Observational Learning In Psychology

Observational learning is the process of acquiring new behaviors and skills by watching a “model” perform them and noting the results. Psychologist Albert Bandura first identified it: people can learn without trying a behavior themselves or being rewarded for it. Four processes drive it: attention, retention, motor reproduction, and motivation.

Key Takeaways

  • Definition: Observational learning is acquiring new or changed behavior by watching others.
  • Models: The person whose behavior is copied is called a model.
  • Origin: Albert Bandura first identified observational learning through his Bobo Doll experiment.
  • Four Processes: Observational learning depends on attention, retention, motor reproduction, and motivation.
  • Everywhere: Both children and adults use observational learning to learn how to behave.
  • Beyond Copying: Modern research shows children also innovate, adapting what they see to solve problems, not just copying it exactly (Legare & Nielsen, 2015).
observational learning
Observational learning, a concept studied in psychology, occurs when an individual watches others perform behaviors and then copies those actions, often acquiring new skills and knowledge through observing models.

What Is Observational Learning?

Observational learning, otherwise known as vicarious learning, is the acquisition of information, skills, or behavior through watching others perform, either directly or through another medium, such as video.

Researchers who study animals define it differently: an animal is conditioned to imitate an act after observing it in a member of its own or another species.

For example, a mockingbird could learn to imitate the song patterns of other kinds of birds.

The Canadian-American psychologist Albert Bandura was one of the first to recognize the phenomenon of observational learning (Bandura, 1985).

His theory, social learning theory, stresses the importance of observation and modeling of behaviors, attitudes, and the emotional reactions of others.

Stages of Observational Learning

Bandura (1985) found that humans, who are social animals, naturally gravitate toward observational learning. For example, children may watch their family members and mimic their behaviors.

In observational learning, people learn by watching others and then imitating or modeling what they do or say. Thus, the individuals or objects performing the imitated behavior are called models (Bandura, 1985).

Even infants may start imitating the mouth movements and facial expressions of the adults around them.

Bandura (1977) identified four cognitive processes that determine observational learning: attention, retention, motor reproduction, and motivation.

Social Learning Theory Bandura four stages mediation process in social learning theory attention retention motor reproduction motivation in diagram flat style.

Attention

  • Noticing the Model: Learners must first pay attention to the behavior, since nothing can be learned from a model that goes unnoticed.
  • Model Traits: Models who are high-status, talented, intelligent, or otherwise similar to the observer tend to draw more attention (Bandura, 1985).
  • Observer Traits: The observer’s own mood and current interest also shape how closely the behavior gets watched.
  • The Learning Environment: Attention depends on the environment too: distraction, poor visibility, or an overly complex action can all reduce what is noticed and registered.
  • In Practice: This is why trainers often break a complex action into smaller steps and cut down distractions so learners can follow it clearly.
  • Example: Someone climbing the corporate ladder may watch and mimic the behavior of managers and vice presidents (Debell, 2021).

Retention

  • Storing the Behavior: Attention alone is not enough; observers must also retain the behavior so they can reproduce it later.
  • How It’s Stored: The behavior can be stored as a mental picture of what the model did, or as a verbal description that can be rehearsed in words.
  • Aiding Retention: Mnemonic devices or spaced repetition help structure the information so it is easy to remember and later perform with little effort (Debell, 2021).
  • Rehearsing the Behavior: Mentally picturing the action, or physically practicing fragments of it, both strengthen the stored memory.
  • Why It Matters: A behavior that is broken down into clear, meaningful steps is remembered better than one stored as a single unstructured sequence.
  • Long-Term Storage: A well-retained behavior can be recalled and performed long after the original observation, sometimes years later.

Motor Reproduction

  • Turning Memory Into Action: Retention gives the observer a mental guide; motor reproduction is putting that guide into actual physical movement.
  • Physical Limits: Even a well-remembered behavior cannot be performed if the observer lacks the strength, coordination, or physical maturity to do it.
  • Time to Master: Reproducing a complex behavior accurately often takes hours of practice, and can take years to fully craft and perfect (Debell, 2021).
  • A Matching Process: The observer’s own attempt is compared to the retained model and gradually adjusted until it lines up, rather than being copied perfectly in one try.
  • Feedback Helps: Comparing an attempt against the remembered model, with help from a coach, teacher, or mirror, lets the observer correct mistakes and improve.
  • Example: A young child who has watched an adult drive a car cannot reproduce that behavior until they are physically old enough.

Motivation

  • The Final Requirement: Even a well-learned behavior is not performed unless the observer is motivated to produce it.
  • Intrinsic vs Extrinsic: Motivation can come from within, or externally through rewards and punishments.
  • Three Sources: Motivation can come from an observer’s own past rewards for a behavior, from seeing a model rewarded or punished, or from the observer’s own sense of pride or guilt.
  • Watching Consequences: Seeing what happens to the model, rather than experiencing it directly, is often enough to raise or lower an observer’s motivation to act.
  • Why It’s Separate: Motivation determines whether a learned behavior is shown, not whether it was learned in the first place.
  • Example: The extrinsic motivation of someone seeking to climb the corporate ladder could include the incentive of earning a high salary and more autonomy at work (Debell, 2021).

