DE100 Assignment: Comparing Adorno and Bandura's Theories

This essay provides a comparative analysis of the theories of aggression proposed by Adorno and Bandura. It begins by outlining the core beliefs of each theorist, with Adorno focusing on the authoritarian personality and its link to prejudice, and Bandura emphasizing social learning theory and observational learning. The essay then details the methodologies employed by each researcher, highlighting Adorno's use of questionnaires and interviews versus Bandura's experimental approach, specifically the Bobo doll experiment. The similarities and differences in their approaches are discussed, including the role of childhood experiences in shaping aggressive behavior. The essay concludes by summarizing the key findings of each theorist, emphasizing that Adorno's work suggests aggression stems from personality flaws, while Bandura's work suggests aggression is learned through observation and imitation. It also highlights the limitations of both studies, such as the lack of diverse samples, and reflects on the implications of these theories in understanding human behavior. This essay, provided by a student, is available on Desklib, a platform offering a range of AI-based study tools and resources for students.

Running head: COMPARISON OF ADORNO AND BANDURA’S APPROACHES
COMPARISON OF ADORNO AND BANDURA’S APPROACHES ON WHY PEOPLE
MIGHT DO HARM TO PEOPLE
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1COMPARISON OF ADORNO AND BANDURA’S APPROACHES
Aggression is one of the most studied topics in psychology as it is the underlying root
cause behind all social ills that range from interpersonal violence to war. Many researchers have
devoted their time in understanding what causes people to do harm to others. To understand the
reason, the approaches of Adorno et al. (1950) and Bandura et al. (1963) will be analysed in this
paper. The similarities and differences in the kind of experiment they did, the methods they used
and the results of these experiments would be highlighted in the present paper.
Adorno and Bandura both wanted to understand how people were inclined to show
aggressive behaviours towards others. Their approach however differed along many lines.
Adorno et al. (1950) believed people were prejudiced because of a flaw in their personality,
which meant that the person was maladjusted. His work was designed to understand the
atrocities against the Jewish at the hands of the Germans during the holocaust. His theory is a
developmental theory, as he believed that the personality of an individual developed through
early childhood experiences. Albert bandura had proposed his social learning theory wherein he
stated that learning was a process that occurred through observations as well as interactions with
others. People learn by observing others and imitating their actions (Everaert 2014).
The methods used by both the researchers are different. Adorno et al. (1950) believed that
people who were highly prejudiced had authoritarian personality. He developed a questionnaire
that included many items. The items assessed individuals on a variety of scale that related to
Anti-Semitism, Ethnocentrism, Conservatism, and receptivity to fascist ideals. The research
methods of Adorno included asking people questions about their upbringing, politics and
prejudices. He carried on in-depth interviews of people who had scored the highest and lowest
scores on the questionnaires (Garcia and Griffitt 1978). He analysed the transcripts and used
them to further design the questionnaire and bringing in a new measure called the F-scale to

2COMPARISON OF ADORNO AND BANDURA’S APPROACHES
measure Authoritarian personality. While Adorno carried out his research with questionnaires
and subjective interpretation of the transcripts, Bandura took the path of a more experimental
approach. In his experiment, he exposed the children to two different models; one was aggressive
and the other was non-aggressive. After the exposure, the child was placed in a room without the
model and then it was observed whether the child would imitate the behaviours of the model or
not (Everaert 2014). The age range of the children used in the experiment was between 3 to 6
years. Thus, one carried out his research in a subjective manner whereas the other took objective
approach to study the subject.
The similarity in both the approaches is that both of them believed that the foundations of
aggression were laid down early in childhood. Adorno believed that children who were
subjected to harsh and strict parenting were more likely to develop authoritarian personality
(Garcia and Griffitt 1978). Bandura believed that children, who were exposed to aggressive
models, imitated such actions. They learned to be aggressive by observing adults. Though both
of them agreed that the root cause of aggression was founded in childhood, their approaches
were different in terms of how an individual manifested aggression in oneself. Adorno concluded
that aggression was the result of how a child’s childhood experiences shaped his personality
(Ray 1976). He concluded that individuals who had an authoritarian personality showed extreme
obedience to authority figures and were submissive and respectful of them. Such people are
uncomfortable with uncertainties as they always see things as being either right or wrong. This
inflexible attitude of their causes them to be aggressive and cause harm to people who think
differently from them. According to Bandura, however, aggression is learned. The results of his
experiment found that aggression was learnt. Children who were exposed to aggressive models

3COMPARISON OF ADORNO AND BANDURA’S APPROACHES
were seen to show aggression in the absence of the model (Everaert 2014). This proves that an
individual can learn to be aggressive by imitating others.
Adorno et al. (1950) approach towards aggression can be categorized as a theory of
personality while bandura et al. (1963) approach is a developmental theory. Adorno’s approach
tried to understand what kind of people were inclined towards aggression, how their personality
shaped them into displaying tendencies of prejudice and aggression (Ray 1976). On the other
hand, Bandura et al. (1963) tried to understand whether aggression could be learned or not. It
can also be highlighted that Adorno et al. took out the survey in a real life setting which gave an
insight into how the real world works. On the other hand, Bandura’s experiment was conducted
in a lab setting; therefore, it is possible that the results might not be indicative of how the real
world works.
Another similarity between the two approaches can be found in the sample that they
selected. Although Adorno carried out his research on adult Caucasian Americans that is
different from Bandura’s sample of children, the similarity can be found in the lack of including
people from diverse backgrounds. Bandura selected children belonging to same racial and
socioeconomic backgrounds (Graham and Arshad-Ayaz 2016). Therefore, it remains to be seen
whether children from different cultures would show the same results as was found in the
previous experiment or whether there can be differences in it. Similarly, Adorno’s research on
Caucasian Americans lacks the in-depth analysis of how people belonging to different cultural
backgrounds would behave.
In a nutshell, it can be concluded that both the approaches were successful in
understanding how and what made people do harm to others. The differences lie in the methods
the used and the sample on which the carried out the research. The results of both the researches

4COMPARISON OF ADORNO AND BANDURA’S APPROACHES
were also different wherein people who had fascist tendencies were said to be show aggression
while bandura said that aggression could be learned. The similarity was found in the lack of
including people from various cultural backgrounds, which could also be said to be a criticism of
both the researches.
Reflection
By analysing both the approaches of Adorno et al. (1950) and Bandura et al. (1963), I
understood that aggression could both be learnt and be influenced by hereditary traits. The
environment that an individual is born in plays a vital role in shaping one’s personality. Learning
also plays an important role in shaping one’s personality. Aggression therefore is both
manifested in an individual by learning and through environmental influences. Therefore, people
can be stopped from harming others when at an early age they are brought up in an environment
that is nit characterized by aggression.

5COMPARISON OF ADORNO AND BANDURA’S APPROACHES
References
Everaert, E., 2014. Bandura’s Bobo doll experiment and violence in the media. Social
Cosmos, 5(1), pp.74-80.
Garcia, L. and Griffitt, W., 1978. Evaluation and recall of evidence: Authoritarianism and the
Patty Hearst case. Journal of Research in Personality, 12(1), pp.57-67.
Graham, P. and Arshad-Ayaz, A., 2016. Learned unsustainability: Bandura’s bobo doll
revisited. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 10(2), pp.262-273.
Ray, J.J., 1976. Do authoritarians hold authoritarian attitudes?. Human relations, 29(4), pp.307-
325.