Social Cognitive Theory

Albert Bandura
 Biographical Background
• Born on December 4, 1925
in Mundare, Alberta, Canada
• Youngest and only boy of the
six children
• Bandura graduated in 1949
from the University of
British Columbia in
Vancouver
• Became a clinical intern at
the Wichita (Kansas)
Guidance Center
Biographical Background
• Accepted a position at
Stanford University
• Became a full professor in
1964 and in 1974, he was
awarded an endowed chair
• At Stanford, He began
field studies on social
learning of aggression
particularly considering
the role of modelling
 Biographical Background
• He focused on
Observational Learning
• He was elected
president of the APA in
1973
• Received a Gold medal
Award for Life
Achievement in the
science of Psychology
in 2006
President Obama gives medal to Bandura
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sj38AeKn_LE
 
Interview of Bandura by Gianvittorio Caprara
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_U-pSZwHy8
AN AGENTIC PERSPECTIVE
 An Agentic Perspective

• An Agentic Perspective emerges on Bandura’s Socio

Cognitive view of personality

• He viewed people as AGENTS, or originators of experience.

• Bandura conceived HUMAN AGENCY as the ability to act

and make things happen

 An Agentic Perspective
Human Agency entails intentionality which enables us to behave
purposefully
 FORETHOUGHT: permit us to
anticipate outcomes
• Example:
when a person is
deciding, that person has his
options . With each options
he has to anticipate
outcomes in order for that
person decides depending on
what might comes out after.
 An Agentic Perspective
Human Agency entails intentionality which enables us to behave
purposefully

 SELF REACTIVENESS: allows us

to motivate and regulate
actions.
• Example:
Drinking on a beer house gives
a person pleasure and it will
give that person the motivation
to drink yet he will regulate his
actions in order for him to get
away from self-censured stuff.
 An Agentic Perspective
Human Agency entails intentionality which enables us to behave
purposefully

 SELF REFLECTIVENESS: gives us

the ability to reflect on our
thoughts and behavior and
make changes as needed.
• Example:
Back to the deciding situation,
when a person chooses one of
his options and everything
went wrong, that person will
reflect and will make changes
for the better.
LEARNING THROUGH OBSERVATION
 Learning through Observation
The Bobo Doll

• In a famous and influential

experiment known as the Bobo
doll experiment, Albert Bandura
and his colleagues were able to
demonstrate one of the ways in
which children learn aggression.
• The experiment involved
exposing children to two
different adult models; an
aggressive model and a non-
aggressive one.
 Learning through Observation
The Bobo Doll

• After witnessing the adult's

behavior, the children would then
be placed in a room without the
model and were observed to see
if they would imitate the behavior
they had witnessed earlier.
• Bandura and his colleagues
believed that the experiment
demonstrates how specific
behaviors can be learned through
observation and imitation.
 Learning through Observation
The Bobo Doll

• In a follow-up study conducted

in 1965, Bandura found that
children were more likely to
imitate aggressive behavior if
the adult model was rewarded
for his or her actions
• They were far less likely to
imitate if they saw the adult
model being punished or
reprimanded for their hostile
behavior.
 Learning through Observation
The Bobo Doll

• Several studies involving

television commercials
and videos containing
violent scenes have
supported this theory of
modeling.

• Albert Bandura believed

television was a source of
behavior modeling.
Bobo doll experiment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmBqwWlJg8U
 
 Learning through Observation
Observational Learning

• In his early writing, Bandura emphasizes the power and

pervasiveness of social modeling and the process of
learning through observation
• Bandura suggests that observational learning occurs
either intentionally or accidentally
• Observational Learning is done through imitation or
modeling
 Learning through Observation
Difference of Imitation and Modeling

Imitation
Individuals observe and
just copy the action.
Example:
Drawing or painting
objects by just copying a
subject
 Learning through Observation
Difference of Imitation and Modeling

