry and pervasiveness ofsoeial modeling in every-
dlly life:. there was no resea.rch to speak of on modc:ling processes until
the publication of 5tXia/ Lutrni"g and [mitati"" by Miller and Dollllrd
in 1941. They recogni2ed modc:ling phenomena but cORSuUed them
as a spedal case of discrimination learning. A model provides a social
cue, the observer penocms II matching response, and its reinfotcement
suengrhens the tendency to behave imitatively. I found rhis conception
wmting on rhe determinants, mec:hmisms, and scope of observarional
learning. It seemed at odds with observarional learning in everyday
life, which requires neither performance enactment nor reinforcement.
There were some other conceptions of m<:Xieling phenomena, but I
found them lacking as well.
The writings on imitation chllracteriud modeling as mimicry of
specific actS. This constricted view limited the scope of research for
many years. Personaliry and developmental theoristS conceptualized
modc:ling as identification involving wholesale incorporation of person-
ality p;atterns. The defining properries of identification were too diffuse,
arbitrary, and empirically questionable either (0 clarify modeling pro-
cesses or to guide scientific inquiry (Bandura, t 969b). I concepmalized
{his mode of learning as modeling. It tranocended specific response
mimicry in ocope and was selecrively and conditionally manifested
ntther (han involving wholesale adoption of personality traits.
1bc: power ofsocial modeling was underscored in a large-scale project
I conducted with Richard Walters, my first doctoral student. We
studied rhe familial dererminanrs of hyperaggressive styles of behavior
56 /l IIISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY IN /lUTOBIOGR/lPIlY

in boys who lived in advantaged neighborhoods dlllc were not cooducive

to antisocial behavior. Raben Cairns, a newly admitted student in our
doctoral progrnm, was also pan of this project. We found rhat parental
modeling of aggressive orientations played a prominent rol", in the
familial transmission of aggression (Bandurn & Walters, 1959).
To furthu understanding: of th", determinants and mechanisms gov-
erning mooeling, we studied this mooe of learning and social influence
eIperim",ntally. Dorrie and Sheila Ross and Ted Rosenthal contributed
much to this program of reseatch. We analyzed social modeling as
opetating through four subfunctions encompassing attentional, repre-
sentarional, ",nactive translarional, and motivational processes (Band-
urn, 1971). I came Wld"'t heavy fire from operant conditioners for
whom nonreinforced mooeling posed a major problem for theireIplana-
tory system (Baer, P<"terson, & Sherman, 1%7). They contended that
reinforcement of some matching responses would esrablish imitation
as a conditioned reinforcer. Tests of these alternative theories demon-
SHated that genetali~ed imitation ;s goveroed by social beliefs and
ourcome eIp<Xtat;Ons rather than by infused reinforcement (Baodura
& Barah, 1971).
There were a number ofentrenched misconceptions about the oature
and scope of mooeling that put a damper on the research and social
applications of this powerlUl mooe of learning. Progress in this area,
therefore, required research designed not only CO elucidare rhe determi-
nanes and mechanisms ofsocial mooeling bur co pur the misconceptions
to rest. One such misconception was that modeling could produce
only response mimicry. This misconception was dispelled by showing
that mooeling involved abstracting the information conveyed by spe-
cific exemplars about the structure and rh", Wldetiying principles gov-
erning the behavior, rather than simple response mimicry of specific
exemplars (Bandura, 1986; Rosenrhal & Zimmerman, 1978). Once
individuals learn the guiding principle, they can use it to generate
new versions of the behavior that go beyond what they have seen
or heard.
Anothet misconc:epr:ion, requiring reticement, held that modeliog
is antithetical to creativity. We were able co show how innovation can
emerge through modeling. Wh",n exposed to models who differ in
their styles of [hinking and behavior, observers rarely pattern their
behavior exclusively after a single source. Nor do they adopt all d,e
 ALBEIlT BANDURA
"
attributes even of preferred moods. Ratber, observers combine various
feamres of different models into new amalgams that differ from the
individuaJ modeled sou[[~ (Dandura, Ross, & Ross, 1%3). Thus,
two observers c;an conStruct new forms of behavior entirely through
modeling that differ from each other by selectively blending different
featutes from che variam models. There is a variety in tbe profusion
ofmodeling.lnllovamrs select useful elements from differem eJ:emplars,
improve upon them, synthesiu them imo new forms, and tailor them
m their particular pursuirs_ Selective rnodelillg Ortell serves as the
mother of innovacion.
There was another oft-repeated misconception regarding the scope
of modeling. Many activities involve cognitive skills on how to gain
and use information for solving problems. Critics argued that modeling
cannot build cognitive skills because thought pn.:>c= are covert and
are not adequately teflected in modeled aCTions, which are tbe eod
PrOOucts of the cognitive operations. This was II limitation of conceptual
vision rather than an inherent limitation of modeling. In fact, cognitive
skills am be teadily promoted by verbal modeling, in which models
vetbalize aloud their reasoning strategies as they engage ill problem-
solving activities. The thoughrs guiding their decisions and actions
are thus made obsel"Vl'lble and acquirable.

My BA PTI SM I N POW Ell POLl TICS occucred early ill my profes-

sional life. At the time that I began my experiments on observational
learning, there was growing public cnocern about the possible effects
of televised violence on children. I was invited to testify before congres-
sional comminees, the Federal Trade Commission, and the National
Commission on the Causes and Prevemion of Violence prompted by
tbe assassination of Robooon Kennedy. The Federal Trade Commission
was t'foubled by increasing reports of sedous injuries suffered by chil-
dren who modeled hazardous aCliviti~ in televised adverti:;em"'nrs. The
commission used our research findings on modeling to get advertisers to
alter ads depicting mjurious f"'alS by children on bicycles and dun'"
buggies, ads for headache remedies in which the cha.rocters induce
splitting headaches by pounding each olher on th", head with mallels,
and other types of ads showing children performing activities that risk
. ..
serIOUS mlury.
58 A HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY IN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

