fei75766_ch18_569-609.indd 606  02/24/20 10:50 AM
Part VI    Learning-Cognitive Theories606
Key Terms and Concepts
•Thecognitive social learning theories ofbothRotter andMischel attempt 
tosynthesize thestrengths ofreinforcement theory withthose ofcognitive 
theory. 
•According toRotter, people’s behavior inaspecific situation isafunction of
theirexpectations of reinforcements andthestrength oftheneeds satisfied by
those reinforcements.
•Inspecific situations, behavior isestimated bythebasic prediction formula 
thatsuggests thatthepotential foragiven behavior tooccur isafunction of
theperson’s expectancy plusthevalue ofthereinforcement.
•Thegeneral prediction formula states thatneed potential isafunction of
freedom ofmovement andneed value.
•Need potential isthepossible occurrence ofasetoffunctionally related 
behaviors directed toward thesatisfaction ofagoalorasimilar setofgoals. 
•Freedom of movement istheaverage expectancy thatasetofrelated 
behaviors willbereinforced. can consciously set goals for themselves and consciously strive to solve old 
and new problems. However, people are not always aware of the underlying 
motivations for much of their present behavior.
On the issue of personality being shaped by social or biological influ -
ences, cognitive social learning theory emphasizes social factors.  Rotter 
especially stressed the importance of learning within a social environment. 
Mischel also highlighted social influences, but he does not overlook the 
importance of genetic factors. He and Shoda (Mischel & Shoda, 1999) main -
tained that people have both a genetic and a social predisposition to act in 
a given manner. The genetic predisposition, of course, flows from their 
genetic endowment, whereas their social predisposition results from their 
social history. 
As for stressing uniqueness or similarities,  we place Rotter in a middle 
position. People have individual histories and unique experiences that allow 
them to set personalized goals, but there are also enough similarities among 
people to allow for the construction of mathematical formulas that, if suffi -
cient information were available, would permit reliable and accurate predic -
tion of behavior. 
By comparison, Mischel clearly places more emphasis on uniqueness than 
on similarities. Differences among people are due to each individual’s behavioral 
signature and to unique patterns of variation in each person’s behavior. In sum -
mary, cognitive social learning theory views people as forward-looking, purpo -
sive, unified, cognitive, affective, and social animals who are capable of 
evaluating present experiences and anticipating future events on the basis of 
goals they have chosen for themselves.Final PDF to printer