Modeling
Individuals observe specific models.
Observers sometimes are able to
solve problems correctly even after
the model fails to solve the same
problem.
Observers draw similar conclusions
from different responses and create
Example:
rules of behavior that permit them
Drawing or painting objects by using the object
to go beyond what they have seen
only as a pattern. The individual could just copy or or heard.
change some of the patterns to the art piece.
 Learning through Observation
Factors that Influence Modeling

o Characteristics of the o Attributes of the

Model Observer
• We are more likely to be • People who are lacking in
influenced by someone who self-esteem or who are
we believe is similar to incompetent are especially
ourselves rather than by prone to follow the structure
someone who is different. and style of the model.
• A highly motivated individual
• According to research, people
will also emulate a model in
who are physically attractive order to master a desired
influence more people.
behavior.
 Learning through Observation
Factors that Influence Modeling

o Reward consequences
associated with the
behavior
• Participants are more
likely to emulate a
behavior if they believe
that such actions will
lead to positive short- or
long-term results.
 Learning through Observation
Process of Observational Learning

Attentional Process Retention Process

• In order for learning to • The ability to store

information or remember it.
take place, you need to
• It can be through verbal or
pay attention.
imaginal
• Models should be
• Verbal- remembering the
noticeable enough for words itself
the observer to focus on • Imaginal- developing a
learning a specific task visual image
 Learning through Observation
Process of Observational Learning

Motor Production Process Motivational Process

 Once we “know” how a • We may acquire a new

behavior should look and skill or behavior through
remember the elements or observation, but we may
steps, we still may not not perform that
perform it smoothly. behavior until there is
 In the production phase, some motivation or
practice makes the behavior incentive to do so.
smoother and more expert.
Learning through Observation
Process of Observational Learning
Example: Driving a Car
 Learning through Observation
Reinforcement in Observational Learning

Extrinsic Reinforcement Intrinsic Reinforcement

• Being rewarded with • Being rewarded by the

objects and stuff feedback or the outcome of
the behavior done.
Example:
Example:
Winning a Playing a difficult piece of
competition and being music well leads to feeling of
rewarded with a medal. accomplishment.
*self-satisfaction
 Learning through Observation
Reinforcement in Observational Learning

Vicarious Reinforcement
Example:
• is learning by observing others.
A child who sees a
• if people can learn by
sibling being spanked for
watching, they must be
focusing their attention, a misdemeanour quickly
constructing images, learns not to do the same
remembering, analyzing, and thing.
making decisions that affect
learning.
 Learning through Observation
Reinforcement in Observational Learning

Self-Reinforcement

• controlling your own Example:

reinforces.
• This reinforcement is One runner might be
important for both students satisfied by completing a
and teachers. mile in five minutes;
• We want our students to another would want to
improve not because it leads
to external rewards, but
finish it in less time
because the students value
and enjoy their growing
competence.
Aggression and Inhumane Behavior
Aggression

Defined as the physical or verbal behavior
that tends to cause harm .
2 Kinds of Aggression

Hostile – driven by anger

Instrumental – means to some other end
 Ex .Self-defense
Aggression and Inhumane Behavior
Aggression
Albert Bandura believes that everyday life
exposes us to aggressive models.
Family
• aggressive children have parents who discplined
them by screaming , slapping and beating
Aggression and Inhumane Behavior
For Albert Bandura there are Multiple Effects of
viewing/watching violence .

Multiple Effects of Violence


Overwhelming of the nervous system

Aggressive style behavior

Desensitization or habituation of viewers
to violence (emotional numb )

Shaping the image of reality (distorted)
Self-Efficacy
 Self-efficacy Defined
• “Perceived self-efficacy is defined as people’s beliefs
about their capabilities to produce designated levels of
performance that exercise influence over events that
effect their lives” (Bandura, 1994).

