Here's a quote from and a link to that studysingledad said:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2889690/
Bad behaviour and parental attention...
- Thread starter singledad
- Start date
<r><LIST type="decimal"><s><LIST type="decimal">
In short – No, it doesn’t prove that kids find a parent’s anger enjoyable. It doesn’t even touch on the subject.<br/>
<br/>
Did you think I would settle for your out-of-context quote without actually reading the article? <E>
</E><br/>
<br/>
btw - how old are your children really? 42,39,31 and 26, or 5 and 2? Or are both lies?</r>
- <LI></s>
<LI><s></LI><LI> - </s>That isn’t a study. It’s a review. A short one.</LI>
<LI><s></LI><LI> - </s>It’s based on social interaction between adults, not parents disciplining toddlers/kids. They talk about implications for psychotherapy, not parenting. (But then, it won’t be the first time you fail to see the difference between therapy and parenting...)</LI>
<LI><s></LI><LI> - </s>It doesn’t actually say anywhere that when a child is being told off for doing something wrong, it activates the reward centers in the brain. It simply says that the way in which social stimuli is interpreted depends on the situation.</LI>
<e></LI>
In short – No, it doesn’t prove that kids find a parent’s anger enjoyable. It doesn’t even touch on the subject.<br/>
<br/>
Did you think I would settle for your out-of-context quote without actually reading the article? <E>
</E><br/><br/>
btw - how old are your children really? 42,39,31 and 26, or 5 and 2? Or are both lies?</r>
The first link from the Journal of Experimental Psychology was more relevant. But look at the methodology and it's less convincing. The set-up sounds absurd, actually.
At my daughter's school, the policy is not to criticize <I>or</I> praise. Those are both pretty much knee-jerk reactions anyway. When the kids do something wrong, we just call it like it is. "Is pushing Bobby the best way to get the pencil you want? What would be a better way to handle that?" instead of "Don't push people, that's bad!" or giving the pusher a cold shoulder (ignoring). When they're doing what they are supposed to be, we also just call it like it is, instead of making it an opportunity for praise. "I see that you used a lot of colors in that waterfall," instead of "What a nice picture!"
It's pretty much the opposite of the praise-for-good, scold-or-ignore-for-bad strategy that Pancreas is advocating, and the kids respond well to it. Here's one of the articles they had us read in "volunteer training," which criticizes the use of praise to reinforce good behavior. I guess the same would be true of criticizing for run-of-the-mill infractions. Point is, praise isn't the kind of attention kids need. And strategically ignoring them for unwanted behavior, then pouring on the praise the rest of the time, just sounds like you're conditioning them into convenient behavior instead of treating them like thinking human beings that can navigate their decisions consciously.
http://www.alfiekohn.org/parenting/gj.htm[/U]</U>[/URL]
At my daughter's school, the policy is not to criticize <I>or</I> praise. Those are both pretty much knee-jerk reactions anyway. When the kids do something wrong, we just call it like it is. "Is pushing Bobby the best way to get the pencil you want? What would be a better way to handle that?" instead of "Don't push people, that's bad!" or giving the pusher a cold shoulder (ignoring). When they're doing what they are supposed to be, we also just call it like it is, instead of making it an opportunity for praise. "I see that you used a lot of colors in that waterfall," instead of "What a nice picture!"
It's pretty much the opposite of the praise-for-good, scold-or-ignore-for-bad strategy that Pancreas is advocating, and the kids respond well to it. Here's one of the articles they had us read in "volunteer training," which criticizes the use of praise to reinforce good behavior. I guess the same would be true of criticizing for run-of-the-mill infractions. Point is, praise isn't the kind of attention kids need. And strategically ignoring them for unwanted behavior, then pouring on the praise the rest of the time, just sounds like you're conditioning them into convenient behavior instead of treating them like thinking human beings that can navigate their decisions consciously.
http://www.alfiekohn.org/parenting/gj.htm[/U]</U>[/URL]
There is a misunderstanding here. I don't advocate scolding. I advocate completely giving up all scolding. It's counterproductive because it can reinforce the very behavior that it's directed at and it can create a coercive cycle between parent and child. There are better methods.akmom said:
And, I don't mean advocate the idea that praise is better than just talking to a kid about his work. These both reinforce good behavior. I have no problem with avoiding all praise and substituting other forms of positive or neutral adult attention. Avoiding praise is often better, praise has been overused.
