bandura's theory of self efficacy- carrie allday

8/13/2019 Bandura's Theory of Self Efficacy- Carrie Allday

1/12

SELF EFFICACY THEORY 1

Banduras Theory of Self-Efficacy

Theorist: Albert Bandura

Albert Bandura

Albert Bandura was born December 4, 1925 in Mundane, in Alberta, Canada. He studied

as an undergraduate at the University of British Columbia. By fluke, Bandura took an

introductory psychology course in order to take a full course load. He enjoyed the course so

much that he graduated in 1949 with a bachelors degree in psychology. Following his

undergraduate work, Bandura studied clinical psychology at the University of Iowa and obtained

a M.A. and Ph. D by 1952. He studied under Robert Sears at the University of Iowa and gained

an interest in social learning theory. Bandura joined the faculty at Stanford University in 1953.

Description of Theory

Overview

Albert Banduras theory ofperceived self-efficacy is based on ones belief of their

capabilities. Perceived self-efficacy influences every aspect of life. The following quote from

Bandura provides a brief synopsis of perceived self-efficacy.

We find that peoplesbeliefs about their efficacy affect the sorts of choices they make

in very significant ways. In particular, it affects their levels of motivation and

perseverance in the face of obstacles. Most success requires persistent effort, so low self-

efficacy becomes a self-limiting process. In order to succeed, people need a sense of self-

efficacy, strung together with resilience to meet the inevitable obstacles and inequities of

life (Bandura, 1977).


2/12


Individuals with overall high perceived self-efficacy often set high goals and maintain

endurance to see them through despite challenges. They recover more quickly from failure and

attribute failure to lack of knowledge or skills, rather than deficits in personal capabilities. These

individuals typically achieve more in life, while experiencing lower levels of stress and

depression (Bandura, 1994).

Individuals with overall low perceived self-efficacy focus on personal deficiencies lack

of skills, and self-doubts. These individuals are hindered by obstacles which often results in

higher rates of failure. Individuals with low perceived self-efficacy tend to exert less effort, set

lower goals and experience less success. They are less likely to recover from setbacks and have

high rates of stress and depression (Bandura, 1994, 1982).

Individuals can have high perceived self-efficacy in some areas and low perceived self-

efficacy in others. Self-efficacy is task specific and differs from one activity to another. For

example, a person may have high levels of perceived self-efficacy at work and low perceived

self-efficacy in the area of weight management. Self-efficacy has to be measured in individual

domains that examine perceived self-efficacy of specific tasks. An example of a measurement of

efficacy in exercise is provided in the Appendix.

In summary, Self-efficacy judgments, whether accurate or faulty, influence choice of

activities and environmental settings. People avoid activities that they believe exceed their

coping capabilities, but they undertake and perform assuredly those that they judge themselves

capable of managing (Bandura, 1977).

History

Bandura conducted a study on how an individualsperception of their ability to control

what they perceive as threats affects the release of neurotransmitters and stress-related hormones


3/12


into the bloodstream. The study resulted in individuals overcoming lifelong phobias within a

matter of a few hours. Study participants even put themselves in activities they once would never

have attempted because they felt they had more control of themselves. The overall findings of

this series of Banduras research was that ones belief in their self-efficacy (e.g., belief in their

own capabilities) could help regulate personal actions. This research marked the beginning of

Banduras interest in and study of perceived self-efficacy.

Self-efficacy has been studied in a variety of diverse fields including business, athletics,

education, medicine, media studies, social and political change, moral development, psychology,

psychiatry, psycho-pathology, and international affairs. The field of education has conducted a

substantial amount of self-efficacy research in pursuit of learning how to help students achieve

more despite their ability, background, family circumstance, and adversity. Bandurastheory of

self-efficacy was developed from research conducted by these diverse programs. The

culmination of perceived self-efficacy in these different fields resulted in a comprehensive

understanding .This body of research brought lucidity in how ones perceived self-efficacy

allows them to take control of their life circumstances to ultimately impact the direction of their

lives and the person they become (Pajares, 2004).

Theory Components

Ones perceived efficacy affects how people think (e.g., erratic, strategic, optimistic,

pessimistic, etc.), choices they make, goals they set, commitment to goals, amount of effort put

forth, anticipated outcomes from their efforts, length of time they persevere during challenging

experiences, resilience to adversity, quality of emotional life, the amount of stress and depression

experienced in coping with demands of life, the life choices they make and accomplishments


4/12


they recognize (Bandura, 2006). It is important understand the sources of self-efficacy and the

associated psychological processes.

