This document summarizes Walter Mischel's social cognitive theory of personality. Some key points: - Mischel believed personality is comprised of cognitive, affective and behavioral competencies, beliefs, standards and goals that interact dynamically. - He emphasized the interaction between traits and situations, and that behavior is influenced by cognitive appraisals of situations rather than traits alone. - Mischel's Cognitive-Affective Personality System model describes how cognitive strategies, affect, goals and values interact reciprocally to shape behavior. - Research on delayed gratification found cognitive strategies like distraction can influence impulsive behavior. Mischel's theory emphasizes understanding cognitive processing dynamics to enable self-directed change.

1. 2.3.5 Locus of Control Generalized Expectancies to perceive reinforcing events One’s own behavior Beyond control

2. 2.3.5.1 Internal Locus of Control A belief that reinforcement is brought about by one’s own behavior. Schultz,2008).

3. 2.3.5.2 External Locus of control A belief that reinforcement is under the control of other people, fate or Luck. (Schultz 2008; Ryckman 2007).

6. Scales to measure Locus of Control I-E Scale(1966). Interpersonal trust Scale(1967). Situation Specific scales. Rotter Incomplete Sentence Blank (1950). Intellectual Ascription of responsibilty scale.(1965). Standford preschool I-E Index .

7. 2.4 Related research on I-E

8. 2.4.1 Origins of I E Orientation (Carton&Nowicki,1994) Parents of internally oriented children are internally oriented themselves.

9. 2.4.2 Age and Gender Differences (Manger& Ekeland 2000) Girls are Internally oriented (Heckhausen & Schultz 1995) College students are more Internally oriented. (DeBrabander&Boone 1990) No difference between men and women,how ever differ on items

10. 2.4.3 Changes in I-E over the Life Span (Mirowsky 1995) Uneducated elderly more Externally Oriented. Educated elderly maintain Internal Orientation by being flexible . (Ryckman ,2007).

11. 2.4.4 I-E and Attribution of Responsibility (Phares & Lamiell 1994) Internal experience more shame and guilt when suffer defeat. Externals employ defensive strategies.

12. 2.4.5 I-E Academic Performance (Mooney,Sherman,lo presto 1991) Internal task skills are associated positively with personal Social and academic adjustments in college.

13. 2.4.6 I-E and Career development and Status ( Luzzo&Ward 1995 ) Internal Students take more part time jobs congruent to their career aspirations.

14. 2.4.7 I-E and Romantic Relationships Internals have fewer romantic attachments than externals .

15. 2.4.8 I –E and physical Health differences (Phares 1993;seeman & seeman 1985) internals ,--Wear Seat belts,exercise and quit smoking. (Marshall 1991) Four aspects of Locus of control as it relates to Physical health. (Ryckman,robbins,Thonton 1982) Internallly oriented people are Physically healthier.

16. Conti (Lau 1982) Parents of Internals encourage them to feel them responsible for their health. (Quadrel&Lau 1989) Internally oriented college students knew more about health than externals. ( LisaClements,reginaldYork,&Glenn rohrer 1995) Four group study on DRIE.

17. Conti (H.A.Ludtke&H.G.Schneider 1996) Corelation of Habit specific locus of control Scales with I_E Scale. Internals ---High in coping and adjustments. Externals ---More Habit Disorders.

18. Conti (Paul Norman,Smith,Murphy 1998) Scores on multidimensional health locus of control scale is significantly related to various health behaviors. People with internal Locus of control ---Higher levels of health.

19. 2.4.9 I-E and Psychological Health ( Cooper,Okamura,&McNeil 1995) Internals are psychologically healthier than externals. (De Moya 1997) Drug addicts Depressives Schizophrenics,neurotics ---Externally oriented. (Barnet 1990) Internals cope better with stress related to divorce or bereavement.

20. 2.4.10 Racial and Socioeconomic differences (Battle & Rotter 1963) Lower socioecnomic classes and minority groups are externally oriented.

21. 2.4.11 I-E and Social Skills (Lefcourt 1982) Video tape study Internals nod more ,held up conversation of their side, fill gaps in conversation as compared to externals.

22. 2.4.12 Behavioral differences Internals day dream more. (findley & Cooper 1983 ) Higher in Internal Locus of Control, Higher grades in schools and standardized tests. ( Tiggemann &Rothblum 1997 ) weight Locus of Control and stereotype behavior. (Schultz,2008:Ryckman,2007:Feist,2002).

