Social Origins of Self-Regulatory Competence
By: Dale H. Schunk and Barry J. Zimmerman
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Social origins of self-regulatory competence. Educational
Psychologist, 32, 195-208.
Made available courtesy of Taylor and Francis: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/
***Reprinted with permission. No further reproduction is authorized without written permission from
Taylor and Francis. This version of the document is not the version of record. Figures and/or pictures
may be missing from this format of the document.***
Abstract:
This article reviews the social origins of students' development of self-regulatory skill with special emphasis on
observational learning through modeling. A social cognitive perspective on self-regulation is presented. In this
view, students' academic competence develops initially from social sources of academic skill and subsequently
shifts to self sources in a series of 4 levels: observational, imitative, self-controlled, and self-regulated. The
effects of models on observers depend in part on perceptions of self-efficacy, or beliefs about one's capabilities
to learn or perform designated behaviors. Research on social influences is reviewed, and includes factors such
as cognitive modeling, coping and mastery models, self-modeling, learning goals, and progress feedback.
Related theoretical perspectives are discussed along with suggestions for future research.
Article:
Successful adaptation to school requires that students develop self-regulation, or processes that activate and
sustain cognitions, behaviors, and affects, and that are oriented toward goal attainment (Zimmerman, 1989,
1990). Academic self-regulatory processes include planning and managing time; attending to and concentrating
on instruction; organizing, rehearsing, and coding information strategically; establishing a productive work
environment; and using social resources effectively (Kanfer & Kanfer, 1991; Karoly, 1993; Pressley et al.,
1990; Zimmerman, 1994). Self-regulation also incorporates motivational processes such as setting performance
goals and outcomes; holding positive beliefs about one's capabilities; valuing learning and its anticipated
outcomes; and experiencing positive affects (e.g., pride, satisfaction) with one's efforts (McCombs, 1989;
Schunk, 1994).
The development of self-regulation is affected by many factors, but an important set comprises socialization
influences. Several years ago researchers hypothesized that children' s exposure to socializing agents (e.g.,
models) influences their behavioral and cognitive development to include the acquisition of concepts, attitudes,
preferences, and standards for self-reward and self-punishment (Bandura & Walters, 1963; Hartup, 1978;
Mischel, 1968). Much research shows that children readily induce and transfer concepts that underlie modeling
sequences (Bandura, 1986; Rosenthal & Zimmerman, 1978; Zimmerman & Rosenthal, 1974).
In recent years, cognitive theorists have shifted their attention to the process whereby self-regulatory
competence is internalized and have studied how children arid adolescents learn to function independently from
socializing agents in an adaptive, generative, and creative manner (Bandura, 1986; Como, 1989; Fuson, 1979;
Kopp, 1982; Mithaug, 1993; Paris & Newman, 1990; Vygotsky, 1978; Wertsch, 1979; Zimmerman, in press).
In this article we identify and review research on the social origins of students' development of self-regulatory
skill with special emphasis on observational learning through modeling. Modeling occurs when observers
pattern their behaviors, strategies, thoughts, beliefs, and affects after those of one or more models (Schunk,
1987). Recent research has demonstrated the effectiveness of modeling self-regulatory skills as a means of
promoting students' academic achievement and associated self-efficacy beliefs (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994).
Researchers hypothesize that self-efficacy, or personal beliefs about one's capabilities to learn or perform
behaviors at designated levels (Bandura, 1986, 1997), is an important cognitive mechanism that mediates the
relation of social (observational) influences and adaptive self-regulatory functioning (Schenk, 1994).
We initially present a theoretical overview of self-regulation from the particular perspective of social cognitive
theory. We focus on the roles played by two constructs that are intimately linked with this theoretical
perspective and that have been rigorously investigated by researchers in this tradition—modeling and self-
efficacy. Although these constructs have been discussed in the context of other theories (Kopp, 1982; Paris &
Newman, 1990), a unique contribution of social cognitive theory is that it highlights their contributions by
explicating them in detail to include careful empirical research methods. We then describe a social cognitive
phase model of the development of self-regulatory competence, and we compare that perspective to some other
prominent views relating to the development of self-regulation. Research on modeling and self-efficacy
processes is summarized, and we conclude with suggestions for future research in educational settings.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Social Cognitive Theory of Self-Regulation
Bandura's (1986) social cognitive theory views human functioning as a series of reciprocal interactions between
behavioral, environmental, and personal variables (e.g., cognitions, affects). For example, research shows that
self-efficacy beliefs (personal variable) influence achievement behaviors (choice of tasks, effort, persistence) in
that efficacious students are more likely to choose to engage in tasks, expend effort, and persist to overcome
obstacles and succeed (Schunk, 1996a; Zimmerman, 1995b). Conversely, behaviors influence personal
variables. As students work on tasks (behavior) they mentally note their progress (personal variable), which
conveys to them that they are capable of learning, thereby raising their self-efficacy (Schunk, 1989).