The Bobo Doll Experiment

Bandura’s Bobo Doll experiment is one of the most famous studies in psychology.

Aim: Bandura, Ross, and Ross (1961) tested whether children would copy specific aggressive acts simply by watching a live adult model perform them.

Method: Researchers individually brought 72 children into a room with an inflatable Bobo doll. A live adult model either attacked the doll with punches, a mallet, and aggressive phrases; played quietly nearby and ignored it; or was absent as a control.

bobo doll

Results: Children who watched the aggressive model reproduced the model’s specific punches, mallet strikes, and verbal insults. Children in the non-aggressive and control groups showed almost none of these acts.

Conclusion: Bandura, Ross, and Ross (1961) concluded that children can acquire a novel aggressive behavior purely by observing it, with no reward, punishment, or prior experience of their own.

Observational Learning Examples

There are numerous examples of observational learning in everyday life for people of all ages.

Nonetheless, observational learning is especially prevalent in the socialization of children. For example:

  • An infant could learn to chew by watching adults chew food.
  • After witnessing an older sibling being punished for taking a cookie without permission, the young child does not take cookies without permission.
  • A school child may learn to write cursive letters by observing their teacher write them on the board.
  • Children may learn to play hide and seek by seeing other children playing the game and being rewarded in the form of entertainment.
  • Children may also learn to say swear words after watching other children say swear words and gain social status.
  • A child may learn how to drive a car by making appropriate motions after seeing a parent driving.
  • A young boy can swing a baseball bat without being explicitly taught how to do it after attending a baseball game. Similarly, a child could learn how to shoot hoops after a basketball game without instruction.
  • A child may be able to put on roller skates and stand on them without explicit instruction.
  • A student may learn not to cheat by watching another student be punished for doing so
  • A child may avoid stepping on ice after seeing another child fall in front of them.

Positive and Negative Outcomes

Bandura concluded that people and animals alike watch and learn and that this learning can have both prosocial and antisocial effects.

Vicarious reinforcement is the term for this effect: seeing a model rewarded or punished shapes whether an observer performs a behavior, without the observer experiencing any consequence themselves.

Bandura (1965) demonstrated this directly. Children who watched a model punished for aggression imitated it less than children who saw the model rewarded or unpunished. When later offered a reward for reproducing the behavior, however, all three groups performed it equally well.

This showed that the model’s consequences affect performance, not learning. Even the children who saw punishment had already learned the behavior; they simply had less reason to show it.

Prosocial or positive models can be used to encourage socially acceptable behavior. For example, parents, by reading to their children, can teach their children to read more.

Parents who want healthy-eating children can model that behavior themselves, eating well and exercising, and spend fitness time together as a family.

Observational learning argues that children tend to copy what parents do above what they say (Daffin, 2021).

Observational learning has also been used to explain how antisocial behaviors develop. For example, research suggests that observational learning is a reason why many abused children grow up to become abusers themselves (Murrell, Christoff, & Henning, 2007).

Abused children tend to grow up witnessing their parents deal with anger and frustration through violent and aggressive acts, often learning to behave in that manner themselves.

Some studies have also suggested that violent television shows may also have antisocial effects, though this is a controversial claim (Kirsh, 2011).

Observational Learning and Behavioral Modification

Observational learning can be used to change already learned behaviors, both positive and negative.

Bandura argued that if all behaviors are learned by observation, they can also be unlearned the same way. Because people model their behavior on those around them, undesirable behaviors can be altered or relearned through new models.

Bandura suggested showing people a model in a situation that usually causes them some anxiety.

For example, a psychologist treating a fear of blood draws might show the client a model using relaxation techniques while calmly getting blood drawn.

By seeing the model interact nicely with the fear-evoking stimulus, the fear should subside. This method of behavioral modification is widely used in clinical, business, and classroom situations (Daffin, 2021).

In the classroom, a teacher may use modeling to demonstrate how to do a math problem for a student. Through a prompt delay, that teacher may then encourage the students to try the problem for themselves.

If the student can solve the problem, no further action is needed. If the student struggles, a teacher may use one of four types of prompts: verbal, gestural, modeling, or physical.

Similarly, a trainer may show a trainee how to use a computer program to run a register.

As before, the trainer can use prompt delays and prompts to test the level of learning the employee has gained.

Reinforcers can then be delivered through social support after the trainee has successfully completed the task themself (Daffin, 2021).

Observational Learning vs. Operant and Classical Conditioning

Classical conditioning, also known as Pavlovian conditioning, pairs a neutral stimulus with one that already triggers a reflex. Pavlov’s dogs learned to salivate to a bell after it was repeatedly paired with food, even once the food stopped appearing.

Operant conditioning instead works through consequences: a trainer teaches a dog to sit by rewarding the behavior each time it happens (Daffin, 2021).

Observational learning extends both traditions. The table below summarizes the key differences.