This excursion into the public arena provided a sobering glimpse

inco the power of tbe broadcast industry, some of which was direcred
ar me pe!SOna!ly. I goc my fi(St inkling into rhe exercise of rhis power
at a meeting convened by the National Institute of Mcneal Health
(NIMH) ro drafr a research agenda on television·s efft<:r.s. Surprisingly,
we met at the plush Waldorf Towers in New Yotk rather than in
Washington for what turned oue to be essentially a production seaged
by the broadcast industry under the auspices of NIMH. Mter we
identified rhe different lines of research rhat could advan<:e rhe under~
standing of televisioo's efft<:ts, the research communiry was invited to
submit geam proposa/.>;. A review panel, ffitxting in a luxurious Carib-
bean setting, rejected my proposal.
Look magazine invired me to write a piece on the social in1luen<:e
of television for a special issue rhey were publishing on youth. When
it appeared, the Television Informarion Office, a subsidiary of the
National Association of Broadcasters, sent a large packet of material
to its sponsor stations e:xplaining why my research on social modeling
should be disregarded. This was just the beginning of a multipronged
offense. Psychologist Ruth Hartley prepared adocumenr commissioned
by CBS in which she took me to cask and criticized the relevance of
other experimental studies demonstraring a positive telation betwtxO
exposure ro violent fare and aggtessive behavior. In an anicle prepared
for TV GMide under the tirle, MThe Man in the Eye of rhe Hurricane:'
Edirh Efron (\%9) dismissed the modeling studies, <:omplaioed thar
rhe re:;earch by ~mbers of the "Bandura school ... won them center
seage in Washington,~ and criticized the Surgeon Genetal's office for
acting Mas if Rome were burning and Dr. Bandura were a fire eJtcin-
guishcr~ (p. 37).
One evening I received a call from one of my graduate students
telling me to turn on my television set to see tbe character playing
my tole undergoing :l. bLisrering cross-examination concerning my
modeling studies. I wasn't doing tOO well! In the plodine of this
televised movie, a beleaguered wife of a screenwriter defends him as
he is being unmercifully victimized by a haranguing press and a
vindicrive mother woo claims that her son's crime was prompted by
a similar act in one of the screenwriter's televised plots. The cross-
examiner was disputing evidence that televised violence a(fe.:r.s aggres-
sive behavior. As part of my program of research on selective moral
 ALBERT BANOURA
"
disengagemellt at the social systems level, I documented how each of
the mechanisms by which moral self-sanctions are disengag«! from
detrimencal conduct was enlisted by the television in<!ustry ill the
pr<xluctiOfl of gratuilOliS violence ror wlDmercial purposes (Bandura,
1973, 2004b). The self-exooerating televised movie portrayed these
diseogagement practices in vivid fashion. Ju. I was being pummeled
by media-commissioned critiques, paid consultants, and fictionalized
dramas, I began to fed a kinship with the Bobo doll!
Failure to distinguish between the diverse effectS of televised violence
and the appropriate meth<xlologies fur elucidating them provided a
fertile ground rot disputes. Different lines of tesearch identified four
major effects of exposure to televised violence. It can reach novel
aggressive styles of conduct; weaken testraincs over interpersonal ag-
gtession by legidmizing, glamorizing, and rdvializing violent conduct;
desensitize and habitWlte viewers to human cruelty; and shape public
images of reality. The Bobo doillaborntory experiments were designed
to clatify the processes governing observational learning. The method-
ology for measuring learning effects requires simulated rather (han
human targets so thac "iewers will te'o'eal all they have learned. To use
human targetS to assess the instructive function of celevised influence
would be as nonsensical as to require bombatdiers to bomb San Fran-
cisco, New York, or some other inhabited locations to test whethet
they had acqui.re<i bombing skills. I had to address misunderstandings
and misrepresentations of the reseuch.
The Nacional Commission was about to celease its repore concluding,
in the mass media section, that tbe empirical evidence taken as a whole
was supportive of a positiv'" relation between teleyis«! violence and
aggressive behavior (National Commission on (he Causes and Preven-
tion of Violence, 1969). In a surprise nlOY"', Senator Pastoce, a supporeer
of (he broadcast industry (Paisley, 1972) who chaired the Communica-
tions SubcommIttee, instructed the Surgeon General, with President
Nixon's "'ndorsement, to assemble a (Omminee of expertS to evaluate
the effects of tekYised violence and co allocate a million dollars for
new research on this topic.
The first meeting of the eyaluation commIttee took place at the
Cent"'r for Advanced Study at Stanford. Ed Park",r and I were invited
to sil in on th", mec.ing. We were surprised to find that 40% of
the comminee membership was tied to Ih", b~t industry_twO
60 A HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY IN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

network researcherS, cwo network consulrants, and a former research

executive at CBS. We enlisted Senaror Mercalf to obtain information
on rhe selKIion procedure. Health, Education and Welfare Secretary
Finch explained d12r each nerwork was allowed ro veto, withour expla-
nation, any of the nominations on the list submiued by professional
associations and the b~ast necworks. I was one of eight researchers,
including Len Betkowin, Percy Tannenbaum, child psychianisr Leon
Eisenbetg, and sociologisrs Leo Bogan: and Qno l.arsen, who were
vetoed. Finch provided cwo justifications for che veto procedure---
precedent and objecrivity. He explained thar rhe tobacco indusrry was
given vetO power in rhe formation of the committ~ to evaluate the
healrh effects of smoking. The report would have grellter impact, he
cbimed, if the committee membeu were entirely objective. Senatoc
Metcalf was astonished to learn thar· rhe cobacco industry was also
given sole vero power. He quesrioned rhe selKrive privilege of veto
power given to tbe broadcast industry and how sracking the commircee
with folk$ ried ro rhe relevision industry accomplished imparciality.
Writing rhe report created hes<taches for the broadcast-linked mem-
beu because rhe empirical dara were nor friendly to a conclusion of
null effects. The report by Jack Gould (972) was written in opaque
technobabble that was better suited to confuse rhan to inform the
public. Rose Goldsen (1972), a Cornell sociologisr, dubbed the report
"science in wonderland: Before the report Wa$ released, a copy was
leaked to rhe NtUI York Times, which published a column on the
report under the misleading headline, "1V Violence Held Unharmful
to Youth."
Researchen who condUCted rhe srudies for the committee were
incensed at the misrepresentation of their findings. They protested to
Senator Pa$tore, who then scheduled an open Senate hearing on the
committee's report. After years of obfuscation, negarion, and disparage-
ment of research programs by the broadcast industry, rheir own Chief
researcher, Joseph Klapper, acknowledged at the hearings, "1'herc were
indications of ll. causal relationship. __ . The catharsis thoory had no
empirical support." No U.S. network reported on the Senate hearing.
Because of concern over rhe spiUover of U.S. televised violence into
Canada., the Film Dor.ud of Canada (1972) filmed the entire Senate
hearing.
 ALBF-RT 6ANOUJ.A
"
Several social sciemiscs rep(med on the perversion of the scientific
review process. Mathilda Paisley (1972) w[()(e a piece on violence done
ro TV violence research. In a book devoted to this controversial episOOe,
Cater and Strickland (1975) traced the evoh.ltion and fare of rhe report.
Scinrct published a lead anicle documenting and condemning die misuse
of the scientific advisory system for policy initialives (Boffey &
Walsh,1970).
The late President Johnson once remarked char politics is like sausage
making. You don't want to examine whac goes inro it. Socia.! scientists
seek to advance knowledge that can inform public policy. As the
stealthy workings of the sociopolitical forces swiding around the issue
of television effeo:tS illustrate, we also need to scudy bow polilia and
power, which shape public policy, determine how our knowledge is
used. Policy research is difficult ro conducl, and we do little of it.
A growing influential source of social learning is the varied and
pervasive symbolic rnodelins through lhe e1e(;tronic media. The ex-
traordinary advances in the technology of communication are trans~
forming the nature, reach, speed, and loci of human influence. These
technological developmenrs have radically altered the social diffusion
process. Video systems feeding off telecommunications satellilcs have
become the dominant means for disseminating symbolic environments.
New ideas, values, and styles of conduct are now being rapidly spread
worldwide in ways that foster a globally distributed consciousness.