• High self-efficacy
• Belief that one can perform well
• Low self-efficacy
• Belief that one lacks the ability to perform well
 Reciprocal Determinism
• Theory set forth by Bandura in 1986
• View that (1) personal factors in the form of
cognition, affect, & biological events, (2) behavior,
and (c) environmental influences create
interactions that result in a triadic reciprocality
 Formation of Self-efficacy
 Self-efficacy is formed in part through four
major psychological processes
 Cognitive
 Motivational
 Affective
 Selection
 Formation of Self-efficacy:
Cognitive
• Beliefs in efficacy shape the types of anticipatory
scenarios they form and rehearse
• High self-efficacy -- successful scenarios
• Low self-efficacy -- dwell on possibility of failure, what can go
wrong
• Those with resilient sense of efficacy in face of difficult
tasks set more challenging goals
• Success gives confidence and competence, thus reaffirming high
efficacy
 Formation of Self-efficacy:
Motivational
• Attribution Theory
• High-efficacy people attribute failures to insufficient
effort.
• Low-efficacy people attribute failure to low ability.
• Expectancy-value theory expectations
• High-Expect success; Low-expect failure
• Goal-setting
• Goals lower for low-efficacy
• High-efficacy, higher goals, greater sense of
achievement
 Formation of Self-efficacy:
Affective
 High-efficacy people generally feel
less threatened by challenges and
more likely to consider them exciting
 Low-efficacy can produce depression
and anxiety
 Formation of Self-efficacy:
Selection Processes
 People avoid activities and situations
they believe exceed their coping
capabilities.
 People undertake challenging
activities and select situations they
consider themselves capable of
handling.
 Self-efficacy vs Self-efficacy Beliefs

• ”People's level of motivation, affective states,

and actions are based more on what they
believe than on what is objectively true.”

• Effects of self-efficacy beliefs

• Choice behavior
• Effort expenditure and persistence
• Thought patterns and emotional reactions
• Humans as producers vs foretellers of behavior
 Effects of Beliefs Explored:
Choice Behavior
• Tendency to avoid involvement in tasks where
efficacy is low
• Generally engage in tasks where efficacy is
high
• High-efficacy/low skill can result in irreparable
harm
• Low-efficacy/high skill doesn’t allow for
growth
 Effects of Beliefs Explored:
Effort Expenditure & Persistence
 Stronger perceived self-efficacy results in
more vigorous/persistent efforts
 Individuals with high self-efficacy may feel less
of a need to invest much effort in preparation
 When applying skills, high-efficacy intensifies
and maintains the effort required to realize a
difficult performance
 Difficult for someone with low-efficacy
 Effects of Beliefs Explored:
Thought Patterns & Emotional Reactions
• Low-efficacy individuals believe things are more difficult
than they actually are
• Creates stress and narrow vision
• High-efficacy people devote attention and energy to
demands of the situation and perceive obstacles as
challenges
• High-efficacy people attribute failure to insufficient effort
• Low-efficacy people relate failure to deficient ability
 Effects of Beliefs Explored:
Behavior Producers vs Foretellers
 People with high self-efficacy act, think, and
feel differently from those with low self-
efficacy. They create their own futures, rather
than foretell it.
 Self-Efficacy is NOT Constant

Bandura stated that an individual’s self-efficacy varies over time.

Self-efficacy is specific to a situation and context

The stability of one’s efficacy is largely determined by how one has

acquired the belief, the strength of that belief, as well as the strength of
that intervening experience.
 Acquiring Strong Beliefs
Bandura suggested four principles that influence self-efficacy beliefs.
 Enactive Mastery Experience
The most influential source of self-efficacy beliefs are mastery
experiences, which provides feedback on learner’s capabilities.

Looks at learners previous success on a task.

 Starts on a simple task and progresses to harder tasks.

2+2=4 >>> 2x + 7 = 11
 Verbal Persuasion
Appraisal, feedback, and
positive encouragement from
others are aspects of verbal
persuasion.

Individuals are persuaded

by others that they are
capable of succeeding in
specific tasks.
 Physiological State
Individuals monitor feelings of self-efficacy based on physiological
states.

Gut feelings convinces learner of probable success or failure.

Refers to states of arousal, depending on how that feeling was

identified can influence a positive or negative outlook.
 Fear = negative outlook
 Nervous or anxious = positive outlook
 Vicarious Experiences
Learner’s observe a role model attaining success at a task.

The role model chosen will affect the extent to which the
learner/observer's self-efficacy will be enhanced.

Multiple models are superior to one,

however, it is not wise to choose several
peer models, for this can contribute to
handicapping one’s self-efficacy.
 How is Self-Efficacy Measured
By the amount of one’s certainty about performing a
given task.

Focus on performance capabilities rather than on

personal qualities.

