# The persuasiveness of Kohn's position on Rewards and Praise



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

This is rambly, as is typical of me. I ask a zillion questions, not expecting anyone to answer all of them, but just because this turned out to be a bit of a train of thought post. Hopefully some of the questions might spark some interest that will help me as I grapple with these issues, and hopefully help to further the thoughts of others who are also concerned about the use of rewards and praise.

Have any of you looked into the persuasiveness of Kohn's position? His argument seems persuasive to me but he wrote it for a general audience and the subject seems to have been pretty much ignored by academics, so I haven't had the benefit of someone else taking the time to come up with a counter-argument to him (aside from the few nonpersuasive rebuttals he responds to in Punished By Rewards). He points to a wealth of studies and a few main researchers in defense of his claims, so one avenue to consider his position is to see how the work of the researchers he focuses on is being received, though he indicates that it too is being more or less ignored in academe.

I recently was reading something about the science of happiness in which one of the leading researchers in the field -- Michael Fordyce -- bluntly indicates that there is a huge amount of research in learning theory that proves that reinforcements work to change not only short-term behavior, but one's long-term internal motivations as well. After a time, he noted, a person who is positively reinforced for doing X will want to do X and will likely enjoy doing X without any further reinforcements. Clearly, this is an overgeneralization -- I'm sure Fordyce would agree. He didn't offer any citations to back up his claims. His position is the opposite to what Kohn indicates. What gives? I'm wondering if Fordyce might have assumed what others assume: that the widely accepted position of psychologists (and others) about the effectiveness of reinforcements has indeed been scientifically confirmed time and again (and on humans, not just on rats and Pavlov's dogs!). On the other hand, he seems to know his stuff, so I do take the matter as worthy of further investigation.

I'd love to hear what others who have given Kohn's position a lot of thought, and perhaps researched it further, think of it! I'm still convinced of his position in broad strokes but I'm wondering if he overstates things and comes down harder on all rewards and deliberate reinforcements than perhaps makes sense. For example, consider the context in which Fordyce mentioned rewards: He suggested that procrastinators who want to become more organized could hold off on the treats that they routinely give to themselves (such as coffee, unhealthy snacks, watching a t.v. show, reading a book, etc.) until AFTER they've completed a task that needs to be done, and to forgo the treat if they do not do the task. This is of course consensual if a person does it to her or himself. Is it harmful? Is it harmful only if it doesn't work -- in which case the person might feel like a loser? Is it harmful to teach oneself that one is only worthy of certain treats when one has performed a certain action? We do that all the time when it comes to work; I don't expect a paycheck when I haven't done any work. So what would the problems, if any, with this be? (I'll have to double check with Punished By Rewards to see if Kohn talks about rewarding oneself.) The main thing that procrastinators like me need (assuming they too want to overcome this trait) is the resolve and will-power to do what we know needs to be done (like administrative tasks that can't reasonably be avoided) but that has ZIP NADA ZILCH appeal and actually feels stressful and unpleasant to do. If a reward will give that incentive to some people, and they choose to attempt this route, wha'z the problem with it? If this is fine for adults, might it also be o.k. -- in some circumstances -- for children to choose to co-operate in a reward system in hopes of building their motivation to achieve a particular goal (especially one that is meaningful for the child)?

I have not addressed Kohn's pertinent concerns about the use of praise and how it teaches children a conditional sense of love and self-worth, or against the studies he points to that show that people who are rewarded for a task tend to treat the task as a means rather than as an end. When it doesn't matter whether the task is loved by the child (or whoever), . . . that is where Kohn's argument may falter. For example, it doesn't matter so much whether a child has an internal love of using the toilet or whether she uses it in a creative and innovative way. So it seems easier, in this case, to argue that there is no harm of using rewards in this context, indeed, that they may even be helpful (e.g., by saving money and energy by using the toilet rather than diapers and helping the child develop a sense of competence; I imagine it may be embarrasing for many 3.5 year olds to still be in diapers). If I remember right, Kohn responds to this type of concern by talking about the likely generalization of rewards to other contexts. Children are the great generalizers so they may come to want rewards in other contexts too, and parents who try this approach and find it effective may also re-use the tactic in other, harmful, contexts. These concerns seem legitimate to me. Perhaps they don't give parents and children enough respect though?