The opposite of what I advocate would be ignoring good behavior and lavishing attention on bad behavior.
Is that the only method that is used when kids do something wrong?akmom said:
(BTW, when two kids are fighting, ignoring would never or almost never work, it's a matter of what is motivating the behavior.)
Last edited:
I very much like the practices that Kohn advocates it this excerpt. But I think some of his theory is incorrect. The responses he advocates under the heading "Say what you saw" and "Talk less, act more" are positive reinforcers. Kohn is (apparently unknowingly) advocating the use of positive reinforcement and conditioning while giving the appearance that he is vilifying it.akmom said:
Dammit. I wanted to link the thread where you made these same statements about Alfie Kohn and got disproved by parentastic, which resulted in you resorting to the personal attacks that got you banned. But the mods cleaned it up after your banning, so it's pointless.
Anyway, I think some comic relief is in order. Talk about conditioning and "training" always reminds me of this episode -
<YOUTUBE id="qy_mIEnnlF4" url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qy_mIEnnlF4">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qy_mIEnnlF4</YOUTUBE>
Anyway, I think some comic relief is in order. Talk about conditioning and "training" always reminds me of this episode -
<YOUTUBE id="qy_mIEnnlF4" url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qy_mIEnnlF4">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qy_mIEnnlF4</YOUTUBE>
Last edited:
I must confess.. I did not read it all I might be repeating.
Personal opinion. If you do not tell a child what they have done wrong.. they can't learn. Period.
A child that gets sufficient love and attention will not crave it. Mine wanted to be put down to play alone because I inundated them with attention.
I did ignore some things.. but the ignoring was a form of rebuke. For instance.. older children who knew without a doubt the correct way to ask for something.. or forgot their manners.. I simply couldn't hear them. They were old enough to understand after 1 or 2 attempts to rephrase it with a "May I?" or "Please" and instantly my hearing returned.
Ignoring little kids doesn't teach them the foundation of what's acceptable. And it may teach them that if they don't like something your doing later on.. just ignore you. Which I might add.. would put me OVER the edge with my teens.
Personal opinion. If you do not tell a child what they have done wrong.. they can't learn. Period.
A child that gets sufficient love and attention will not crave it. Mine wanted to be put down to play alone because I inundated them with attention.
I did ignore some things.. but the ignoring was a form of rebuke. For instance.. older children who knew without a doubt the correct way to ask for something.. or forgot their manners.. I simply couldn't hear them. They were old enough to understand after 1 or 2 attempts to rephrase it with a "May I?" or "Please" and instantly my hearing returned.
Ignoring little kids doesn't teach them the foundation of what's acceptable. And it may teach them that if they don't like something your doing later on.. just ignore you. Which I might add.. would put me OVER the edge with my teens.
Hmm, I disagree that neutral comments are a form of positive reinforcement. They are intended to direct a child to the task at hand, guiding them to take pleasure in their work instead of just seeking praise for it. At first I found it really awkward not to say "good job," but it has grown on me. I'm able to just comment on the children's work as I see it, instead of trying to phrase compliments to make them happy. The kids don't expect praise, so it just works.
And yes, we try to handle every infraction that way. But you have to understand that there are just so few infractions, and after awhile, the kids really catch on and handle it on their own. It's nothing like classrooms when I was a kid, where students were expected to handle problems in their own inexperienced ways, and adult intervention only happened after it escalated to something serious. The kids are taught conflict resolution skills early, and staff are vigilant about spotting and addressing even the slightest problems, so kids have a lot of practice with these techniques and are comfortable with problem-solving. I know when I was a kid it was kind of a shameful thing to be caught in an altercation, and we kind of tried to hide it or lie about our role, because we'd get scolded. But these kids actually don't do that; they aren't ashamed of conflict because it is not villified, and the emphasis is on how to handle it. And they really take pride in handling it themselves. They have an arsenal of techniques, and it's adorable to watch such young kids behaving so maturely. I really think that conflict resolution should be more emphasized in schools. Having young kids navigate their own conflicts is just stressful to them and makes a distracting environment. The major infractions are so few that a teacher is able to discretely send them to the principal, who handles it privately. Part of the school's philosophy is to never rebuke a kid in front of their peers.