Perceived judgments of how well one will be able to

perform in given situations.
He said I can do this!
I know I can do it!
...
 Closely Related Constructs
Linked to self-efficacy, self-efficacy has three closely related
constructs.

 Outcome Expectations

 Self-Concept

 Perceived Control
 Self-Efficacy & Outcome Expectations
Incentives are used throughout outcome expectations, and
emphasized throughout the performance segment of self-efficacy.

Incentives, whether positive or negative, influence the level of an

individuals motivation towards a specific task.
 Can change one’s image or status.
 Cause one’s perceived self-efficacy to change over time.

Outcome expectations are comprised of three major factors.

 Physical affects (pleasure or pain)
 Social effects (power, money, approval)
 Self-evaluation
 Self-efficacy vs. Outcome Expectations
Shell, Murphy, and Bruning (1989) measured self-efficacy in
terms of perceived capability to perform various reading and
writing activities

Efficacy beliefs and outcome expectancies jointly predicted

32% of the variance in reading achievement.
 Perceived efficacy accounting for virtually all the variance.
 Only perceived self-efficacy was a significant predictor of
writing achievement.

This study supported Bandura’s contingent that self-efficacy

plays a larger role than outcome expectancies in motivation.
 Health Promotion by Social Cognitive Means

The field of health is changing from a disease model to a health model. It is just as
meaningful to speak of levels of vitality and healthfulness as of degrees of impairment
and debility. Health promotion should begin with goals, not means. If health is the goal,
biomedical interventions are not the only means to it. A broadened perspective expands
the range of health-promoting practices and enlists the collective efforts of researchers
and practitioners who have much to contribute from a variety of disciplines to the health
of a nation.
The quality of health is heavily influenced by lifestyle habits. This enables people to
exercise some measure of control over their health. By managing their health habits,
people can live longer and healthier and retard the process of aging. Self-management is
good medicine.
Supply-Side Versus Demand-Side Approaches

Current health practices focus heavily on the medical supply side. The growing pressure on
health systems is to reduce, ration, and delay health services to contain health costs. The
days for the supply-side health system are limited. People are living longer. This creates
more time for minor dysfunctions to develop into chronic diseases. Demand is
overwhelming supply. Psychosocial factors partly determine whether the extended life is
lived efficaciously or with debility, pain, and dependence.

Social cognitive approaches focus on the demand side. They promote effective
selfmanagement of health habits that keep people healthy through their life span. Aging
populations will force societies to redirect their efforts from supply-side practices to
demand-side remedies. Otherwise, nations will be swamped with staggering health costs
that consume valuable resources needed for national programs.
SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY

Social cognitive theory specifies a core set of determinants, the

mechanism through which they work, and the optimal ways of
translating this knowledge into effective health practices.
The core determinants include
- knowledge of health risks and benefits of different health practices,
perceived self-efficacy that one can exercise control over one’s health
habits,
- outcome expectations about the expected costs and benefits for
different health habits,
- the health goals people set for themselves and the concrete plans
and strategies for realizing them, and
- the perceived facilitators and social and structural impediments to
the changes they seek.
 Knowledge of health risks and benefits creates the precondition for change. If people
lack knowledge about how their lifestyle habits affect their health, they have little
reason to put themselves through the travail of changing the detrimental habits they
enjoy. But additional self-influences are needed for most people to overcome the
impediments to adopting new lifestyle habits and maintaining them. Beliefs of personal
efficacy play a central role in personal change. This focal belief is the foundation of
human motivation and action. Unless people believe they can produce desired effects
by their actions, they have little incentive to act or to persevere in the face of difficulties.

Health behavior is also affected by the outcomes people expect their actions to
produce. The outcome expectations take several forms. The physical outcomes
include the pleasurable and aversive effects of the behavior and the accompanying
material losses and benefits. Behavior is also partly regulated by the social reactions it
evokes. The social approval and disapproval the behavior produces in one’s
interpersonal relationships is the second major class of outcomes. This third set of
outcomes concerns the positive and negative self-evaluative reactions to one’s health
behavior and health status. People adopt personal standards and regulate their
behavior by their self-evaluative reactions.
Personal goals, rooted in a value system, provide further self-incentives and
guides for health habits. Long-term goals set the course of personal change. But
there are too many competing influences at hand for distal goals to control
current behavior. Short-term attainable goals help people to succeed by enlisting
effort and guiding action in the here and how