An example of the influence of environment on behavior occurs when teachers introduce an unusual stimulus or
novel event (environmental variable) and students direct their attention toward it (behavior). Behavior can affect
environment. For example, if students act puzzled by a teacher's explanation (behavior), the teacher may reteach
the material (environmental variable).
Personal variables and environments also affect one another. For example, when students with high self-
efficacy find themselves trying to accomplish an academic task in an environment full of distractions (e.g.,
noise, others working), they may redouble their mental concentration (personal variable) to make the
environment less distracting. Related views of self-regulation discuss this type of personal influence under the
headings of volitional control (Como & Kanfer, 1993) and proximal resource allocation (Kanfer & Ackerman,
1989). The influence of environmental variables on personal variables is seen when teachers give students
verbal feedback (environmental variable; e.g., "That's right. You're really getting good at this."), which raises
their self-efficacy—a personal variable.
Social cognitive theory postulates that the self-regulation process comprises three major levels (subprocesses):
self-ob servation, self-judgment, and self-reaction (Bandura, 1986; Kanfer & Gaelick, 1986). Self-observation
refers to deliberate attention to specific aspects of one's behavior (Bandura, 1986). Bandura and others (e.g.,
Mace, Belfiore, & Shea, 1989) recommend assessing behaviors on dimensions such as quantity, quality, rate,
and originality. When self-observation results in perceptions of goal progress, it can motivate one to improve
(Schunk, 1989). Students with academic problems often are surprised to learn that they waste much valuable
study time on nonacademic tasks. Such knowledge can motivate students to improve their habits. Self-
observation is assisted with the use of self-recording, where instances of behavior are recorded along with their
time, place, and frequency of occurrence (Mace et al., 1989).
Self-observation is closely linked to self-judgment, which refers to comparing current performance with a
standard. Bandura (1986) places much emphasis on judgmental processes and on specifying factors affecting
judgments, which has facilitated empirical investigation. Thus, self-judgments are hypothesized to be affected
by type and importance of standards employed. Standards may be stated in absolute or normative terms.
Absolute standards are fixed (e.g., a student who attempts to finish an assignment during a class period),
whereas normative standards are based on the performances of others (e.g., a student who attempts to be the
first one in the class to finish an assignment). Standards often are acquired by observing models (Bandura,
1986); socially comparing one's perfornninces with those of others helps one evaluate the appropriateness of
behavior. Social comparisons are used in the self-judgment process when absolute standards are not in effect or
are unclear (Schunk, 1996a).
Self-judgments are also affected by the importance and informativeness of standards. People are more likely to
judge their task progress for tasks they value. They may not assess their performance or expend effort to
improve their skills for tasks in which they have little interest in how they perform.
Comparing one's performance against standards provides information about progress. Students who must learn
30 new spelling words in a week know they are ahead of schedule if they learn 10 words the first day.
Self reaction involves making evaluative responses to judgments of one's performance; for example, whether it
is good or bad, acceptable or not acceptable, beyond or below expectation. These evaluative reactions constitute
a critical aspect of self-regulation and represent a unique contribution of social cognitive theory (Bandura,
1986). Evaluative reactions involve students' beliefs about their progress. The belief that one is making
acceptable progress toward a goal, along with the expected satisfaction of goal attainment, enhances self-
efficacy and sustains motivation (Schunk, 1996a). Negative evaluations will not decrease motivation if students
believe they are capable of improving (e.g., by working harder or using more effective strategies). Motivation is
not enhanced if students think they lack the capability to succeed and that increased effort or better use of
strategies will not help (Schunk, 1994). Self-reactions can be influenced by tangible self-rewards, which
validate perceptions of progress and raise self-efficacy when they are linked to actual accomplishments. For
example, students who believe they are improving their study routine may reward themselves by taking a break
to watch a movie.
