У нас вы можете посмотреть бесплатно Episode 33 или скачать в максимальном доступном качестве, видео которое было загружено на ютуб. Для загрузки выберите вариант из формы ниже:
Если кнопки скачивания не
загрузились
НАЖМИТЕ ЗДЕСЬ или обновите страницу
Если возникают проблемы со скачиванием видео, пожалуйста напишите в поддержку по адресу внизу
страницы.
Спасибо за использование сервиса ClipSaver.ru
Media Links Website: delvepsych.com Instagram: @delvepsychchicago YouTube: / @delvepsych20 Substack: https://delvepsych.substack.com/ Hosts Ali McGarel Adam W. Fominaya, PhD Overview of Big Ideas A listener question becomes a deceptively weighty inquiry: kids learn conflict styles by watching conflict. Bandura’s social learning theory (and the Bobo doll studies) as a stark demonstration of imitation, hostile language pickup, and behavioral “generalization” beyond what was directly modeled. PubMed+1 A crisp primer on experimental design: control groups, random assignment, and why comparison is the engine of inference. Observational learning isn’t “just for kids”: adults (and even animals) infer consequences by watching, not only by being reinforced directly. Why a simplistic rewards/punishments frame is often too anemic for humans: cognition, context, and “mentalizing” muddy the neat behaviorist story. Two vivid side-threads: decision fatigue in judges and the “Rat Park” line of work as reminders that environment and depletion can warp behavior. PubMed+1 Breakdown of Segments Welcome + practice notes: listener-supported ethos, consultation plug, Substack, and availability/low-fee options. The question: “How do kids learn how to fight?” framed as learning-by-observation. Bandura refresher: Bobo doll as a template for mimicry + escalation/generalization (new aggressive acts, not merely copied ones). PubMed+1 Science detour: what makes a study “experimental,” why controls matter, and why random assignment protects against hidden timing/context effects. Beyond humans: a dog/puppet example to illustrate vicarious learning of consequences. Complexity check: humans (and even rats) don’t reduce cleanly to pellets-and-levers; cognition and social context change the equation. PubMed+1 Closing ethos: an anti-perfectionism push—start small, iterate, and act a little before you feel “ready.” AI Recommended References (APA) Alexander, B. K., Coambs, R. B., & Hadaway, P. F. (1978). The effect of housing and gender on morphine self-administration in rats. Psychopharmacology, 58(2), 175–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00426903 Springer Link Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575–582. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045925 PubMed Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048687 PubMed Danziger, S., Levav, J., & Avnaim-Pesso, L. (2011). Extraneous factors in judicial decisions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(17), 6889–6892. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1018033108 PubMed Gallup, G. G., Jr. (1970). Chimpanzees: Self-recognition. Science, 167(3914), 86–87. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.167.3... PubMed Gage, S. H., & Sumnall, H. R. (2019). Rat Park: How a rat paradise changed the narrative of addiction. Addiction, 114(5), 917–922. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.14481 PubMed