23. 2.5 Locus of Control & bandura’s Concept of self efficacy (Judge,Erez,Bono&Thoresen 2002) Reported a strong relationship between Rotter’s Concept of Locus of Control and Bandura’s Concept of Self efficacy. (Schultz 2008).

24. Idea of bilocal Ideally healthy individuals are neither Controllers (extreme internals) nor Controllees (extreme externals) Bilocals accept external constraints as a fact of life and assume the responsibility of working productively within these constraints. They attempt to alter what can be changed and accept what cannot be changed . (wong&Sproule,1984 ). (Ryckman, 2007).

25. 2.7 Implication for therapy Low freedom of Movement High Need Value. Maladjustment is due to difficulties at any point in ‘ predictive Formula ”.

26. conti 2.7.1 Changing Goals 2.7.2 Eliminating Low expectancies 2.7.3 Alternative Courses of Action

27. 2.8 Critical Evaluation 2.8.1 Comprehensiveness 2.8.2 Precision and testability 2.8.3 Parsimony 2.8.4 EmpiricalValidity 2.8.5 Heuristic Value 2.8.6 Applied Value

28. 3 Walter Mischel’s Cognitive Social Learning Theory

29. Content 3 Biographical sketch 3.1 Walter Mischel’s Social Cognitive Theory of Personality Structures. 3.2 The Nature of Personality Structure. 3.3 Basic Assumptions of Theory 3.3.1 Trait Situation Interaction and Situational Variables 3.4 Cognitive Affective Personality System (CAPS) 3.4.1 Cognitive Affective Units 3.4.2 Demonstration with related Research 3.5 Theory’s Implication to Therapy 3.7 6 Critical Evaluation

30. 3 Biographical sketch Walter Mischel born on 22 feb 1930. Studied under George Kelly & julian Rotter. (1965)Participated in peace corps assessment project—Global Traits measure poor assessment. Personality & assessment 1965. (Pervin ,2008 ).

31. View about Person A person is being who can use language to reason in Past Present and future tense about themselves and the World . (Harre&Secord 1972).

32. 3.1 Walter Mischel’s Social Cognitive Theory of personality Structure 3.1.1 Competencies and skills 3.1.2 Beliefs and Expectancies 3.1.3 Behavioral or Evaluative Standards . Moral Verses Immoral Sanction against killing (Osofsky,Bandura,Zimbardo 2005) 3. 1.4 Personal Goals

33. 3.2 Nature of these Personality Structures Personality can not be reduced in to simple scores. Opposed to fixed stages of development.

34. 3.3 Contribution in personality Psychology 4.1 Trait Situation Interaction Idea about Introvert & Extrovert. Situational Variables (Mischel & Ervin Staub 1965)— Both Situation and person’s expectancy for success are important.

35. 3.4 CAPS Model C Cognitive Encoding strategies , Competencies and Self regulatory Strategies , Expectancies and Beliefs, Goals an Values . A Affective Affective Responses includes feelings and emotions as well as the affects that accompany physiological reactions P Personality S system e.g Brain ,or computer . All these Cognitive Affective representations interact dynamically and influence each other reciprocally

37. Behavioral Signatures A when X B when Y Study by (Kammrath,Mendoza,&Mischel,2005 ) Lay persons anticipate IF-THEN variability in different situations. (Mischel 1994) Summer camp study. (Pervin,2008).

38. 3.4.2 Research The Marsh Mallow Experiments (Bandura&Mischel,1965) High -Modeled Low Low -Modeled High Verbal Symbolic Model No model- Re administerd after 5 weeks.

40. An Analysis of Reaction to the O.J Simpson Verdict A system that considers a set of cognitive affective units is a better predictor of people’s reactions to racially sensitive issues than ethnic back ground. (Feist&Feist 2002:Pervin 2008).

45. 3.5 Theory’s implication to therapy Delay of Gratification Some times we need to stop doing some thing ,( by our will power) Smoking, Overeating, driving Car. Cognitive Strategies Hot Verses Cool Encoding If Distract attention---(Can delay reward), COOL Encoding Giving in to Impulsive reactions----HOT Encoding Self Regulatory dynamics---Creates Balance between hot emotional Go system and Cool Cognitive Know system

46. Understanding of Processing Dynamics Alternative Encodings ---Self directed change. Adopt Psychologically distant Perspective to cognitively re represent their experience.

47. 3.6 Critical Evaluation 3.6.1 Comprehensiveness 3.6.2 Precision and testability 3.6.3 Parsimony 3.6.4 Empirical Validity 3.6.5 Heuristic Value 3.6.6 Applied Value