The perceived facilitators and obstacles are another determinant of health

habits. Some of the impediments are personal ones that deter performance of
healthful behavior. They form an integral part of self-efficacy assessment. Self-
efficacy beliefs must be measured against gradations of challenges to
successful performance.
 Self-efficacy is a focal determinant because it affects health behavior both directly and by its
influence on the other determinants. Efficacy beliefs influence goals and aspirations. The
stronger the perceived self-efficacy, the higher the goals people set for themselves and the
firmer their commitment to them. Self-efficacy beliefs shape the outcomes people expect
their efforts to produce. Those of high efficacy expect to realize favorable outcomes. Those of
low efficacy expect their efforts to bring poor outcomes.
PUBLIC HEALTH CAMPAIGNS

Four possible mechanisms through which health communications

could alter health habits:

- by transmitting information on how habits affect health,

- by arousing fear of disease,
- by increasing perceptions of one’s personal vulnerability or risk,
- by raising people’s beliefs in their efficacy to alter their habits.

 health communications foster adoption of healthful practices to

the extent that they raise beliefs in personal efficacy
Perceived self-efficacy governs whether individuals translate
perceived risk into a search for health information and whether
they translate acquired health knowledge into healthful
behavioral practices.
Those of low self-efficacy take no action even though they are
knowledgeable about lifestyle contributors to health and
perceive themselves to be vulnerable to disease.
 Maibach and colleagues found that both people’s preexisting self-efficacy beliefs
that they can exercise control over their health habits and the self-efficacy beliefs
instilled by a community health campaign contributed to adoption of healthy
eating habits and regular exercise.
 Overprediction of Refractoriness

Our theories overpredict the resistance of health habits to change. This is because they
are developed by studying mainly refractory cases but ignoring successful self-changers.

For example, smoking is one of the most addictive substances. It is said to be

intractable because it is compelled by biochemical and psychological dependencies.
Each puff sends a reinforcing nicotine shot to the brain. Prolonged use is said to create
a relapsing brain disease.
The problem with this theorizing is that it predicts far more than has ever been
observed. More than 40 million people in the United States have quit smoking on their
own. Where was their brain disease? How did the smokers cure the disease on their
own?
Carey and his colleagues verified longitudinally that heavy smokers who quit on their
own had a stronger belief in their efficacy at the outset than did continuous smokers
and relapsers. Successful self-changers combine efficacy belief with outcome
expectations that benefits will outweigh disadvantages of the lifestyle changes.
The same is true for alcohol and narcotic addiction.
Enhancement of Health Impact
by Interactive Technologies
In the direct pathway , media promote changes by informing, modeling, motivating, and
guiding personal changes. In the socially mediated pathway , the media link participants to
social networks and community settings. These places provide continued personalized
guidance, natural incentives, and social supports for desired changes. The major share of
behavioral changes is promoted within these social milieus.
Promoting Society-Wide Changes by
Serial Dramas
 Some of the story lines centered on safer sexual practices to
prevent the spread of AIDS. Infection rates are high among long-
distance truckers and prostitutes at truck stops. The dramatic
productions focused on self-protective and risky sexual practices
and modeled howto curb the spread of HIV infection. Compared
with residents in the control region, those in the broadcast region
increased belief in their personal risk of HIV infection through
unprotected sexual practices, talked more about HIV infection,
reduced the number of sexual partners, and increased condom
use.
 Compared to the
control region,
more families in the
broadcast area
went to
family planning
clinics and adopted
family planning and
contraceptive
methods. The
dramatic series
produced similar
changes later, when
they were
broadcast in
the former control
region of the
country.