Sources of Efficacy

According to Bandura (1994), there are four primary sources of perceived self-efficacy

which include mastery experiences, social modeling, social persuasion, and emotional states.

Each of these sources can promote both high and low self-efficacy. When one experiences

mastery of a task or activity, it can serve as a boost to self-efficacy. If one experiences mastery

too quickly or easily, one can tend to exert less effort and expect to achieve mastery immediately

without learning to work. The general tendency is the more someone experiences mastery, the

more likely they are to develop higher levels of self-efficacy.

Social models are a source of efficacy. Individuals are influenced by the capabilities of

others whom they perceive themselves to be most similar too. For example, a person who views

themselves as similar to someone who is highly capable in a certain area, may perceive

themselves equally as capable (i.e., if she can do it, I can do it.). This can also be reversed to the

negative where one may perceive themselves incapable (i.e., if she cant do that, there is no way

I can). Social models serve as a standard for judging personal capabilities (Bandura, 1994).

Social persuasion is another source of efficacy that takes place when others believe an

individual is capable of a task. Individuals can perform up or down to others expectations and

beliefs. For example, students whose teachers label them as bad, often behave badly while

students who are believed to be good typically behave well.

Finally, emotional states are a source of efficacy. Emotions and mood affect the way a

person perceives their efficacy. People translate their reactions to emotion into performance

capabilities. The mood or emotion is not important as much as affect their reaction has on an


5/12


individuals perceptionof there self-efficacy. For example, an individual may not think he or she

has the emotional capacity to do a certain activity or task based on their previous reactions to

emotion or mood.

Psychological Processes of Perceived Self-Efficacy

In addition to sources of efficacy, Bandura (1994) suggested four psychological processes

of perception of self-efficacy that affect human performance (see Figure 1). These process

include cognitive, motivational, affective and selection. Cognitive processes involve the thought

process one goes through before engaging in a task. People imagine a scenario and anticipate

their capabilities and potential outcomes. Every task begins with a cognitive thought process.

Secondly, the motivational processes occurs when one gains motivation from causal

attributions, outcome expectancies and goals to attempt or perform a given task (Bandura, 1994).

Every action is motivated by something. Next individuals experience the affective process. The

affective process involves an individuals perceived efficacy in their coping abilities and how

much stress they believe they are capable of handling in challenging or threatening

circumstances. The ultimate decision occurs in the selection process. People select activities

they feel they are capable of and avoid activities they perceive themselves to be incapable of

successfully completing. Each selection or life choice molds ones life. Bandura (1994)

suggested individuals follow each of the discussed processes in decision making. Perceived self-

efficacy is involved in every decision made.

Perceived self-efficacy is a belief of what one is capable of while outcome expectations

are beliefs about the outcomes that will likely follow a given performance (Bandura, 2006). The

outcomes people anticipate depend largely on their judgments of how well they will be able to


6/12


perform in given situations(Bandura, 2006, p.309). This is obtained through the four processes

identified by Bandura.

Measurement and Instrumentation

It is not possible for an individual to have high levels of self-efficacy in each area of life.

Individuals have areas in which they have higher levels of self-efficacy than others. Bandura

(2006) gave an example of a business executive who had high levels of organizational efficacy

but low levels of parenting efficacy. There are multiple domains (e.g., exercise, diet, parental,

organizational, etc.) of self-efficacy that make up ones general personal efficacy; therefore there

is no all encompassing self-efficacy measure. Such measurement would not provide adequate

information for any specific domain. Instruments that attempt to serve as an all-purpose measure

of self-efficacy have limited value because they do not encompass specific situations and

circumstances necessary for accurate measurement (Bandura, 2006). Scales of perceived self-

efficacy must be tailored to the particular domain of functioning that is the object of interest

(Bandura, 2006, p. 307-308). Individual domain instruments must be created.

Bandura (2006) provided guidelines for developing self-efficacy scales in any given

domain. In measuring perceived self-efficacy for a specific domain, all behavioral aspects of the

domain must be considered. Bandura (2006) used the example of weight loss to explain. In

developing an instrument to measure ones perceived capabilities to control weight, both dietand

exercise must be examined. If only diet was considered, this would not account for true success

in weight loss, only one part of the weightless process. All relevant aspects of a domain must be

considered to ensure a valid measurement.