As ME NTIQ NED EA RLI E R, psychodynamic theory, especially the

psychoanalytic form, reigned over rhe fields of personality, psychother-
apy, and pop culture when I entered the field of psychology. The mid-
19505 witnessed growing disillusionment with this line of theorizing
and irs mode of rrearment. The rhcory lacked predictive power and
did not fare well in therapeutiC effectiveness. Following rhe adage thar
one should light a candle rather rhan curse the conceptual darkness,
Dick Walters and I provided an alternative view of human behavior
in the book, Social L-rning and Ptno""lity Devdopmml (Bandura &
Wallers, 196~).
During [his petiod, I W1lS teaching the psychotherapy courses at
Stanford, and I became intrigued by cases in whIch dire(c modification
62 A 11iSTORYOF PSYCHOLOGY IN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

of problem behavior not only produce<llasting improvementS in peo_

ple's lives but fostered generalized benefits in oontreated areas of fUnc-
tioning. I spent several months tracking down such treatments pub-
lished in obscure journals housed in the mustyotaeombs of theStanfotd
library. I emerged bleary-eyed but iuspired to publish the atticle,
·Psychotherapy as a Lea.roing Process" in the joutnal PJydJo/~iuJBu//~
Ii" (Bandura, 1961). Ie was organized around six basic principles of
behavioral change.
lbe time was apparently ripe: for a new direction in the conceptual-
ization and treatmerlt of beluvior. J was flooded with reprinc requests
from home llnd ab.-oad llCross specialties and disciplinary dornaius. On
the basis of rhis ardcle, Eysenck invited me (Q concribute a chapter
to a volume he was editing, which was the first published volume on
behavior therapy. The chapter kept enlarging unci I it ourgrew the
assignment. Instead, it turned into the volume Pri"nplc of Bthaf,ior
McJijiuJrion (Bandum, 1969a). It addressed che influencial role of cogni-
tive, vicarious, and self-regulatory medulIlisms in human adaptation
aoo personal and social change.
During this time, I was examining the self-regulatory mechanisms by
which people exercise comtol over their motivation, styles of chinking,
emotional life, llfl<1 personal accomplishments. As pan of this line of
research on the development and exetcise of personal agency, my Stu-
dents and I were devising new modes of treatment using mastery
experiences as the ptincipal vehicle ofchange. Talk alone will noc Cute
intracrable problems. People with intracrable phobias, of CQun;t, are
IlOl about to do what they dread. With the creative contributions of

Bruni Ritcer and Ed Blanchud, we created environmental conditions

that enabled people with phobias co succeed despite themselves. This
was achieved by enlisting a Vllriety of perfurmance mastery aids (Ban_
dura, Blanchard, & Riuet, 1969; Bandura, Jeffery, & Gajdos, 1975).
We initially tested the effectiveness of this enabling approoch with
people with severe snake phobias. This proved to be a powerful treat-
ment. It instilled a robust sense ofcoping efficacy; transformed attitudes
toward che phobic objecrs from abhorrence to liking; and wiped our
anxier:y, biological Stress reactions, and phobic behaviot. These people
with phobias had been plagued by recurrent nighunares for 20 or }O
years. Guided mastery rransformed dream activity and wiped ouc
chronic nightmares. As one woman gained mastery over her snake
 ALBERT BANDURA
"
phobia, she dreamt that the boa constrictor befriended her and was
helping her to wash the dishes. Reptiles soon h<ied from ber dreams.
The changes endllCCd. The people with phobias who achieved only
partial improvement with alternative modes of nearment achieved full
recovery with the benefit of tbe guided mastery treatment regardless
of the severity of rheir phobic dysfunctions. Lloyd Williams Om)
showed that the guided mastery treatment was equally powerful with
the most profound anxiety disorder_gorapbobia.
The 1960s ushered in remarkable transformative changes in the
«planation and modification of human fuoctioning and change (Ban-
dura, 2004<:). Causal analysis shifted from unconscious psychic dynam-
ics to transactional psychosocial dynamics. Human functioning was
constroed as the product of the dynamic interplay between personal,
behavioral, and environmental inOuences. Social labeling practices re-
garding problemsofliving were changed. Problem behavior was viewed
as divergent behavior rather [han a symptom of a psychic disease.
FlUlctional analysis of human behavior replaced diagnostic labeling
lhat categorized people imo psychopathologic types with stigmatizing
consequences. Laboratory and conI rolled field studies of the determi-
nams of hutrnlll behavior and lhe mechanisms rhrough which they
operate replaced conrenr analyses of interviews. Action-oriemed treat-
ments replaced interpretive interviews. The modes of rreallTlenr were
altered ill the COlltenr, locus, and agents of change.
Within adecade. the field was mmsformed by a major paradigm shift
(Bandura, 2ook). New con<:eptual models and analytic methodologies
were Cfeated. New sets of periodicals were launched for rhe rising
stream ofinteresl. New organizations were formed for rhe advancement
of behaviorally oriented. approaches. New professional conventions pro-
vided a forum foc the exchange of ideas.
Psycbodynamicists branded these new modes of treatment not only
as superficial but dangerous. I was invited to pcesent my program of
tesearch at the Langley Porter Clinic in San Fnncisco, a stronghold
of psychodynamic adherents. ll,e session began with a disparaging
introduction to the effect that this young upstart will tell uS seasoned
analysts how to cure phobias! I explained that my host·s generous
in<roduc(;on remioded me of a football contest between Iowa and
Notre Dame in South Bend. Iowa scored a touchdown, which tied the
ocore. As the player ran on the field to kick the cxtnY"point, coach
6-i .... HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY IN .... UTOBIOGR .... PHY