Many rewards seem to be of the nature: Hey dh, if you clean the kitchen I'll make dinner. He usually cleans the kitchen anyway, but sometimes I'm eager to have it clean asap so I might offer some sort of incentive so this his doing it pronto becomes appealing to both of us. I don't want to underestimate children by thinking that they too cannot enter into such agreements without being thrown off kilter and demanding something for every cooperative act that they do.

At the same time, there is something about certain rewards that is hard to pinpoint that just feels wrong. I could not bring myself to say to Simon: "Here is a chart on the wall. If you use the toilet, we'll put a happy face sticker right here! Want to try?" Hmmm. Looking at that again, I'm feeling conflicted. As that's written, it doesn't seem particularly problematic. How different is it from other means of trying to make using the toilet more appealing to him? O.k., after more thought, I imagine Simon just reaching out for the stickers and wanting them right away, not even having sat on the toilet. I can't imagine dangling stickers in his face like that and saying, "Oh sorry honey, first you have to pee in the toilet (which is something I know he doesn't want to do)! These are special stickers to show that you've peed!". (Would he get a consolation prize for peeing on the floor?!) He may be receptive to this approach -- I have no idea -- but what seems likelier to me is that he'd be pissed off by the suggestion. There does seem to be something humiliating about the scenario. He's of the mindset that with only a very few exceptions, he's entitled to engage with anything that we own, which sounds fair to me. We don't place any conditionals on his use of our things (he is included in "ours"), other than the need to maintain personal safety and to treat certain items carefully. If there is something that would be extremely appealing to him but that we wouldn't feel comfortable with him using, we'd keep it out of sight if so doing were feasible. So far it has pretty much always been feasible. This policy has led to some damaged items, but I see that as part of life with a toddler.

In the philosophical literature on coercion, things tend not to be counted as coercive unless they set a person back from their baseline (i.e. where they would be at if not given the offer/threat). That is, if not giving Simon a sticker he wouldn't normally receive does not put Simon in a position that is worse off than where he would be if the sticker were not offered, there is no reason to think of the offer as coercive. (From my preliminary readings, it seems that most theorists do not take any offers as coercive, indicating, e.g., that "You give me $50 and I'll give you this art print" is a typical form of offer and we do not think of that as coercive. It would only be coercive if the offer were more accurately a threat.) Is it a threat? With the baseline thing... if the sticker is offered and refused, Simon would be worse off than would be the case had the sticker not been offered. Indeed, he would feel deprived for not getting the coveted item and perhaps ashamed and humiliated by failing to reach "his" goal, or angry with me for not giving the desired sticker to him. The feelings of children in cases like these may be relevantly different from those of adults (with some exceptions since not all children and not all adults are alike).

The rewards children are offered also seem more restrictive and in your face. It is not akin to going to a great bazaar and seeing a million different items one might like to own and then feeling angry at the shop-keepers because one can't afford them. It's perhaps more like having a loved one within your home dangling an item that you think is amazing and are eager to hold, but keeping it in your face until you act in a very specific way, often reminding you of the great item and your need to be obedient to earn it. Described so, it does seem to unfairly manipulate the desires of children. They are at a huge practical disadvantage in meeting these desires on their own -- to say the least. An adult who wants 50 cents worth of stickers can rush off to the store to get them, whereas for children, whether they get rewards at all and whatever else they receive tends to be governed by their parents and other caregivers.

If this type of bartering is problematic with children (setting aside for the moment whether it's effective), perhaps a large part of the problem resides in the unequal distribution of power and/or perhaps in what the child is reasonably entitled to. Treats add to our happiness. I think it doesn't seem a big stretch to believe that children are entitled to treats that are within the means of their family and that it is unfair to expect the child to earn each of these treats. As I just mentioned, unlike parents, who can give themselves treats at whim (provided they have the means, and many treats -- like a walk in the park -- are free), children are typically at the mercy of parents.

But of course, someone might respond, any decent parent gives their children things that might be considered treats "just because". No one is suggesting that the child has to earn every treat that she receives. Is it still wrong to offer super-erogatory (extra) treats above and beyond these? [Some of the concerns I'm raising here may start to answer this question.]

