fei75766_ch17_534-568.indd 542  02/24/20 10:49 AM
Part VI    Learning-Cognitive Theories542
beofequal strength ortomake equal contributions. Therelative potency ofthethree 
varies withtheindividual andwiththesituation. Attimes, behavior might bethemost 
powerful, aswhen aperson plays thepiano forherownenjoyment. Other times, the
environment exerts thegreatest influence, aswhen aboatoverturns andevery survi -
vorbegins thinking andbehaving inaverysimilar fashion. Although behavior and
environment canattimes bethemost powerful contributors toperformance, cogni -
tion(person) isusually thestrongest contributor toperformance. Cognition would 
likely beactivated intheexamples oftheperson playing thepiano forherownenjoy -
ment andthesurvivors ofanoverturned boat. Therelative influence ofbehavior, 
environment, andperson depends onwhich ofthetriadic factors isstrongest ata
particular moment (Bandura, 1997).
An Example of Triadic Reciprocal Causation
Consider thisexample oftriadic reciprocal causation. Achild begging herfather fora
second brownie is,from thefather’s viewpoint, anenvironmental event. Ifthefather 
automatically (without thought) weretogivethechild asecond brownie, thenthetwo
would beconditioning eachother’s behavior intheSkinnerian sense. Thebehavior of
thefather would becontrolled bytheenvironment; buthisbehavior, inturn, would 
haveacountercontrolling effect onhisenvironment, namely thechild. InBandura’s 
theory, however, thefather iscapable ofthinking about theconsequences ofreward -
ingorignoring thechild’s behavior. Hemaythink, “IfIgiveheranother brownie, she
willstopcrying temporarily, butinfuture cases, shewillbemore likely topersist until
Igiveintoher.Therefore, Iwillnotallow hertohaveanother brownie.” Hence, the
father hasaneffect onbothhisenvironment (thechild) andhisownbehavior (reject -
inghisdaughter’s request). Thechild’s subsequent behavior (father’s environment) 
helps shape thecognition andthebehavior ofthefather. Ifthechild stops begging, 
thefather maythenhaveother thoughts. Forexample, hemayevaluate hisbehavior 
bythinking, “I’magood father because Ididtherightthing.” Thechange inenviron -
ment alsoallows thefather topursue different behaviors. Thus, hissubsequent behav -
iorispartially determined bythereciprocal interaction ofhisenvironment, cognition, 
andbehavior.
Thisexample illustrates thereciprocal interaction ofbehavioral, environ -
mental, andpersonal factors from thefather’s point ofview. First, thechild’s pleas 
affected thefather’s behavior (E⇒B);theyalsopartially determined thefather’s 
cognition (E⇒P);thefather’s behavior helped shape thechild’s behavior, thatis,
hisownenvironment (B⇒E);hisbehavior alsoimpinged onhisownthoughts 
(B⇒P);andhiscognition partially determined hisbehavior (P⇒B).Tocomplete 
thecycle, P(person) must influence E(environment). How canthefather’s cogni -
tiondirectly shape theenvironment without firstbeing transformed intobehavior? It
cannot. However, Pdoesnotsignify cognition alone; itstands forperson. Bandura 
(1999b) hypothesized that“people evoke different reactions from theirsocial envi-
ronment bytheirphysical characteristics—such astheirage,size,race, sex,andphys-
icalattractiveness—even before theysayordoanything” (p.158). Thefather, then, 
byvirtue ofhisroleandstatus asafather andperhaps inconjunction withhissize
andstrength, hasadecided effect onthechild. Thus, thefinalcausal linkiscom-
pleted (P⇒E).Final PDF to printer