Evashevski rume<lto his assistant coach and remarked, "Now there

goes a bave soul, a ProteStant attempting a conversion before
50,000 Catholics!'
Not all the: critics of the psychodynamic modd embraced the same
theoretical framework, however. Some thoughr the operant route pro-
vided the best glimpse of the promised land. Others adopted Hullian
theory. I took the: social cognitive route, emphasizing the inAuential
role ofagemic capabilities in self-development, adapracion, and change.
Vigorous baules were foughr over cognirive determinants and the:ir
sciemific Iegirimacy (Bandura, 19950., 1996; Carania, 1975; Skin,
ncr, 1971).
The popular media were dduging the public with repugnant imagery
of brainwashmg and the frightful scenarios of 1984 and Bra'" New
Wtwld dominated by social engineers wielding powerlUl methods of
behavioral control. The hit movie, A CI«kwork Orange, graphically
portrayed the fiendish nature ofbchavior modifiers physically shocking
people into submission. In his movie SltJefm, Woody Allen amllsingly
outwits the ironclad control by despotic social engineers who reduce
humans ro mindless zombies. Skinner's publication, B90nd PtWdom
and Dignity (1971), alarmed the public that rhe application of rhese
new psychological methods would strip people of their dignity and
deprive them of rheir freedom. 11,e unihombc:r targetedJim McConnell
at the University of Michigan as his first victim with a tirade about
the: evils of behavior modification. Lyndon laRouche, who became a
perennial candidate for the U.S. pr~idency, branded the practitioners
of behavioral approaches as MRockefeller Nazis," formally tried some
of the leading figures in his tribunal for crimes against humanity,
stormed classes at the Sate University of New York at Stony Brook,
and issued threats requiring police surveillance of the Association fot
the Advancement of Behavior Therapy convention in Chicago. As in
any professional practice, there were some appalling applications of
behavioral principles, especially in coercive insriturional systems, rhat
affirmed and fueled the public's fears.
At the height of this media frenzy, I began my term as presideot
of the APA. A responsible social science must concern irself not only
with the advancement of knowledge but with the social effecls of irs
applications_ In keeping with this dual commitment, the APA Board
of Directors formed an interdisciplinary cask force to examine rhe way
 ALBERT BANDUilA

in which knowledge on behavioral modification was being used both

"
at the individual and insticucionallevel. A wide-ranging analysis that
was published in the volume EthicallIJ1leJ in BthavilJr MIJdifi<ati&n (Stob,
1978) provided a thoughtful evaluation of eJ;iscing applications and a
set of standards for ethical practice that helped to dispel the frightful
misconceptions propagated by the mass media. Growing applications
of our knowledge fur personal and social beuetment not only won
public acceprance bot rognitive bebavior treatments were being cited
as rhe method of choice for diverse aspectS of the human condition. This
fascmating odyssey involved dual transrormative changes--a paradigm
shift in theory and pmcrice as well as a sweeping change in public
acceptance.
The theoretical framework guiding my wotk was originally labeled
J0ri4IIMT7Iing Jhtory. flatet relabeled the theory as slKial togniJive Jhtory
fur seveml reasons (Bandul'll., 1986). A ","riery of theories rounded on
divergent tenets-Miller and Dollard's drive rheory, Rotter's expec-
tancy theory, Gewirtz·s opemnt conditioning theory, and Panerson·s
functionalist theory-were all dlristened with this same appellation.
This created untold confusion in the litemrure concerning the theory
being posited and tested. Moreover, the theory under discussion had
always been much broader than the initial descriptive label. It not
only addressed how people acquire rognitive. social, emotional, and
behavioral competences but also how they motivate and regulate their
behavior and create social systems that organize and Structure their
lives. In the more lining appellation as social wgnitivt (~, the 1«ial
portion of the tide acknowledges I'he social origins of much human
thought and action; the tl>g1JiJiflt! portion re<:ognizes the influential
conrribution of cognitive processes (0 human m<Kivarion, affen, and
action.

Til" ADD J Tl 0 N 0 F TH E self-efficacy belief system to toe agenric

features of social cognitive rheory was an outgrowth of Out resea.r<:h
aimed at building resilience to phobic threats. Our powerful guided
mastery treatment was eliminating snake phobias of long standing in
everyone in a few hours. This seemingly circumscribed phobia was not
JUSt a minor inconvenience for these people. 10 had seriously impaired
their occupational, social, and rt<:reational lives and fad plagued them
66 A HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY IN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

with disnessing ruminations and recurr~m nightmares. Having ov~{­

(Orne, in a few houn, a phobic dread rhar had {orm~n[ed ch~m for 20
or 30 y~ars was a transforming and liberaring ~xperi~n~. In follow.
up assessm~nu, ch~ individuals ~xpressed grarirude for being rid of
[heir phobia but explained rhat the trearmem had a more profound
psychological impacr-it rransformed their belief in their efficacy to
~xe[(ise be[(~r oontm! over th~ir lives. Th~y were putring themselves
ro chI,' t~St in anivities rhey formerly avoided and enjoying SU«esses,
much to rh~ir surprise.
I redirected my research efforu to gain a deeper undeutanding of
this belief syst~m. To guide this new mission I dev~lope<! a conc~ptual
framework that specified th~ nature, srrunure, and function or efficacy
bel ids; the means by whi(h they <:an be develope<!; [h~irdiverse effectS;
rhe oognitive, morivational, affecrive, and choice processes through
which rhey produce their effects; and how this agenti( knowledge can
be used fur personal and social benerment. Diverse ptQgmms of resear(h
were conducted chac were essential ro undersrarK!ing these various
aspecu of self.-.efficaq theory. This body of knowledge helped ro darifY
how people's beliefS in th~ir eflicacy enabl~ rh~m to exer(ise inlluen(e
over the qua[iryof theit furu:cioning and to organize, creare, and manage
the Life drcumsrances thar affect whac they become and the courses
their lives tak~ (Bandura, 1995b, 1997).
The conventional theorizing and research on human agency focused
almost entirely on agentic processes opeol[ing at the individual level.
To represent mor~ fully how agenq is acruaJJy exercised in people's
everyday Lives, I posited triadic modes of human agency-individual,
proxy, and wUective ageru:y operating in WnCerl. In personal agency
exercised individually, people bring [heir inlluell(e co bear on [heir
own functioning and on environmental ~venrs. In many spheres of
functioning, people do not have direct control over wnditions thac
affect their lives. They exercise socially mediated agency by influencing
otheu who have th... resources, knowledge, and means to act on rheir
behalf to secure the outcomes they desire. Many of the chings people
seek are achievable only by working rogether chrough interdependenc
efforc. In rhe exercise of collecrive agency, chey pool their knowledge,
skills, and resources and acc in concert: co shape chelr fmure. ColJecdve
ageru:ye"tended the applicabiliry ofsocial cognitive theory co collecdv-
isrically oriemed socieries. The relacive weight given to individual,
 AlB6RT BANDURA