Is it o.k. to treat children's actions as commodities? Is doing so comparable to prostitution in any nontrivial sense? Maybe that's outlandish, but it came to mind so maybe there is a connection. Should the family unit be a safe space away from such bartering-type interactions? Are there any benefits for the child when some of their actions are treated as commodities? Might earning some rewards lead to a healthy sense of accomplishment and purpose? Is the purpose apt to be learned in this way an unhealthy one, e.g., acting in order to be paid rather than because it is what one loves to do? Could both be learned at the same time? Is it reasonable to expect that we should, ideally, always love what we're doing? If not, is there harm in wanting pay for things that we don't enjoy doing? Might it be the case that rather than coming to want more and more pay for these tedious tasks, one simply becomes accustomed to them?

It seems to me that it is the act of repeatedly carrying out a tedious but desireable action (and the beneficial side effects of so doing) that forms a habit to it rather than the reward. Rewards can help a person to repeatedly perform tedious actions. If rewards need not be used to form the desired habit, it is best to avoid them? E.g., should we try instead to encourage children to do certain important tasks through dialogue and by offering them relevant information? It seems that if the latter can work (which I think it can), the sense of accomplishment at the end of the day would be greater than would be the case if the child learned (e.g.) how to be a hygenic or health-conscious person through an externally imposed system of rewards. But... what if rewards turned out to be more effective? Especially for young children? Maybe that would be akin to rushing a child to independence before the child is ready, and lead to negative results (such as an anal retentive adult -- if there is anything to Freud's theory of the repercussions of stressful potty training)?

Are children free to choose to accept a reward or are the pressures of their parents, and the typically intense way they experience their desires, so heavy that it reduces their autonomy in an unjustified way? It seems that rewards are typically offered almost rhetorically. It is expected that the child will comply and chase after the reward. The child, then, is wrong for not chasing the reward and if she fails at the task, wrong for not getting it.

I remember it not feeling so great when my parents tried to buy my actions.
On the one hand I wanted the money, but on the other hand the agreement never felt right. I remember feeling a lot of pressure to do as they were asking, and I was a young adult at the time!

For those who disagree with the use of rewards with their children (I'm in this category now), do you think that ideally, other parents should also avoid the use of them? Or, is it acceptable for them to use these methods? If it seems acceptable, though not ideal (in your opinion), for them to use rewards, would it be preferable if they do not, even if they claim that the methods work well in their homes? Is it obnoxious and insensitive to encourage parents to avoid rewards? I'm writing my dissertation on children's autonomy and parental authority. Whatever position I ultimately defend, it's important to me that it be respectful of all parents and in particular, considerate of single parents and those who parent in the most difficult of situations. The best interests of the child and of the entire family will be at the heart of any suggestions I end up offering.


----------



## karlin (Apr 8, 2004)

Wow, what a read!

My stance is that many children (and my DS in particular) see rewards as manipulation. I have tried bribing my son to do certain things, and it almost always backfires. In fact, I think I set potty learning back at least 6 months by trying to give him stickers and presents and chocolate. He feels he deserves these things all the time, and it felt wrong to both of us to keep them away from him unless he uses the potty. I don't need to do something special to have a little chocolate, so why does my son? Also, what kind of relationship with food does that set children up for when that's what's being rewarded? I'm not sure of the answer to that one, but I'd rather not find out the hard way.

I think children really feel that they deserve respect, and being manipulated into doing something is not respectful. I remember my mom bribing me to play softball one last year because it was something she loved to watch. I hated my team because they constantly made fun of me (I had an overbite...kids are so cruel). But, I wanted what she offered, so I played. I don't think I told my mom about the team situation, because it was humiliating to me. It's been almost 20 years, and it's still a bit painful to think about. It was a very long season. I never want to do that to my child.


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

Thank-you for your response Karlin! Reading personal stories is so helpful to me! There is something about anecdotes... I can never get enough of them. I'm sorry about your softball experience. That is horrible!!! I was dragged to softball with my dad. I was an outcast, but the other players typically ignored me (perrhaps because my dad was a few feet away as the empire?). I somewhat enjoyed it but mostly went because it was expected and we didn't discuss whether I enjoyed it. Or rather, we did discuss this in a superficial way, but I felt that all my parents wanted to hear was "Yah, it's fun" -- much like they asked me at Christmas and at my birthday whether I'd gotten everything I wanted. Say "yes" and I'm lying but they seem pleased, say "no" and things are awkward and I come off as ungrateful.

