Yes, there were three groups of children to be compared for the study. One with a non aggressive model, second with an aggressive model and third one was the control group with no model.

Don't know the answer but relatable

when one feels (awkward) or (shy) interacting, I think its the fear of saying something other people present there won't like, well when one sees people interacting, being loved , etc , you might wanna feel that free to interact. its the same as this theory's "positive modelling" part. when one's afraid to interact they feel like there should be a book of rules to what to say and what not, like now you can obviously correct me if im wrong but u may feel a little pulled back :) thank you for reading

You have said not just what my mind was thinking, but what my soul was trying to say. Thank you, Charles Miller. So spot on.

Has it improved your performance in the bedroom? Cause cocaine is a hell of a drug!

Everyone thinks their better until they do it.

Pretty sure it's an exam prep video. Unfortunately, if it's not relevant to a question specifically on the exam criteria, an examiner will not care if you know everything about his life's work or not if you fail to answer the question asked of you, i.e what was his theory

Vrinda Sugandhi jhopeee

even during studying he haunts me *sings pied piper in the background*

its just the overall intro

This shows what a bigger fool you are. These, as you say, "meaningless, " and "pseudoscientific ideas" are actually the what makes psychiatrist and psychologists do their jobs. Without these, then treatment would be hard cause 1. They do not understand the cause of behavior, 2. They do not know how their treatment would influence behavior, and 3. They do not know why is that their behavior. Open a book once in your life. All of these theories are actually easier to understand cause, one way or another, you can apply it to your own life.

@@franceslilithgrey993 I did open many books, and unlike you I've read books that are based on the scientific method and that describe empirically observable facts. Facts such as that Vitamin D insufficiency causes Schizophrenia or that Diazepam affects the GABA receptors in the brain in a way that calms people and relaxes muscles, or that mood stabilizers slow down the passage of impulses in the brain which prevents mood swings and epilepsy. These are all real empirical facts that can be exactly measured, whereas these pseudoscientific claims of Albert Bandura, Sigmund Freud and other frauds that you so dogmatically defend are just metaphysical nonsense that are too vague to mean anything. And most psychiatrists do not even know who Albert Bandura is.

@@MultiBOZA how then can you say you opened a lot of books when you do not even know what these theories are used for? While most people would say science is based on emperical observable facts, all sciences first start as theories and not many even know and understand what these are. Furthermore, the reason why they are, as you say vague, is because, first of all, humans are complex beings. These psychological theories are used to explain personality in a way that people could understand. Additionally, you can not just say that mental illnesses all stem from one reason, or that medicine works for everyone. Also, are you a psychiatrist or know psychiatrists to actually say they do not know of Bandura?

Do you even know how long it takes for theories to become factual? Like some takes decades. These psychological theories just started to be published in 1950-1960s, and it would be a theory for decades as humans are ever evolving beings.

@@franceslilithgrey993 Well, 5 days ago I opened a new peer-reviewed science book which said that this theory by Bandura is too vague to mean anything, and that in reality this "learning" process depicted in this video was just an irrelevant little stimulus and that in reality the violent behaviour of children is caused by a group of external and mostly internal factors. Furthermore, that book claims that Richard Trembley has a much better theory for deviant and criminal behaviour of children, and that unlike Bandura's, Trembley's theory is supported by a lot of longitudinal and statistical studies.

study.com/academy/lesson/social-cognitive-learning-theory-definition-and-examples.html You may check this link