pro:ry, and collective agency varies cross-culturally and by spheres of

lik, but one needs all foems of agency to make il through tht, day,
regardless of where one lives.
Conrentious du:o.l.isms pervaded r~ field of cullUral psychology,
pining aUlonomy against interdependence, individU2lism against 001-
le<:tivism, a~ncy againsccommunion, and human agency against social
structure reified as an entity disembodied from tbe behaviorofindividu_
als. It was widely daimed that Western cheorieslacked genenlizabilicy
to non-Western cultures. This prevailing belief had to be addressed
empirically.
Through an examination of d~ issue of cross-ruJtural generalizabil_
ity, social cognitive theory distinguished ~n basic human capaci_
ties aOO how culture shapes these potentia.lities into diverse forms
appropriare ro fit different cultural milieus_ For example, humans have
evolved an advanced capacity foe observarional learning. This mode of
learning is essential for their self-deve1opment and functioning regard-
less of the culture in which people reside. Modeling is a universalized
human capacity, bur what is mcodeled, how modding inOuences are
socially StruCturN, and tbe pUrp<:>sel; they $trve vary in different cultural
milieus. Being immOOilized by self-doubt and belief io che fu£ility of
efron has linle adaptive value. A growing numbec of srndies demon-
Strated thai the sources, suucture, and function of efficacy beliefs are
much the $lI.ffie in dive"" culrural milieus (Bandura, 2OQ2h). Dut how
efficacy beliefs are developed and struclUrcd, the forms they cake, the
ways in which they are «:ercised, and the purpo:ses to which they are
pUt vary cross-culcurally.
These various sources of evidence supponed the view that there is
commonality in basic agenric capabilities and mechanisms of oper..tion
bur diven;ity in the culturing of these inherent capacities_ In social
cognitive theory, universality is nO( incompatible with manifes' cul-
rural plumliry. Cultural variations emerge from univel:Salized capacities
through rhe influence ofsocial practices reflecting shared values, beliefs,
and normS and from the impacr ofincenrive systems, role pr~riplions,
and pervasive modeling of distinerive styles of thinking and behaving.
Cultures are neither monolithic entities nor insular anymore. Growing
global connectivity is shrinking cultural uniqueness, homogenizing
SOme aspectS of life, polarizing other aspects, and fosterins a lot of
culcuml hybridization.
68 II HISTORY Of PSYCHOLOGY IN IIUTODIOGRIIPHY

As anoeher aspect 10 the agemic perspective or social cognieive

theory, I undenoo1C a program or rese'4rch into ehe nature and. mecha~
nisms of self-regulation (Bandura, 1991a, 1986). In exercising self-
reactive: influence, individuals adopr standards of merit and morality,
monicor their behavior, judge it in relarion to eheir personal standards
and situational circumstances, and react self-evaluatively co ie.
Some of the studies conducted with Dan Cervone, Carol Kupers
Whalen, Mike Mahoney, Bernard Perloff, and Karen Simon clarified
how personal standards are conscructed from the profusion of social
influences; other studies documeneed the regulatory power of self-
reaceive influence; and still others shed light on how dysfuncrions in
self_regulaeion give eise to affective and behavioral disorders. Operant
conditioners treared self-regulation as a ghostly fiction, ruhrisrened
it as sri_JUJ amtrot, and IOCllted it in rhe exrernal environment (urania,
1975 l· In rejoinders, I relocated self-management in the selllient proac-
rive being and documeneed the growing body ofevidence on the means
by which individuals exercise seLf-direcredness (Bandura, 1976).
In ['drional models ofself-regularion room::!. in the market meraphor,
behavior was said to be regulared by self-interest construed almost
entirely in terms of marerial costs and benefits. My students and'
demonsuared rhal human motivation and performance attainments are
governed not only by marerial incentives but also by self-cvaluacive
incentives linked to personal standards. People often settled for alterna-
tives of marginal utility or even sacrificed material gain to preserve
d"lClr positive self-regard. Some of our studies examioed self-regulation
under conftictual condirions in which individuals are rewarded for
behavior they devalue or are punished for activities they personally
value. Principled dissenters often find themselves in the latler predica-
ments. They invest their sense of self-worth so strongly in certllin
conviClions tbat chey will submit to malcreaunent t1leher than accede
to what they regard as unjust or immoral.
The 19705 were an inhospitable time to present an agentic theory
of human behavior. Psychodynamicists depicted behavior as driven
unconsciously by impulses and complexes. Behaviorists depicted beI,av-
ior as shaped and shepherded by environmencal forces. The cognitive
revolution was ushered in on a computer metaphor. This conception
stripper! humans of agentic Cllpabilleies, a functional consciousness,
and a self-identity. The mind as a symbol manipulaeoe in rhe likeness
 "'lBEil.T B... NOUR. ...

of a linear computer became the conceptual model for the urnes.

Computedud cognitivism was, in curn, supplanted by parallel disuih-
ured models in which sensory organs deliver information to ime«:on-
neo::ted, multilayered neural networks that generate the output automat-
ically and nOn<onsciously. In these conceptual schemes it was nor
individuals but theit subpersonal modules rhar were orchestraring
activities nOn<onsciously.
The prevailing control theories of motivation and self-regulatiOn
focused heavily on error correction driven by negative feedback loops
in a machine metaphor of human furKtioning. I regarded regulation
by negative discrepancy as telling only half the SlOry and not: the more
interesting half. Social cognitive theory posited dual control in self-
regulation-prooctive discrepancy production in which individuals
create negative discrepan<ies for themselves to he mastered by setting
themselves challenging gools and standards accompanied by discrep-
ancy reduction by mobiliting the efforC1and resources needed to fulfill
those standards.