These three self-regulatory subprocesses interact with one another. As students observe their own performances,
they judge them against goal standards and react to those judgments. Their evaluations and reactions set the
stage for additional observations. These subprocesses also interact with environmental factors (Zimmerman,
1989). Students who judge their task progress as inadequate may react by requesting teacher assistance. Teach-
ers may help students learn a better strategy, which students then use to produce better learning. This dynamic
interaction of aspects of self-regulation is one of its central features (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994).
Modeling Processes
Modeling often is an antecedent of self-regulation. An important contribution of social cognitive theory is to
show that modeling can serve different imitative functions: inhibition/disinhibition, response facilitation, and
observational learning (Bandura, 1986). Inhibition/disinhibition refers to the strengthening or weakening of
behavioral inhibitions that occurs as a result of observing models. For example, students who are afraid of math
and observe models engage in math activities without negative consequences may experience less fear and try
the activities themselves (Zimmerman & Kindsler, 1979). Conversely, students who observe peers punished for
classroom misbehavior may be less likely to misbehave.
Response facilitation occurs when modeled actions serve to socially prompt behavior by observers. New
students in a class are likely to follow along and perform actions comparable to those of classmates as a means
of learning the rules and routines. Modeling even has been shown to induce greater creative fluency among
observing students (Zimmerman & Dialessi, 1973).
Observational learning through modeling occurs when observers display new behaviors that prior to modeling
had no probability of occurrence, even with motivational inducements in effect (Bandura, 1986; Schunk, 1987;
Zimmerman & Rosenthal, 1974). To learn observationally, students must attend to a model, code the
information for retention, be capable of producing the demonstrated responses, and be motivated to perform the
modeled behaviors (Bandura, 1986). An important form of observational learning occurs through cognitive
modeling, which incorporates modeled explanations and demonstrations with verbalizations of the model's
thoughts and reasons for performing the actions (Meichenbaum, 1977).
Exposure to models is informative. Observer modeling is strongly affected by the functional value of behav-
ior—whether modeled behaviors result in success or failure, reward or punishment. Modeled behaviors that lead
to rewarding outcomes are more likely to be performed than behaviors that result in punishment (Zimmerman &
Koussa, 1979).
Modeled (vicarious) consequences also indicate the motivational value of behavior to observers (Bandura,
1986). By observing modeled behaviors and their consequences, people formulate outcome expectations about
the likely outcomes of actions. These expectations motivate behavior (Zimmerman, 1977).
Perceived similarity between model and observer is hypothesized to be an important source of information to
determine behavioral appropriateness and formulate outcome expectations (Schunk, 1987). Most social
situations are structured so that the appropriateness of behaviors depends on factors such as age, gender, or
status. Although exceptions exist, the more alike observers are to models, the greater the probability that similar
actions by observers are socially appropriate and will produce comparable results (Zimmerman & Koussa,
1975). Similarity is especially influential when observers have little information about the functional value of
behaviors. This is not intended to downplay the importance of diversity: People learn from models who are
unlike themselves in many attributes. Societal norms are such, however, that similarity in critical attributes is
highly predictive of appropriateness for many behaviors (Bandura, 1986).
The effects of modeled consequences on observers depend in part on self-efficacy. Similarity to models consti-
tutes an important source of vicarious information for gauging one's efficacy. Observing similar others succeed
can raise observers' efficacy and motivate them to try the task because they may believe that if others can
succeed they can as well. When similar others experience difficulty, observers may doubt their capabilities and
may not be motivated to try the task. Similarity can have profound effects in situations where individuals have
experienced difficulties and hold doubts about performing well (Schunk, 1987).
In the current view, models are important sources for conveying self-regulatory skills and for building their self-
efficacy to employ these skills effectively on their own. The academic self-regulatory skills mentioned at the
outset of this article are amenable to transmission by social models: planning and managing time; attending to
and concentrating on instruction; organizing, rehearsing, and coding information strategically; establishing a
productive work environment; and using social resources. For example, students might observe a teacher
engage in effective time management and verbalize appropriate principles. By observing models, students may
believe that they also can plan and manage time effectively, which creates a sense of self-efficacy for academic
self-regulation and motivates students to engage in these activities.
Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy is hypothesized to influence choice of tasks, effort expenditure, persistence, and achievement
(Bandura, 1986, 1997; Schunk, 1996a; Zimmerman, 1995b). Compared with students who doubt their learning
capabilities, those with high self-efficacy for acquiring a skill or performing a task participate more readily,
work harder, persist longer when they encounter difficulties, and achieve at a higher level.
Learners obtain information about their self-efficacy from their performance accomplishments, vicarious
(observational) experiences, forms of persuasion, and physiological reactions. Students' own performances offer
reliable guides for assessing self-efficacy. Successes raise efficacy and failures lower it (Zimmerman & Ringle,
1981). Students socially acquire efficacy information by comparing their performances with those of others.
Similar others offer a valid basis for comparison (Schunk, 1987). Observing similar peers succeed (or fail) at a
task may raise (or lower) observers' self-efficacy, The effects of such vicariously induced changes in self-
efficacy can be negated by observers' subsequent performance outcomes (e.g., observers fail to perform the task
after they view successful models).
Learners often receive from teachers, parents, coaches, and peers persuasive information that they are capable
of performing a task (e.g., "You can do this."). Such information can raise efficacy but can lose its influence
from subsequent performance failure (Bandura, 1997). Students also acquire efficacy information from
physiological reactions (e.g., sweating, heart rate). Symptoms signaling anxiety may convey that one lacks skill;
lower anxiety may be construed as a sign of greater competency. It should be noted that sources may offer
conflicting information; for example, a teacher gives positive feedback, but a student feels highly anxious. We
cannot always predict which source will have the strongest effect on efficacy; it may depend on factors such as
prior experiences, source credibility, and motivational influences (e.g., peer pressure).
Self-efficacy is an important influence on achievement behavior but not the only one. High self-efficacy will
not produce competent performances when requisite knowledge and skills are lacking, Outcome expectations
are influential because students engage in activities they believe will lead to positive outcomes (Shell, Murphy,
& Bruning, 1989). Per ceived value—the perceived importance of learning, or what use will be made of what
one learns—affects behavior because learners show little interest in activities they do not value. Assuming,
then, that students possess adequate skill, hold positive outcome expectations, and value what they are learning,
self-efficacy is hypothesized to exert an important effect on the instigation, direction, and persistence of
achievement behavior.
Effective self-regulation depends on feeling self-efficacious for using skills to achieve mastery (Bandura, 1986,
1997; Bouffard-Bouchard, Parent, & Larivee, 1991; Schunk, 1996a; Zimmerman, 1989). As students work on a
task, they compare their performances to their goals. Self-evaluations of progress enhance self-efficacy and
maintain motivation to improve. Students who feel efficacious about learning or performing well are apt to
implement effective self-regulatory strategies, such as concentrating on the task, using proper procedures,
managing time effectively, seeking assistance as necessary, and monitoring performance and adjusting strate-
gies as needed (McCombs, 1989; Pintrich & De Groot, 1990; Zimmerman, 1994). The latter self-regulatory
strategies are types of volitional processes (Corno, 1993) because they involve task and self-management rather
than personal appraisals of efficacy.
Although low self-efficacy is detrimental, effective selfregulation does not require that self-efficacy be
exceptionally high. Salomon (1984) found that a slightly lower sense of self-efficacy led to greater mental effort
and better learning than did extreme confidence. There is a limit, however; a very low sense of efficacy does not
motivate. Assuming that learners feel efficacious about surmounting problems, holding some doubt about
success may mobilize effort and effective use of strategies more than does feeling overly confident.
Development of Self-Regulatory Competence
Zimmerman and Bonner (in press) advanced a social cognitive theoretical model of the development of self-
regulatory competence (Table 1). The model predicts that academic competence develops initially from social
sources and subsequently shifts to self sources in a series of levels. Novice learners acquire self-regulatory skills
and strategies most rapidly from social modeling, tuition, task structuring, and encouragement (Zimmerman &
Rosenthal, 1974). Although many learners can induce the major features of strategies from watching a model
(observational level of academic skill), most of them will benefit from actually performing the strategies to help
incorporate them into their behavioral repertoires. If a model adopts a teaching role and provides guidance,
feedback, and social reinforcement during practice, he or she can improve the observer's behavioral accuracy of