Modeling

• The concept of behavioral modeling was introduced by Albert Bandura in

1961.

• Modeling therapy is based on social learning theory.

• The theory emphasizes the importance of learning from observing and

imitating role models, and learning about rewards and punishments that
follow behaviour.

• The technique has been used to eliminate unwanted behaviours, reduce

excessive fears, facilitate learning of social behaviours, and many more.

• Modeling may be used either to strengthen or to weaken previously

learned behaviours.
• Modeling is also called Observational learning or Imitation, is
a behaviourally based procedure that involves the use of live
or symbolic models to demonstrate particular behaviour,
thought, or attitude that a client may want to acquire or
change.

• Modeling is some times called vicarious learning, because the

client need not actually perform behaviour in order to learn it.

• Modeling techniques were seen as obvious tool to guide ,

redirect and educate people.
• The use of modeling in psychotherapy was
influenced by research of social learning theorist
Albert Bandura ( 1969) , who studied observational
learning in children, particularly in relation to
aggression.

• Bandura pioneered the concept of Vicarious

conditioning , in which one learns not only from
observed behaviours of others but also from
whether that behaviour is rewarded or punished.
• Bandura concluded that certain conditions determine whether or
not people learn from observed behaviour.

• They must pay attention and retain what they have observed, and
they must be capable of and motivated to reproduce the behaviour.

• The effects of observed behaviour are also stronger if the model

has characteristics similar to those of the observer or is particularly
attractive or powerful. Bandura (1969) claimed that ‘virtually all
learning phenomena resulting from direct experiences can occur on
vicarious basis through observation of other person’s behavior and
its consequences.”
 Effects of modeling

• Modeling influences can produce four effects in observers.

Each class of effects has important features for the planning
and implementation of therapy.

1. Acquisition effects
2. Inhibitory and disinhibitory effects
Inhibitory effects
Disinhibitory effects
3. Response facilitation effects
4. Cognitive standards of self regulation
 Acquisition effects
• First observer can acquire new patterns of behaviour and coping
strategies that were not present in their repertoires or unavailable
in an integrated usable form.

• Such observational learning effects are shown most clearly when

model exhibit novel response patterns that observer have not yet
learn to execute.

• After observation , clients are able to adopt and implement these

new solutions in substantially identical form.

• Modelling exposures serves an instructional role also . They teach

new components and guide the recombination of other elements.
After modelling exposures, adults and adolescents could apply a
concept that was totally unavailable before.
Inhibitory and Disinhibitory Effects

• A second main function of modeling influences is to

strengthen or weaken inhibitions of responses that are
available in observers’ repertories.
• The impact of modeling on behavioural restraints largely
depends on
• (1) the rewarding or punishing outcomes produced by
models’ deeds.
• (2) observers’ inferences that similar consequences
would result from emulating the conduct witnessed , and
• (3) observers’ judgements of their ability to enact the
modeled behaviour.
 Inhibitory effects
• It occurs when observers either reduce performing the
modeled class of behaviour, or generally curtail their rate of
response as the result of negative consequences perceived.

• Clinical modeling rarely seeks to create inhibitions. If the

behaviour is seriously harmful to self or society, inhibitory
modeling might aid to reduce the noxious conduct.
 Disinhibitory Effects
• These effects are evident when observers increase production of
formerly inhibited acts after models perform them without any
adverse results.

• Disinhibitory effects are common in clinical modeling designed to

reduce fears.
• Observing another approach, cope with, and master situations that
scare clients can vicariously enhance expectations of personal
effectiveness and thus reduce fear reactions in observers.

• Then, successful overt encounters further reinforce a sense of self

efficacy, allowing the persons to favorably reassess their ability to
manage the task. Judgments of one's own efficacy are major
determinants of overt performance that mediate confident
approach in the future.
 Response Facilitation Effects
• The behavior of others can also serve as discriminative cues or priming
stimuli.

• Perceiving others to perform can facilitates observers' production of the

same general class of responses, which already exist in their repertoires.

• Response facilitation effects are distinguished from acquisition and

disinhibition because (1) no new responses are acquired, and

• (2) disinhibitory processes are not involved because the activity is socially
acceptable and not encumbered by restraints.

•
Cognitive Standard for Self regulation

• Most routine behaviour is governed by our past experience in the form of

adaptation levels and judgemental standards.

• We seldom react to situations as unique. We are guided by expectations from

related events that are categorized and interpreted as similar.

• Even perceptual cues are scanned in relation to standards. Once perceived ,

new information is compared to former inputs that act as meaningful
decision-making guidelines.

• Such frames of reference prepare us to handle current and future demands.