Rogers EM, Vaughan PW, Swalehe RMA, Rao N, Svenkerud P, Sood S: Effects of an entertainment
education radio soap opera on family planning behavior in Tanzania. Stud Fam Plann 30:1193-
1211, 1999.
Rogers et al 1999
 SELF-MANAGEMENT MODEL

DeBusk and his colleagues have developed a self-management model for health
promotion and disease risk reduction founded on the self-regulatory mechanisms of social
cognitive theory. This self-management model combines self-regulatory principles with
computer-assisted implementation. It includes exercise programs to build cardiovascular
capacity, nutrition programs to reduce dietary fat to lower risk of heart disease
and cancer, weight reduction programs, and smoking cessation programs.
In tests of the preventive
value of this self-
management system,
employees in the
workplace lowered
elevated cholesterol by
altering eating habits high
in saturated fats.
They achieved even larger
reductions if their spouses
took part in the program.
The more room for dietary
change, the larger the
reduction in plasma
cholesterol.
A single
nutritionist implemented
the entire program at
minimal cost for large
numbers of
employees.
The success of the self-management system in promoting adherence is shown in a program
by West and his colleagues to reduce sodium intake in patients suffering from heart failure. It
strengthened patients’ efficacy to adhere to a low-sodium diet. They achieved substantial
reduction in sodium intake and maintained it during a 6-month period. At each time point,
the higher the perceived self-efficacy, the greater the sodium reduction.
Effect of the self-management system to promote lifestyle changes in patients suffering
from coronary artery disease: At the end of 4 years, those receiving medical care by their
physicians showed no change or they got worse. In contrast, those aided in self-
management by nurse implementers achieved big reductions in multiple risk factors.
 The program also altered the physical progression of the disease. Those receiving the
self-management program had 47% less buildup of plaque on their artery wall. They
also had fewer coronary events, fewer hospitalizations, and fewer deaths.
 Health Promotion in Children Through
Interactive Media

In a role-playing video game for diabetic children, they win points

depending on how well they understand the diabetic condition and
regulate the diet, insulin, and blood sugar levels of two wacky
diabetic pachyderms, Packy and Marlon . They set out to retrieve
the food and diabetes supplies snatched by pesky enemy critters in
a diabetes summer camp. To succeed, children have to boost the
elephants’ health by managing their diabetes as they fight off the
pesky critters using their trunks as water cannons and peanut
launchers.
 Childhood Health Promotion Models
An effective preventive program includes four major components:
- the first component is informational. It informs children of the health risks and
benefits of different lifestyle habits.
- the second component develops the social and self-management skills for
translating informed concerns into effective preventive practices;
- the third component builds a resilient sense of efficacy to support the exercise of
control in the face of difficulties and setbacks that inevitably arise;
- the final component enlists and creates social supports for desired personal
changes.

Schools that are provided with a brief health promotion curriculum and
encouraged to lower the fat content of their lunch offerings and enhance their
physical activity offerings produce lasting improvements in children’s eating and
exercise habits.

- Contrast with schools that promote in their lunch program fast foods and house
vending machines that dispense sodas and candy in return for substantial
payments to schools by commercial enterprises.
Self-Management of Chronic Diseases

The weight of disease is shifting from acute to chronic

maladies.
The self-management of chronic diseases is another
example of the use of self-regulatory and self-efficacy
theory to develop cost-effective models with high social
utility. Biomedical approaches are ill-suited for chronic
diseases because they are devised mainly for acute
illness.
The treatment of chronic disease must focus on self-
management of physical conditions over time.
 Holman and Lorig devised a generic self-
management program in which patients
are taught pain control techniques, self-
relaxation, and proximal goal setting
combined with self-incentives as
motivators to increase level of activity.
Participants are also taught
problem-solving self-diagnostic skills and
how to take greater initiative for their
health care in dealings with health
personnel. These skills are developed
through modeling of self-management
skills, guided mastery practices, and
informative feedback.
In the self-management of arthritis, the
program is implemented in groups in
community settings by leaders who lead
active lives despite their arthritis.
SOCIALLY ORIENTED APPROACHES TO HEALTH

The quality of health of a nation is a social matter, not just a

personal one. It requires changing the practices of social
systems that impair health rather than just changing the habits
of individuals.
We do not lack sound policy prescriptions in the field of health.
What is lacking is the collective efficacy to realize them…
Cigarette smoking is the most
personally preventable cause
of death. People got smoke-
free workplaces, restaurants,
public buildings, and airliners
through their own collective
action, not through the
governmental agencies with
the responsibility to protect
national health.