SOCIAL COGNITIVIl THEORY LENDS itsclf readily to social

applications. Our knowledge of self_regulatory meo::banisms served as
rhe basis fot the development of new models fur health promOtion and
disease risk reduction. The dominant health ptactices focus heavily on
the supply side with mounting pressure on healeh systems to redw:e,
ration, and curtail health servites lO coma;n soaring healrh COSts. The
self-management models developed in collaboration with Robert De
Busk and Kate Lorig at rhe Sranford Medical School focused on the
demand side. They promore effe.::ti"" self-regulation of health habitS
rhat keep people healthy so they do nOt require cosrly medical care.
These self-management models are now being integrated inro main-
stream health care systems and disseminared iorernarionally. 1be IOter-
anive online formars enable people to exercise some coorrol over theit
healob wherever they may live.
Self-regulatory med'anisms also playa key role in rhe exercise of
moral agency rooced io self-sanctions. I\s anorher aspect ofsocial cogoi-
rive rhenry, our program of research ill rhis domain soughr to clarify
rhe narure and function of moral agellCf. The various lines of re:;ear(h
examined how individuals consrrun mol'lll standards from rhe mix of
7C A HISTORY Of PSYCHOLOGY IN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

social inAuences; the processes by which people select, weigh, and

integrate morallY relevant information in making 1OOrn! judgments;
and the self-regulatory me<hanisms whereby moral judgmems are
linked to moral conduct through self-sanctions (Bandura, 1991b,
2004a). This rheoretkal approach addressed the dual nature of moral
ageocy-d"" inhibirive form manifested in the power co refrain ftom
behaving inhumanely and rhe proacrive form elI:pressed in the power
to behave humanely.
Moral standards do not function as unceasing inrernal regulators of
conduct. In theit everyday life, people often use a vaciery of sociocogni-
tive means to selectively disengage moral self-Sllnctions from detrimen-
tal conduct. To guide rcsea.n:h on rhis aspect of moral agency, the
theory specifies the forms moral disengagemenr rake and the points
in a control process at which dley come inro play. Thwugh sele<rive
morn! disengagement, people who in orher areas of their lives are
considerare aOO compassionalecan get themselves co support detrimen-
tal social policies, carry our harmful organizational and social practices,
and perpetrare latge-scale inhumanities ar rhe social systems level
(Bandura, 1999).
In oonageork microdetenninisric IDeories, behavior is the product
of nooconscious processes in which environmental inputS activare sub-
personal neuronal modules that cause the actions. If people's actions
are rhe product of rhe noncollSCiollS workings of theit neuronal machin-
ery and their cOllSCious stares are simply the epipheoomenal outputs
of lower level braio processes, it is pointless to hold them responsible
for what rhey do.
The subpt:rsonal workings of the biological machinery are nonethical.
A theory thar hu.m.ans have no conscious control over what they do,
in tacr, representS a position on morality, It is one of moral nonaccoum_
abiliry rhat is socially consequential. Would a nonagemk cooception
of human nature erode personal and social erhics that undergird a civil
society? How would people create and mainrain a civil society if its
members are absolved of any pecsonalaccoumabiliry for their actions?
Psychologists often cite examples in the narural and biological .sci-
ences in which knowledge pursued for irs own sake has unforeseen
human benefirs_ The knowledge gained from the modeling experimentS
40 years earlier and rhe: insights from the more recent self-eflicacy
work spawned, through a co!labor-uive partuenhip, unimagioed global
 ALllERT llANDURA

~pplications to alleviate some of the most urgent global problems

(B~ndura. 20(6).
These in.:lude Stemming the soaring population growth chat is
destroying rOC ecosystems [h~r support life and degrading the qualicy
of li&; raising tbe sra.ms of women in societies in which mey ace
marginalized. devalned. disallowed aspiration, and denied their liberty
~nd dignity; and curbing the spread of rhe HJV/AlDS epidemic. Some
sociecies present wlique problems that requice special social themes
railorro 1O their detrimental cultural practices such as child trnflicking
that sells children for slave labor under inhumane condiciolls and
forcing women co Illldergo tbe brutal genital mutilation procedure.
One mommg I rt:Ceived a call from Miguel Sabido, a creative pro..-
ducer at Televisia in Mexico City. He explained that he was deveiopllIg
long-running serial dramas founded on the modeling principles from
the Bobo doll experiments to promOte national literacy and family
planning in Mexico (Sabido, 1981). These televised productions drama-
riu people's everyday lives and the problems Ihey have to manage.
The enabling dramas inform and enable viewers, help chern to see a
better life, and provide .hem with the stl'luegies and incenrives 1O take
the steps to realize that life.
'There are three major componenLS to che evolved social cognitive
approach to fostering society-wide ch~nges: a theorecical model thac
specifies the determinanrs of psychosocial change and the mt:Chanisms
through which chey produce lheir effecrs; a translational and implemen-
tarion model that converts LhoofCtical principles inco an inllovative
operational model; and a social diffusion model on how ro promote
adoptioll of psychosocial programs in diverse cultural milieus. We
often do not: profit from our snccesses because we lack adequate systems
for dilTusing elkcrive praccices.
In this evolving developmem, social cognidve lhCOl}' provided che
theoretical model and Sabido created the generic trandational and
implemenl:lliional model. On the basis of the demonscrated success
of this macrosocial apprOllCh, David Poindexter (2004), dirt:Ctof of
Populacion Communication International in New York, designed the
social diffusion model. Worldwide applications in Africa, Asia, and
La[in Amerka are promodng national lireracy, adoption of family
planning methods in countties wich soaring popubtion growth, raising
rhe srarus of women, curta.iling rhe spread of HIVIAIDS infecrion,
72 A HISTORY Of PSYCHOLOGY IN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