With a young child, these rewards certainly do seem like manipulation. With a slightly older child, perhaps some uses of them are o.k.? E.g., a child wants to build a playhouse but is frustrated and overwhelmed. A parent helps the child to break the project into smaller parts and suggests that the child enjoy a reward after completing each part? This is just a suggestion and nothing is lorded over the child. If it helps the child get through the project... that may be a decent use of something akin to rewards.


----------



## BellinghamCrunchie (Sep 7, 2005)

I don't completely know what to make of Kohn. I agree with him in broad strokes, that I don't want to use praise as coersion. But I disagree that using reinforcers always results in the person learning to value extrinsic reinforcement when they could have developed intrinsic reinforcment instead.

In working with children with autism, I have seen over and over that the use of positive reinforcement makes lasting changes that don't seem to me to be coersive or that result in a need for on-going external reinforcement. For example, "Zach," a child with autism, was terrified of loud noises. We used desensitization and positive reinforcement to teach him to tolerate the noise of the vacuum, the dishwasher, and the washing machine. We started out a distance away from these machines, and had an M&M party with lots of soothing talk and praise. We slowly crept closer over a period of weeks. Zach doesn't blink an eye now when the vacuum or dishwasher or washing machine are going - in fact, he now loves vacuuming. When these noises are going, he doesn't look for external reinforcement or praise or anything. He learned to tolerate the noises (his sensory system changed) and that was that. His life is better because he has less fear.

When I was learning to swim, I was terrified of putting my face in the water and holding my breath. My father encouraged me and encouraged me. I could not overcome my fear of going under for myself, but I could do it to please my father, and to imagine how proud he would be of me if I learned to do this. That is what enabled me to do it - not intrinsic reinforcement, but knowing my father would be pleased (external reinforcment). However, once I learned to swim underwater, I learned to love swimming. I don't need anyone to tell me "good job swimming." I love swimming. Sometimes a person needs external reinforcement to learn a behavior that later becomes internally reinforcing. Reading is another example of this. Reading letters and then short words wasn't particularly reinforcing to me. But it pleased my mother and she praised me. I learned to read in part because it pleased my mother. But now I love reading, and I do it for the intrinsic value of it. Its hard for me to imagine very many children learning to read without at least some external reinforcement through the boring parts where you just have to learn the darn letters.


----------



## SomerG (Jun 29, 2005)

First, I have to say that I haven't yet read much of Kohn's writings, but I am familiar with them to some extent. I think there are varying types of rewards, and not all are coersive. One example that comes to mind is when my brother and I were kids, my mom would always reward us with getting an Orange Julius after we went to the dentist. It wasn't a bribe to get us to go (that wasn't really optional), but it was a treat to look forward to afterward. It helped the unpleasant task not seem so unpleasant. This is the way I sometime still reward myself when something needs to be done that I don't "feel" like doing (especially because I am also prone to procrastinate). I can see using this concept with my own children. I think it is quite different from using rewards as a type of bribery.


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

:


----------



## hipumpkins (Jul 25, 2003)

:


----------



## OHmidwife (Feb 24, 2003)

Wow! What a fascinating and thoughtful post. I recently read a Kohn article about this topic and have been thinking about it lately. It made me notice just how often I automatically say "Good job!" or similar praise to my 15 month old son without even thinking about it. So I've been trying to cut back on the praise, but still wondering if it's really that harmful.
I don't have any answers, just more questions. I was just wondering if it might be dependent on how you presented a particular reward to your child. Like what if instead of saying "You will get this sticker as a reward when you use the potty" you said, "For the month of October, we are all going to put stickers on this chart every time we use the potty. Then at the end of the month we will count how many stickers we have. Doesn't that sound like an interesting experiment?" Thus you are taking advantage of the fact that the child likes stickers, but not placing any value on the stickers as a reward, simply as an activity connected with another activity. And if you (the parent) put a sticker on whenever you use the potty too, it makes it more fair. Does that make sense?
Of course, I've never tried this myself, it's just an idea that occurred to me as I was reading your post. I'll be interested to hear what others think.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

I personally was more influenced by TCC than by Kohn, in the area of praise.
Kohn got me thinking about it and questioning it, but what I read in TCC really struck me. (I quoted it in the "what's wrong with praise" thread)

As for other stuff, Kohn was very influencial on me.


