Abdul,

Social Cognitive/Learning Theory has long been established and there are many different theoretical and conceptual interpretations of them out there. In essence, there is no 'exact construct' - but there are seminal theories and models to follow. The attached article, while targeting nurses, might assist - in that the principles are generic and there are many models available.

Dear Abdul:

You ask the following: What is the exact construct of social cognitive theory that exist inside (personal, behavior and environment)?  

I am not sure about what you want to know with your question, namely when you mention the word "inside". I interpret it as meaning inside the individual. Am I correct?

I think that your question has to do with Bandura's (1977) social learning theory and his more recent social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986).

It is obvious that the environment is an external construct in the sense that it refers to something that exists out there. By its very nature, the physical and social environment is just what exist out there, that is, outside the individual.

As I see it, any human behavior belongs to an individual and, as such, resides inside the individual, namely when such behavior is a mental or covert behavior, such as thinking, remembering, intending, and the like. When one's behavior is an external or overt behavior, such as to drive a car, deliver a lecture, and the like, we can say that, to an extent, such behavior exists outside the individual in the sense that it can be seen by other individuals.

As you certainly know, Bandura's (1986) social cognitive theory posits the existence of, say, six psychological variables, exact (?)constructs, or processes underlying one's learning that are personal and, hence, occur in one's mind and brain. Of course, individuals may differ in each of these six psychological processes and constructs  Also, as psychological processes, they are personal and internal constructs .

What follows refers to each of these psychological processes or internal variables and constructs.   

(1) Attention processes. Note, for example, that if we want to learn from others -- to learn from others is the key idea of Bandura's social learning and social cognitive learning theories --  then we have to pay attention to others' performances. I cannot imagine a student learning from their teachers if s/he does not pay attention to what teachers intend to teach him/her.

(2) Retention processes. Attention is necessary, but not sufficient to learn from others. For example, pupils can pay attention to their teachers’ lessons, but make no effort to retain what the teachers intend to teach them. When this is the case, no learning from others is possible.

 (3) Production processes. Attention and retention are necessary, but not yet sufficient for the target learning to be effective. This means that other processes have to be taken into account. Production is one of these processes. Consider the case of a teacher who tries to teach the concept of proportionality to, say, an 8-year-child. However much the child pays attention and makes efforts to retain what his/her teacher intends to teach him/her, the child has no capacity to grasp and reproduce the referred to concept of proportionality. 

(4) Motivation processes. Let us imagine that an individual is able to solve proportionality problems through others' teaching. Even so, s/he may not solve them because s/he is not motivated to solve such problems

(5) Outcome expectancies. This is an example of motivation. For example, if an individual, who is capable of solving proportionality problems, anticipates positive or rewarding consequences of solving such problems (e.g., to get good marks at school), it is likely that s/he really solves the problems. However, the most important variable or construct in Bandura’s thinking is self-efficacy.

 (6) Self-efficacy refers to what extent an individual believes that s/he is capable or not capable of performing well on a certain task (e.g., to have goods marks in an exam situation)..

 As I see it, any educational program should also take into account E. Deci’s theory of self-determination. The central core of this theory is its distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, a distinction that, I believe, does not exist In Bandura’s thinking. Of course, an intrinsically-motivated individual performs better than an extrinsically-motivated individual. When pupils study because they are afraid of being punished by their parents, those pupils are extrinsically motivated. If they study because they want to be excellent pupils and contribute to the well-being of their own or even other countries, they are intrinsically motivated.

 Based on the preceding consideration, I think that the more an educational program combines Bandura’s thinking with Deci’s oeuvre the more it is likely to be a good educational program.

 As a developmental psychologist, I use to say that the individual’s development and education is much dependent upon three parameters: love, action, and context. John Bowlby was wonderful in showing how the lack of love is detrimental to any subject whoever. Jean Piaget showed unambiguously that the individual’s actions upon the objects and his/her interactions with other individuals are indispensable for his/her psychological development and education. Urie Bronfenbrenner was able to show how the individual’s development and educations depends upon the several contexts or systems (e.g., microsystem, macrosystem, chronosystem) in which they live.

hope I have got your question and that this helps.

Best regards

Orlando