7/12


Including factors that do not influence a specific domain is of equal importance. For

example, ones ability to relax does not affect weight loss. Any items in a scale that do not affect

the domain being measured and cannot be linked to the domain must be rewritten or discarded.

Instruments measuring perceived self-efficacy must include a level of challenge one

perceives they are capable of attaining. This may be measured by level of perceived, accuracy,

exertion, productivity, threat, self-regulation, etc. One self-efficacy scale Bandura developed

measured onesperceived capabilities to exercise under certain circumstances (i.e., stressed,

tired, under pressure from work, etc.; see Appendix). His measurement scale was in increments

of 10 from 0 to 100 with 0 measuring cannot do at all, 50 measuring moderately can do, and

100 measuring highly certain can do (Bandura, 2006, p. 321). When developing self-efficacy

scales, researchers must identify challenges that keep individuals from performing a specific

behavior. For example, some individuals may perceive themselves as less capable of maintaining

an exercise routine during rainy weather. Researchers can identify these challenges by

conducting pilot studies with open ended questions that ask participants to describe things that

make it challenging to perform a specific behavior. The identified challenges can be built into the

efficacy measure. A more encompassing scale can be developed from this practice. When the

scale is formally given, participants can rate their ability to meet or surpass a given barrier.

The response scale for measuring self-efficacy should require individuals to rate the

strength of their belief in their current capabilities to do a specific activity at the time of the

measurement. Scales can be from 0 to 100 with increments of 10 or from 1 to 10 depending on

the age and ability of participants. A 5 interval scale is weaker than using a 0-100 scale (Pajares,

Hartley, & Valiante, 2001) because it does not allow responses to be distributed over a range.


8/12


A practice item is recommended to ensure that participants recognize they should rate

themselves according to what their capabilities are at the time the measurement is given. This

must be emphasized to avoid participants rating how they perceive themselves to be in the future.

Raters may mistakenly rate themselves higher with the hopes that they will one day be capable of

a certain behavior or task. Bandura recommends a practice item on the capability to lift objects

of a certain weight. At a certain point an individual can determine they are incapable of lifting a

certain amount of weight. This helps to train the participant in how to properly rate perceived

self-efficacy. There are activities children can do to learn how to rate themselves. Bandura

(2006) recommended placing markers at different distances from the child, have them rate their

beliefs of if they can jump a certain distance to a marker. Once a child has rated their capability,

the child attempts to jump as far as the marker. This activity can help train children in rating

perceived self-efficacy behaviors.

Bias

Bandura recommended safeguard procedures to help prevent bias in responses. First, he

recommended use of standard procedures. Measurement instructions should not require personal

identification and participants should be informed that the instrument will be coded and only

reviewed by researchers. This helps decrease respondent evaluation concerns.

Second, Bandura recommended to generically title measurements (e.g., Appraisal

Inventory) rather than the title containing the word self-efficacy. According to Bandura, they

are more likely to respond truthfully if they feel they are helping contribute to research efforts

rather than personally being evaluated.

Items


9/12


10/12


11/12


Figure 1

Banduras Theory of Self-Efficacy

(Bandura, 1986, p.169)


12/12


Appendix

Self-Efficacy to Regulate Exercise

A number of situations are described below that can make it hard to

stick to an exercise routine. Please rate in each of the blanks in the col-

umn how certain you are that you can get yourself to perform your exer-

cise routine regularly (three or more times a week).

Rate your degree of confidence by recording a number from 0 to 100 using

the

scale given below:

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Cannot Moderately Highly certain

do at all can do can do

Confidence

(0-100)

When I am feeling tired _____

When I am feeling under pressure from work _____

During bad weather _____

After recovering from an injury that caused me to stop exercising _____

During or after experiencing personal problems _____

When I am feeling depressed _____

When I am feeling anxious _____

After recovering from an illness that caused me to stop exercising _____

When I feel physical discomfort when I exercise _____

After a vacation _____

When I have too much work to do at home _____

When visitors are present _____

When there are other interesting things to do _____

If I dont reach my exercise goals _____

Without support from my family or friends _____

During a vacation _____

When I have other time commitments _____

After experiencing family problems _____

bandura's theory of self efficacy- carrie allday

Documents