----------



## ejsmama (Jun 20, 2006)

I too would like to see a really well thought through, researched rebuttal of Kohn from someone with a GD perspective. It is not that I think he is wrong, it is that I hate to see an idea not be challenged, and I want the opportunity to read both sides. While there are certainly plenty of discipline experts out there who have positions very different from his, no one seems to have addressed his position directly, and that would be helpful for me as I figure out how I feel about this. I tend to distrust any position which goes to an extreme, like "praising is always harmful" or "praising is never harmful", and generally feel that all of the parenting approaches I have been reading need to be tempered, ballanced, and mindfully implemented by parents who take their individual child's temperment and needs into consideration.

I think another example of my distrust of extremes is on the issue of sleeping. There is the "its never ever ok to let your child cry (even when he is 10 months old, exhausted, and isn't sleeping well because he has to nurse every 45 minutes in order to soothe himself back to sleep)" extreme, and the "you must rigidly teach your child to sleep by letting her cry for x amount of minutes or you are a terrible parent" extreme. Both extremes went against my own instincts and my own observations about my son's temperament. I was so relieved when I found a middle road approach which was loving, gentle, respected my need to get some rest, and taught me to trust in my sons ability to have healthy sleep patterns as he became a toddler - that he didn't always need me to soothe him back to sleep. I know this is totally unrelated to Kohn, but it is just an example.


----------



## Mizelenius (Mar 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dal* 
For those who disagree with the use of rewards with their children (I'm in this category now), do you think that ideally, other parents should also avoid the use of them? Or, is it acceptable for them to use these methods? If it seems acceptable, though not ideal (in your opinion), for them to use rewards, would it be preferable if they do not, even if they claim that the methods work well in their homes? Is it obnoxious and insensitive to encourage parents to avoid rewards? I'm writing my dissertation on children's autonomy and parental authority. Whatever position I ultimately defend, it's important to me that it be respectful of all parents and in particular, considerate of single parents and those who parent in the most difficult of situations. The best interests of the child and of the entire family will be at the heart of any suggestions I end up offering.

I think one aspect that has been left out of many parenting books is the cultural one. I think we (general "we") tend to approach parenting topics assuming that everyone holds the same cultural ideals that we do, and this is far from true. While I would like to believe that EVERY child deserves x,y,z, I have to remember that I am just as ethnocentric as the next person. I can't possibly understand what it is like to raise a child as a member of another cultural group. (I can't let go of the idea that no child should be hit, though.)

Anyway, this doesn't answer your question, just something I thought I should mention.


----------



## Nora'sMama (Apr 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ejsmama* 
*I was so relieved when I found a middle road approach which was loving, gentle, respected my need to get some rest, and taught me to trust in my sons ability to have healthy sleep patterns* as he became a toddler - that he didn't always need me to soothe him back to sleep.









OK, apologies for the OT question, but, can you PM me what this approach was? I'm so sleep-deprived it's starting to be dangerous. But I am 100% anti-CIO...anything short of that would definitely be considered. TY! Sorry for disrupting the thread (which is fascinating...wish I had something insightful to add!).


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Great post! I don't really have any answers, but I have wondered about some of this stuff myself, especially this:

Quote:

) The main thing that procrastinators like me need (assuming they too want to overcome this trait) is the resolve and will-power to do what we know needs to be done (like administrative tasks that can't reasonably be avoided) but that has ZIP NADA ZILCH appeal and actually feels stressful and unpleasant to do. If a reward will give that incentive to some people, and they choose to attempt this route, wha'z the problem with it? If this is fine for adults, might it also be o.k. -- in some circumstances -- for children to choose to co-operate in a reward system in hopes of building their motivation to achieve a particular goal (especially one that is meaningful for the child)?
I too routinely reward myself for getting my butt in gear and doing little things I don't want to do. It is a useful tool in my self-management.


----------



## Emmom (Sep 11, 2005)

What an interesting post. I have a few thoughts.