fostering environmental COO$efVlltion, and in other ways beuering

people's Iives{Bandura, 2002a). These worldwide applications illustrlue
how the effectiveness of psychosocial programs can be amplified by
blending different types of expeni~ that no one diKipline am provide.
[n this brief memoir, I traced the social influences Chal played
important roles in my life and reviewed my life's wock in a diKiplin.ary
pursuit that has been highly fulfilling. As I reflea: on this transforming
journey, it f"",1s like a surreal odyssey from a remote hamlet in Norrh<:m
Alberta to the balmy pa.lms of St:anford in a brief 6 years. I have
recently completed a half C<':nf;Ury of active academic 5el'Vice ar Stanford
and am saddled up for conrinued exploration into the second half. In
my insrruaion.al activities, I am now l«turing [() offspring of my
former SUI,:ieIll.S ("Psychology Lessons That TraoKeod. Generations,"
200~). A variety of theoretical issues regatding the nature of human
agency, collaboration in diverse progr:alJ1$ of researrh at Sranfooo and
abroad, and development of new models for personal and social change
have kept me tOO busy to create a posU<:ript to my professional career.
This memoir affOrds me the opportunity to acknowledge my indebted-
ness to rhe many people who lightened my labors and enriched my
scholarship over dlese many years. I also thank them for the gift of
their friendship. I do so in the eloquent words of the poet Yeats: MAsk
where my glory most begins, and encls. And I say my glory was I had
such friench."
As I refl«t On my journey to this octogenarian milepost, I am
reminded of the saying thar it is not the miles traveled bur the amount
of [[cad ""maining that is important. When I last checked, I still have
tOO much tread left to gellr down or to conclude this engaging odyssey.

Sl:lLEC1"6D PUBLICATIONS BY ALBERT BANDURA

Bondura. A. (1961). P'yd>o<hetapy os. ltuning proc<:$S. P~iuJ B"lksiw, )8,

l43-09.
funduu, A. (19Q9a). P,ffKipu. of Hh.wiM -Ji~. New Yorl<: Hoi" Ri""h."
& Wins,on.
Bandura, A. (l969b). Socw-kami"ll" ,hooey of ~,j&<.tory p'" ,.,. I" D. Gooli"
(Ed.), lI"nJJ,o"I, 0/ ,oci"fiulimJ , ' - ' ,.."J .......dJ (pp. 213_262), Chiago' Rond
MeN.lly.
 ALBEIlT BANDUflA

n..nd"..., A. (Ed.). (971). P~i<oJ ....J,!iwl' C""Jlic'i~g thti;riQ. N~w York:

,., ld i <>C-'" d>crron.
Band"..., A. (973). AM'f'JiM: A _i..1 '-wi>ol ......1,.;.,. Englo:wood QilU, NJ:
P~miCf' H"JJ.
Ibndu..., A. (1976). Sdf-~jnfura:men<: 1l>e<><e<ical aDd """hodoIogicaJ considmo,
.ioo•. Bth.wiiwiJ", 4, J3)~ln.
Ibnd"..., A. (982). "The psychology of chance ~ncoun'm aDd lir~ poth<. A-><.r~
P1J<hJo:;"I, 37, 747_7)).
B.nd""" "- (1986). SrriJ j""""liom of 1lwttht _d 411;': A wi..! "'Pitw. I " .
Engl~wood ClifJi, NJ: P,,,,,dCf' Hall.
B.nd",,,, A. (l99Ia). SeJf-no:gula.;",-, of motivation th.ough an,icipo'ory and $Clf_
'ea<t;v~ ~hanissru. In R. A. Dicn<'[,i.,< (Ed.), N<br4JU S'J'R/I<I1u. ... MOI""I,,,,,:
VoJ. 38. PmJl«1Wa." _;""/;"" (pp. 69-164). Uncoln: Uni"""itJ ofNdmsh
,=.
I3.Rd" ... , A. 099lb). Soci.1 cogn;,i"".~ of monJ 'hought aRd ac.ion. In W. M.
K""i ..... &: J. I~ Gew;rtt (Ed•.), H..~ of --..J kh..~ ."td "-'~ (Vol.
I, PI'. 4~_103). HiJlsdoJe, NJ: Etlbawn.
Ibnd"..., ,.,. (199~.). Commen<s OIl ,he cNS*le "pi...t .he n ....1 eff>cocy of bwnall
'houg:ht. J"""""IJ{ &htwi(lr 7"h<NP1 ,,"" £<p<.i_1 P1]<bi"',,, 26, 179-190.
Ibnd".... A. (Ed.). (I99)b). SJj~ i. choutgi~l _inUs. Cambri<l8<'. England;
Camb,idge Uni.~...i,y Pres<.
B..nd" .... ,.,. (996). Ontological aDd epi.<t:mt>logicoJ .~rrai,.. revi.i,ed. J"""",I of
BtA.wi", Tb<T4J _d &J-i-l4i P,,,bi"lr], 27. 323-34).
Rond" "- OW7l- St/f-4Ji<-y: TIN .,..,.,iII of """,oJ. N~w y 0<1<: F=man.
Rond" A. (1998). E<plon.,;oo of (om,i,ous de<er,runa"u of life p..d,•. Pry<b./o:ic4J
I_qilliry, 9. 9~-99.
Band".... A (999). Mo...1 di""'8"-8<'m«l' in <he perptt... ,ion of itlhumani'i....
Pm"""',,, ,,~d Sa<idl PJ]Ch<J/IV R...-itw, 3, 193-209.
Rond"..., A. (2002..). Iinvironmental ....'.ina!>ili<y by sociocogni,ive deceleration of
popula,ion growth. In P. Schmudr &: W. Schult. (Eds..), Tho prydJ<J"O If{_f4i"..J,l.
dw</t!f>-'r' (pp. 209-238). Docdrecbt, Th~ Netbt:.lan<ls: Klu""'. Academic.
B.nd".... A. (200211). Social rognitivt <heoty ;n <U1.ma! ron='.J""""" If{ AppJu"
PJJfhoJ"O: A~ In,WIU';-.J RttJinp, 51, 269_290.
B."du..., A. (2004..). "The '01. of seI~<i.., monJ di.. ng.g~men' io ...."";.0'1 .nd
rount.n."o.-;sm. In P. M. Moghaddom &: A. J. M"""JI. (Ed•.), U~,.Jinl
,......,rn.: P1J<h<Jotir,,1 '-', 'tnUeI/-" -J ;~'WWfI'''''' (pp. 121-150). Washing_
.on, IX: Ame,io.n P,ychologio.l Associ..i"".
Ihnd"..., A. (200411). s..lec,;vt eurr;"" of mono! "S"ncy. ln T. A. "Thoricild..n &
H. J. Walbt:,g (Ed•.), N_,"i~& _"Iity(pp. 37-H). New Yorlr, S",;"8"' Science
&: 8usi".... Medi...
Bandu..., A. (200k). Swimmi"8 og.ins< tI.. mainstrnsn: 'n.. ... rly YftIS {rom
chilly tribu'Ofy '" ,ran.r.,.mo,ive 0'1.;"""'''0'1. ~lfl R".".." """ Thtt"fJ,
4Z,613-630
74 "HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY IN AUTOBIOGRAPIlY