And yes, we try to handle every infraction that way. But you have to understand that there are just so few infractions, and after awhile, the kids really catch on and handle it on their own. It's nothing like classrooms when I was a kid, where students were expected to handle problems in their own inexperienced ways, and adult intervention only happened after it escalated to something serious. The kids are taught conflict resolution skills early, and staff are vigilant about spotting and addressing even the slightest problems, so kids have a lot of practice with these techniques and are comfortable with problem-solving. I know when I was a kid it was kind of a shameful thing to be caught in an altercation, and we kind of tried to hide it or lie about our role, because we'd get scolded. But these kids actually don't do that; they aren't ashamed of conflict because it is not villified, and the emphasis is on how to handle it. And they really take pride in handling it themselves. They have an arsenal of techniques, and it's adorable to watch such young kids behaving so maturely. I really think that conflict resolution should be more emphasized in schools. Having young kids navigate their own conflicts is just stressful to them and makes a distracting environment. The major infractions are so few that a teacher is able to discretely send them to the principal, who handles it privately. Part of the school's philosophy is to never rebuke a kid in front of their peers.
Oh.. I get it.. a name change has happened here has it? I should have read it all after all!
I'm out
I'm out
I don't know... I thought it was a worthwhile topic to debate.
Maybe we have different age groups in mind. I mean, toddlers thrive off praise. It's not like you are going to explain the logic behind potty-training to a two-year-old. Instead, you use praise and every other form of positive reinforcement you can think of until it works! So maybe the praise-for-good, ignore-for-bad <I>is</I> an appropriate strategy at that age. Perhaps potty-training is a bad example, because ignoring them when they mess up would be a very bad idea. But for tantrums, I can definitely see the ignore strategy working on a toddler. I think that's actually a pretty common strategy against toddler tantrums.
Maybe we have different age groups in mind. I mean, toddlers thrive off praise. It's not like you are going to explain the logic behind potty-training to a two-year-old. Instead, you use praise and every other form of positive reinforcement you can think of until it works! So maybe the praise-for-good, ignore-for-bad <I>is</I> an appropriate strategy at that age. Perhaps potty-training is a bad example, because ignoring them when they mess up would be a very bad idea. But for tantrums, I can definitely see the ignore strategy working on a toddler. I think that's actually a pretty common strategy against toddler tantrums.
Alfie Kohn acknowledges age differences in that article you cited:akmom said:
http://www.alfiekohn.org/parenting/gj.htm
But, as far as I know, he never elaborates in any of his writing on the evaluations and guidance that he considers necessary especially for toddlers and preschoolers. Maybe someone can point out where he more fully explains what he has in mind.
When my second child was born, I did not get much of a headache with my eldest. I am not saying that he's too goody-goody because when the time that they're growing up and my youngest was 4 years old, (my eldest was 8) they tend to fight over most of the things like who's going to use the computer, who gets what, trying to get my attention. In our country, we are used to getting spanked as way of disciplining children, which I can say is quite effective and most children tried to behave after. Nowadays, this is not allowed anymore because of child abuse law. So thinking of alternative way to discipline a child, "ignoring bad behaviour" became a big issue on this matter. Personally, I cannot ignore bad behaviour due to how I was brought up. I believe that not all bad behavior must be ignored. Sometimes the child must know how bad he is behaving and how other people become affected with it. For me, instead of ignoring the behavior, why not talk about it with the child. Isn't good to communicate with your child showing them that you are giving them importance by getting also their opinion?
I agree, Tess. Talk to the child. Not only are you teaching them what they are doing wrong, why it is wrong, and how to find a better way to act in any given situation, you are also teaching them communication skills, how to handle conflict, and how to solve problems. Much more valuable, IMO, than simply "training" them to instinctively conform to your wishes.
Edited to add - Plus, when talking rather than ignoring, you don't run the risk of potentially ignoring something that is a symptom of a real, serious problem and in so doing, missing the problem completely.
Edited to add - Plus, when talking rather than ignoring, you don't run the risk of potentially ignoring something that is a symptom of a real, serious problem and in so doing, missing the problem completely.
Last edited:
Funny! I take a quick peek at the forum after months of absence (as I was rushing with finishing my Masters' degree) and WHAM! I found this thread with a revived Tad arguing the same things. Strange coincidence!singledad said:Dammit. I wanted to link the thread where you made these same statements about Alfie Kohn and got disproved by parentastic, which resulted in you resorting to the personal attacks that got you banned. But the mods cleaned it up after your banning, so it's pointless.
Good to see you are holding the fort, SD