Evaluating Social Learning Theory
Social learning theory's biggest strength is recognising that cognitive factors matter in learning. Traditional conditioning theories couldn't fully explain human behaviour because they ignored our ability to think, store information, and make judgements about when certain actions are appropriate.
However, the theory has significant limitations. It largely ignores biological factors that influence behaviour. For instance, boys often show more aggressive behaviour than girls, which could be explained by testosterone differences rather than just social learning. This suggests Bandura may have underestimated biological influences.
Ethical concerns also limit research in this area. Exposing children to aggressive behaviour (knowing they might copy it) raises serious questions about protecting participants from harm. Modern ethics committees wouldn't approve studies like the original Bobo doll experiment.
The theory's ecological validity is questionable too. Most supporting evidence comes from controlled lab experiments where children were aggressive towards a doll that obviously couldn't feel pain. Their behaviour might be completely different towards real people in real-world situations.
Despite these limitations, social learning theory has brilliant practical applications. It explains media influence on behaviour, cultural differences in aggression, and why some communities (like the Amish) remain non-violent - if aggressive behaviour isn't displayed, it can't be imitated.
Exam Tip: Remember to balance strengths and limitations in evaluation questions - social learning theory is useful but not complete on its own!