Bandun, A. (200~l. l"he evolution of <ocial <:ogniti"e thwry. In K. G. Smith &<

M. A. Hitt (Eds.l, G.--';"Js j" "''''J:<-I't(pp. 9-3~)_ Oxfo«l, England: Oxfunl
Uni"e<'$ity P((SS_
Balldu..... A. (2006). Going globo.l with social cogniti\/( theory: FlOm prospect to
paydin. In S. I. Donaldson, D. E. Btctg"r, &: K. Peulek (Eds.), lipplitd fn,.IxJIOC/:
N_ frtnrti.... """ -./i"C'--' (pp. B-79). Mah'Wah, NJ: Lawrence Eribowm.
Bandun. A., &< Barab, P. G. 097 tl. Conditions gowming oonr"infurced ;m;",oon.
o-J<tJm-r.J P~, 5, 244_2~~.
&ndun, A., Blanchard, E. D., &: !li,ter, B. 0%9). Relaei\/(efficacyof desensitiu,ion
and modeling ~ fur indocing beha"iocaJ, affective, and aniUJdina1
changcs. J~ 4 Prn.-Jily ,,"" S«UJ PJ~, 13, 173-199.
Bandura, A" Jeffery, R. W., &: Gajdo$, E. 09n). Q,,,,,nJi.ing change through
participant modeling wi,h self-direc<ed mutet}'. B<h<t";q,,.. R~rrh """ Thmtpy,
/3, 141-n2.
&ndura A., R=, D., &: Ross, S. A. (1%3). A comparati"" tCS' of ,he S"'Ui; envy.
social po"",r, and st>eondary rei~me ... ,heocics of id"",i6cawry learning.
J - 1 4 A ~ """ S"UJ PtydJoI"t:!, 67, ~27-~34,
Bandura, A., &: Wolten, R. H. (19~9). A~, .unui4n· N"w York: Ronald Press.
Bandura, A., &< WaI,ers, R. H. (1963). Sodal '-"i"g ,,""/>tn.-Ji'1tktWop-r. New
Ynoc Holt, Rinehan: &: Winstoo.

OtHER PUaLlQTIONS CITED

Baer, D. M_, P""eooo, R. t·., &: Sbe<<IWl,j. A. (1%7). The developmem ofimi""iolt
by- reinfo.-c:ing bebniotJral similarity co a modeLJ.....-..aI t{thl E~'"I A..JJ'is
of Beb<wi__, 10, 4{)~--416.
Boffey, P., &: WaWl, J- (1970, May 22). Study of TV vio!encec Sevcn cop ~hers
btmebo.lk<l &om po.nd. ~ /68, 949-9~2.
Catania, C. A. (1975). The ml"h of self_!l'infut<:emen,. ~,., 3, 192-199.
Cuer, D., &: Scricllind, S. (1975). TV ~ """ 1M thild. N,"", York Russell
Sage foundac;on.
Efron, E. 0969, N<I't'CIIlber I~). The mon in (he eye of the luuricane. TV G_UJ.,
pp.34-37.
Film Board ofC:anada. (972). Theq_,i." qf>i"'-:. The U.s. S-h-i"K' (Mocioo
piC<UIl']_ United Stat.,.: Phoeni. Films. (Available from Phoeni>: Films, Inc., 470
Puk A.........e South, N.,.. YorIc, NY 10016)
GoIdsen, R. (1972). S«- n. ~"'''''. Unpublished mItnUSCt;pt, Cornell
Univers.i,y, Id>aca, NY.
Gould,j. (1972,januarr II). Vinl.~oce hdd unharmful <0 )'OU,h. N_ Y..." Timt:t, p. I.
James, H. (Ed.). (1906). TM Idkn !1/ Wil/idtt< J-, V.L II. Boswn: A.lantic
Monchly P."...
Miller, N. E., &: Dc>lwd, J. (1941). S«iJ u..n.;"t."" ;",it4,i4.. New Haven, er:
Yale Universi.y P..,...
 ALBERT BANDURA
"
National Cornrni<$ion on 'M Causn and P."...,mtoo of Viol~oc~. (969). C.....issim
st,/I',,",,' "" <WI",,_ i. ,Jtr:isw. "",""i_I /""tT""'" Washington, DC: U.S. Gov-
erom,,," Prioting Office.
P.isley, M. (972). $~ j»Ji<J -m..-J ,huuJilw of'N 1]""": ViMnfa ""'" u TV
~h. St.nfo.-d, CA: SUrdwd Ulli""rsi,y, Institute for Communi"",iOlJ Research.
PaindeIter, D. O. (200'i). II history of cptertainmcnr-educat;on, 1958-2000. n.c
origins of mterol;nmctI,-educa'ion. 10 A. SiflJlhal, M.). Cody, E. M. Rogus, '"
M. Sobido (Ed._), &.''''l<Ji""",~,i"" "",,, stri>1 dAto_g<-: HiltDr7, ~..m, ,,'nl
",..aiel (pp. 21~31). M........ , NJ E.-lbo.urn.
Psychology ICS$OM .ha•• rall$and gcl>Cf1ldo"•. (2005, July/Allgus,), S",./..." M"t"-
oi"" p. 30.
Rosen'h", T. L, &< Zirn ......"'"", S. J. (1978). $tri>/ f"""i_, "lid "'Pi'~, New-
York: llcademic P<w.
s..bido, M. (1981). Tw"mls IN -ud ~ of -P oJ-"I. Maico City. Mexico: Institute
fo.r Communication Research.
SIc;nnc•• B. F. (1971). &,-/ frwJ- -J dlpi!]. New Yo<k: Knopf.
Stol>.. S. B. (978). E!,hic4l illJ'4 i. brJ:w<,i", m<Jifr4,il/rf. San Francisco: JOSKy-Bass.
Williotn$, S. L (990). Guided IJlllSfe'l' tfCl>Unc'll of .gonphobio: Beyond stimulus
exposurt:. In M. IlctSCn. R. M. Eisler, '" P. M. Miller (Eds.), P~I;" /tJJ".vi.".
m<Jifr4ljl/rf (Vol. 26, pp. 89-(21). Newbury Park, CII: s..ge.