Reciprocal determinism
Reciprocal determinism was developed by #REDIRECT Albert Bandura in attempt to explain the continuous reciprocal interaction of personal, behavioral, and environmental constructs.}} #REDIRECT Triadic reciprocal causation is a term introduced by Albert Bandura[1] to refer to the mutual influence between three sets of factors; personal, environmental, and behavioral.
Theory
Previous attempts at the aforementioned relationships from the #REDIRECT Social Learning Theory ignored the effect of one's behavior on the person and environment and focused only on the behavior resulting from the joint influence of person and environment. Bandura accepts the possibility of an individual's behavior being conditioned through the use of consequences. At the same time he asserts that a person's behavior (and personal factors, such as cognitive skills or attitudes) can impact the environment.[2] Behavior consist of environmental and individual parts that interlink together to function.[3] The basis of reciprocal determinism should transform individual behavior by allowing subjective thought processes transparency when contrasted with cognitive, environmental, and external social stimulus events. "For the most part, the environment is only a potentiality until actualized by appropriate actions; it is not a fixed action that impinges upon individuals... Similarly, personal determinants are only potentialities that do not operate as influences unless they are activated." [2] According to this theory, the activation of neither the environment or personal determinants are concrete, but rather are contingent upon individual response.
Freedom and determinism
According to Bandura, freedom is not the absence of environmental constraints, rather it is the ability to exercise self-restraint. Individuals more capable of self-influence will experience a greater amount of freedom than those with limited personal resources. This theory is in opposition to #REDIRECT B.F Skinner who argued that apart from genetic contributions, human behavior is controlled solely by environmental contingencies". [4] "Granted that selection of particular sources of action from available alternatives is itself determined, individuals can nevertheless exert some control over the factors that govern their choices"[2] The basis of reciprocal determinism should transform individual behavior by allowing subjective thought processes transparency when contrasted with cognitive, environmental, and external social stimulus events. Behavior consist of environmental and individual parts that interlink together to function.
Bandura argues that rather than restricting freedom, as with children or in an attempt to control population, offering better alternatives is a more effective way of modifying unwanted behaviors. [2]
Genes and environment
Behavioral genetics is a relatively new field of study attempting to make sense of both genetic and environmental contributions to individual variations in human behavior.According to the diathesis-stress model, “individuals inherit tendencies to express certain traits or behaviors, which may be activated under conditions of stress [caused by the environment]. Furthermore, the reciprocal gene-environment model suggests certain individuals have a “genetically determined tendency to create the very environmental risk factors that trigger a genetic vulnerability [to a particular behavior, disease, etc.][5]}} According to this theory, individuals who find themselves perpetually in poor relationships are the victim of their own genetically based characteristics that drive how and with whom they interact. A report by Kendler and colleagues found that "about one third of of the association between stressful life events and depression is not the usual arrangement where stress triggers depression but rather individuals vulnerable to depression who are placing themselves in high-risk environments" [1].
Notes
<references>Barlow, D. H., & Durand V. M. (2009). Abnormal Psychology: An Integrative Approach. Belmont CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
<references>Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. <references>Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. <references>Psychology: An International Perspective by Michael W. Eysenck, p. 473. 4. <references>http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/108107398127355