Lobbyists get legislators to

block tobacco regulation.
The more tobacco money the
legislators get, the more
dutifully they vote against
tobacco regulation.
Role of perceived coping self-efficacy in recovery from traumatic experiences within the
framework of social cognitive theory.
Self-efficacy: perceived capability to mange one’s personal functioning and the myriad
environmental demands of the aftermath occasioned by a traumatic event.
 Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)

Acute distress is a normative response to trauma. However, a small percent of the

people who have undergone traumatic experiences continue to exhibit severe stress
reactions long after the trauma.
The posttraumatic reactions are widely generalized across different modes and
spheres of functioning. They include
1. re-experiencing of the traumatic event in flashbacks,
2. recurrent nightmares and intrusive memories,
3. hypervigilant arousal,
4. impaired concentration,
5. depression,
6. sleep disturbances,
7. self-devaluation,
8. avoidance of reminders of traumatic experiences,
9. emotional detachment from others, and
10. disengagement from aspects of life that provide meaning and self-fulfillment.

DSM-IV-TR diagnostic criteria for PTSD:

an individual must have ‘‘experienced, witnessed, or been confronted with an event or
events that involve actual or threatened death or serious injury, or a threat of the physical
integrity of self or others’’.
The individual must experience a sense of intense fear, helplessness, or horror in response
to the traumatic stressor.
 Self-efficacy foundation of human agency
A sense of personal efficacy is the foundation of human agency.
Self-efficacy beliefs regulate human functioning through cognitive, motivational,
affective, and decisional processes. They affect
-whether individuals think in self-enhancing or self-debilitating ways;
-how well they motivate themselves and persevere in the face of difficulties;
-the quality of their emotional life and vulnerability to stress and depression; resiliency
to adversity;
-and the choices they make at important decisional points which set life courses.

Transformative actions
Perceived self-efficacy to manage intense stressors affects not only how threats
are construed but how well people cope with them:
- people are producers of life circumstances not just construers and reactors to
them.
Those who have a high sense of coping efficacy adopt strategies and courses of
action designed to change hazardous environments into more benign ones.

… a robust sense of coping efficacy is accompanied by benign appraisals of

potential threats, weaker stress reactions to them, less ruminative preoccupation
with them, better behavioral management of threats, and faster recovery of well-
being from any experienced distress over them.
 Mediational role of perceived coping self-efficacy in posttraumatic recovery

Hurricane Andrew struck South Florida with massive destructive force leaving as many as
1 million victims in its devastated wake without many of the basic necessities of life. Benight et
al. (1999) tested a causal model designed to explain the differential impact of the traumatic
event on the residents (Benightetal., 1999). The model included three major factors as
determinants of acute and long-term distress:

-magnitude of the loss of material resources experienced by the residents, involving dwellings,
automobiles, furnishings, pets, sentimental possessions, and missed work. Serious losses serve
as perpetual stressors;
-self-efficacy to cope with the aftermath of the hurricane included as both a direct and
mediating determinant of posttraumatic stress
- strategies people use to cope with the disaster wrought by the hurricane. These include active
problem-solving coping designed to change existing realities or turning inward to alleviate the
distress over them (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).
The impact of resource loss on level of distress in the acute phase is partly mediated by
perceived coping self-efficacy (Benight et al., 1999). Belief that one can exercise some
measure of control over the daunting challenges reduces distress not only concurrently,
but in the long term, as well after controlling for level of acute distress and mode of coping
in the acute phase. People of high self-efficacy also eschew the more escapist, self-
ameliorative modes of coping. Proactive coping reduces the likelihood of longer term
distress, inward self-ameliorative coping does not.
Hurricane Opal, a category 3 hurricane, not only played havoc with people’s lives but
changed the landscape by obliterating a good part of the pre-existing shoreline.

- the impact of resource loss on trauma related distress is completely mediated through
people’s beliefs in their coping capabilities.
-social support reduces the likelihood of trauma-related stress by raising beliefs in one’s self-
efficacy rather than directly.
- dispositional optimism also operates entirely through self-efficacy belief. Thus, neither social
support nor optimism makes an independent contribution to prediction of posttraumatic stress
after the influence of perceived self-efficacy is removed.