Modelling influences affect self-regulation standards in many spheres. A
model’s choice of performance goals , and what amount of self reward is fair
for meeting them can instate similar standards in observers.
 Determinants of Vicarious Influence

• Several interrelated sub processes jointly control how

modeled information is comprehend and utilized by
observers.
• When these components are properly implemented ,
powerful therapeutic changes can be predictably
achieved.
• Neglect of any sub process may retard or neutralize the
entire treatment plan.
• Therefore, analysis of the subsystem aids both for
designing modeling applications and for analyzing
procedures that fail to produce their intended effects.
Bandura (1970) outlined four determinants of
the effectiveness of modeling (determinants
of vicarious influence).
Attentional Processes
Retentional Processes
Motor Reproduction Processes
Motivational Processes
• Attentional Process : Presenting a modeling display
does not assume that learners will perceive it.
• They must be able to register the sensory events as
coherent input.
• When stimuli appear unsystematic , or too fast, too
weak carry too many cues simultaneously, observer
may fail to discriminate the relevant aspects.
• If observers actively attend to and register sense
impressions , they still must be able to decipher(read)
them. Both semantic and judgmental acts are involved.
• Retention Process : Once discriminated , input
is soon lost if not recast in more durable form.
Modeled information must be represented
and encoded in a framework. Such symbolic
codes must be available when needed for the
response information to be used.
• Motoric Reproduction Process : The third main
determinants of modeling effectiveness is motor
reproduction competence. Some tasks require
combining familiar, easy movements to enact very
abstract plans; chess is an example. Symbolic
representativeness and codes guide motor
execution in those undertakings.
• Motivational and Incentive Processes :The last main
sub processes underlying modeling outcome concern
motivational or reinforcement effects.

• Persons may attend to modeled activities , grasps their

meaning , code the grasp into durable symbols, retain
the guidance in accessible form, and have the response
competence to execute it adeptly.
• Yet they will rarely perform behavior, if they face
unfavorable incentives, sanctions for so acting. In such
cases, providing positive incentives can promptly elicit
overt enactment of observational learning.
 A basic modeling approach to the
elimination of fearful avoidance involves
having a client observe live or video taped
models who perform the behavior that client
avoids. The observable consequences of
desired behavior for the models should be
positive or at least not negative.
Variations in modeling procedures:
1. Overt modeling
2. Modeling with guided participation
3. Covert modeling
 Overt modeling
• Fearful observers profit from viewing others perform
threatening activities.
• The therapist fosters response enactment by structured
demonstration.
• With phobic children live and filmed modeling brought similar
gains.
• Adults and adolescents presenting various inhibitions have
benefitted from similar overt modeling.
• Vicarious extinction of fears, and behavioral disinhibitions
have been found with severe animal phobias, examination
anxiety.
Modeling with guided participation:
Live modeling is supplemented by giving the client an
opportunity to make guided, gradual contact with the
feared object under controlled or protected
circumstances.

Only direct confrontation, if performed adequately ,can

fully remove the doubts about the success of simply
watching the models performing the threatening acts.
Performance desensitization produces substantially greater
behavioral change than does symbolic desensitization.
Real encounters with threats are superior to imagined
exposure.

Participant modeling, which uses successful performance as

the primary vehicle of change is much more effective
than modeling alone.

Clients and therapists work at a graded hierarchy of tasks

that eventually leads to mastery of feared activities.
• At each step the therapist exemplifies the relevant activity
while the client observes, then accompanies the client during
performance until the client gains enough skill and self
assurance to attempt the task alone.
• Once the client can handle formerly threatening situations on
their own with relative comfort, more difficult tasks are
introduced.
• The same strategy is applied until the hardest steps are
eventually completed .
• At that stage further independent practice is supplied until
clients have mastered several different instances by
themselves and expect they can tackle successfully any future
encounters.
Covert and symbolic alternatives
Clients are instructed to imagine people engaging in
progressive contacts with threatening stimuli.

Innovative modeling technique in which clients observe

the activities of imagined therapeutic models rather
than watching live or videotaped displays.
It involves three components
1. Imagination of situations where fear is expected to
occur.
2. Imagination of one or more persons comfortably
dealing with these situations.
3. Imagination of favorable consequences for the
model.

It is similar to live modeling with regard to its

effectiveness in treating snake phobia (Cautela [Link].
1974).
Approach behavior increases and fearfulness declines
after the cognitive modeling.

Several constrains on covert modeling: when symbolic

facility is poor ( in case of children and retarded
clients- they process actual example better than
symbolic.
However clinical evidence show that overt and
symbolic demonstrations can promote similar
changes.
 Application
• Modeling can serve many important functions in
changing behavior( Bandura,1969)
• Effective in assertiveness training
• This have been found to be effective in reducing wide
range of phobias-excessive fears of dogs, snakes and
spiders etc.
• Effective in treating various types of fears in chronic
patients through modeling, role playing and positive
reinforcement.
• More stable behavior change
• Not much effective in the patients lacking
seriousness and motivation