FeatureClassical ConditioningOperant ConditioningObservational Learning
Experience requiredPersonally undergoes the stimulus pairingPersonally performs the response and receives the consequenceWatches another person perform and experience the consequence
Role of reinforcementNot necessary for learningCentral; the response is learned because it is reinforcedAffects performance, not learning; acquisition can occur with no reinforcement at all
New behaviorCannot introduce a new responseBuilds a new response gradually through shapingCan install a full, novel action pattern after a single observation
Central figuresPavlov, WatsonThorndike, SkinnerBandura

These three forms of learning are not rivals; they work together.

A child’s fear of dogs might start with a bite (classical conditioning), then grow stronger each time a parent’s comforting attention reinforces it (operant conditioning).

Watching a sibling panic around dogs can spread that fear further, purely through observation, making the overall learning process more efficient (Daffin, 2021).

Critical Evaluation of Observational Learning

The Bobo doll studies are landmark research, but later work has also revealed real limitations in how they were designed and interpreted.

Strengths and Limitations of the Bobo Doll Studies

  • Controlled Design: Pre-matched groups and high inter-observer reliability let researchers rule out alternative explanations for the children’s aggression.
  • Demand Characteristics: Watching an adult attack the doll may have signaled to children that hitting it was expected, inflating imitation scores (demand characteristics).
  • Rehearsed Play: The Bobo doll is built to be hit and rebounds when struck, so some “aggression” may be ordinary play with an inviting toy.
  • Ecological Validity: Hitting an inflatable doll in a lab is not the same as real aggression toward a person, which limits how far the findings generalize (ecological validity).
  • Ethical Concerns: Exposing young children to an aggressive adult model and a frustrating situation raises ethical questions that would not be accepted under today’s research standards.
  • Sample Age Range: All three landmark Bobo doll studies tested preschool children only, so it is unclear how far the findings extend to older children and adults.

Contemporary Research

Legare and Nielsen (2015) argued that observational learning draws on two separate skills: imitation, exact copying, and innovation, adapting what is seen to solve a problem.

Children switch between the two based on what they think a behavior is for, imitating faithfully for social rituals and innovating for practical goals.

Cross-cultural studies show some children copy a demonstrated action more faithfully than others, even repeating steps that make no difference to the outcome, a pattern researchers call overimitation.

Researchers read this as a sign that children treat a model’s exact actions as culturally meaningful, not just useful, adding a social dimension to Bandura’s four processes.

Children may copy a model closely because they infer that a knowledgeable model is showing them what they ought to do, not only because they expect a reward.

Taken together, observational learning remains one of psychology’s best-supported theories: its core claim, that people learn by watching, is not seriously disputed.

Ongoing research is refining how and why observational learning happens, not whether it happens at all.

References

Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of models’ reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(6), 589–595. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022070

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84 (2), 191.

Bandura, A. (1985). Model of causality in social learning theory. I n Cognition and psychotherapy (pp. 81-99). Springer, Boston, MA.

Bandura, A. (1986). Fearful expectations and avoidant actions as coeffects of perceived self-inefficacy.

Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American psychologist, 44 (9), 1175.

Bandura, A. (1998). Health promotion from the perspective of social cognitive theory. Psychology and health, 13 (4), 623-649.

Bandura, A. (2003). Social cognitive theory for personal and social change by enabling media. In Entertainment-education and social change (pp. 97-118). Routledge.

Bandura, A. Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through the imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575-582.

Debell, A. (2021). What is Observational Learning? 

Daffin, L. (2021). Principles of Learning and Behavior. Washington State University.

Kirsh, S. J. (2011). Children, adolescents, and media violence: A critical look at the research. 

LaMort, W. (2019). The Social Cognitive Theory. Boston University.

Legare, C. H., & Nielsen, M. (2015). Imitation and innovation: The dual engines of cultural learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(11), 688–699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.08.005

Murrell, A. R., Christoff, K. A., & Henning, K. R. (2007). Characteristics of domestic violence offenders: Associations with childhood exposure to violence. Journal of Family violence, 22 (7), 523-532.

Reed, M. S., Evely, A. C., Cundill, G., Fazey, I., Glass, J., Laing, A., … & Stringer, L. C. (2010). What is social learning?. Ecology and society, 15 (4).

Schunk, D. H. (2012). Social cognitive theory.

Skinner, B. F. (1950). Are theories of learning necessary?. Psychological Review, 57 (4), 193.

Saul McLeod, PhD

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Chartered Psychologist (CPsychol)

Saul McLeod, PhD, is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.


Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology, where she contributes accessible content on psychological topics. She is also an autistic PhD student at the University of Birmingham, researching autistic camouflaging in higher education.

Charlotte Nickerson

Writer and Cognitive Engineer

AB History, Harvard University

Charlotte Nickerson is a Harvard graduate and cognitive engineer whose work sits at the intersection of social psychology, human behaviour, and technology design. She contributed over 100 articles to Simply Psychology and holds a Master's in Cognitive Engineering from ENSC.