I don't think bribes and rewards are interchangable ideas. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with bribes--with "sweetening the deal" with your kid. If you want him to go to the dentist and you promise an orange julius, then you're basically trying to make a not-so-pleasant experience into a more pleasant one. You're understanding where he's coming from, sympathizing, and trying to help him feel better about the situation. Rewards, on the other hand, are based in a behaviorist model where what you want is judged as the right thing and the kid's desires are something to be 'corrected'. The difference is a) how you're presenting it--'I want us to do this, for this reason, what would make it a better experience for you' vs. 'do x and I'll give you y' and b) the choice involved. In answer to your question about whether or not kids can _really_ make a free choice when faced with parental pressure, I would say that if you have a relationship where you express respect and trust for your child (not rewarding, praising, punishing, etc.), then they may feel more free to choose. Especially if there's a history in your relationship of you accepting choices that are different than the choice you would have preferred.

Kids are smart enough to see that you're manipulating them and, since they trust you, they'll see that their own instincts about themselves and what they need to do are not to be trusted.

Children have a good reason for anything they don't want to do. By manipulating them to do it anyway, you may miss an underlying need.

Any praise or reward--any setting yourself up as the judge of your child's behavior--interferes with your relationship with them. By reasoning with them and expressing things in realistic terms of your desire for them to do this or that, you act as their partner. I think that a partnering relationship is more desirable, especially as children get older.

And, a personal anecdote. I wanted to quit smoking so badly when I was in college that I made it a project for psych class, using every behaviorist tool available to me to create for myself a regimented program of quitting smoking. It worked. I quit. Three months after class ended, I took up smoking again. I really think that rewarding and punishing myself for not smoking or smoking, respectively, interfered with my process of quitting. It masked my actual reasons for wanting to quit and made it into a sort of game, with the real reasons for and products of my behavior less and less in the forefront of my mind. More importantly, I began to think of smoking as something to be bargained for, so that when I went out to the bar with friends one night, I bargained myself into thinking it was ok to have one cigarette if I did such-and-such good thing for myself in the morning. Etc, etc. Behaviorism worked, but only short-term. It took two more years for me to quit for good, with nothing but an internal motivation.


----------



## Daffodil (Aug 30, 2003)

Some kind of random thoughts on the subject:

A while back, someone on another thread mentioned a book called Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation: Resolving the Controversy by Cameron and Pierce. The authors disagree with Kohn. I was able to find a little info on the web about the controversy. Apparently everyone on both sides agrees that there are conditions where rewards reduce intrinsic motivation and/or creativity. The controversy is over how likely those conditions are to occur and how easy it is to avoid them. Both sides also seem to agree that, at least in some situations, rewards can be given without reducing intrinsic motivation.

Before I had kids, I had a dog I trained to compete in obedience trials, and I've read a lot about dog training, so I'm used to thinking from a behaviorist perspective. Kohn's totally anti-behaviorist attitude kind of turned me off. And he never even mentioned randomized rewards. Every dog trainer knows that the most effective way to reward is not to do it every time, but at random. (Not for random behaviors, always for the behavior you want, but not every time the behavior is shown.) The uncertain possibility of a reward is what makes people keep putting their money into slot machines, or keep going to the computer to check their email or discussion forums. It seems entirely possible to me that you could come up with reward systems that work a lot better than the ones Kohn talks about. (But I still think it's likely that you'd run the risk of undermining internal motivation.)

And I agree, Dal, that Kohn's arguments against rewards don't really seem to apply to situations where there is never likely to be any intrinsic motivation. I think he should have talked more about that. I tend to think using rewards in that kind of situation might be a good idea, or at least not a bad idea.

The idea that rewards can eventually lead to internal motivation makes sense to me. It certainly happens with dogs. I imagine it's most likely to happen with behaviors that have a lot of potential to be enjoyable, when the potential isn't immediately obvious. Like when a dog that has no natural impulse to retrieve is taught to fetch objects through rewards, but eventually finds that playing fetch is fun in itself. For people, it might be behaviors like exercising.

For me, the most compelling reason to go with a UP approach is not the idea that rewards won't really work. (Though I did find Punished by Rewards pretty convincing.) I'm more influenced by Kohn's ideas about not making kids feel constantly judged, and about helping them to understand the real reasons why they should or shouldn't act in a certain way, instead of just acting to please other people.


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

Interesting thread. I read Kohn when my kids were toddlers and was very influenced by it. My kids are 8 and 10 and have been *mostly* raised without rewards. I say mostly because I let them participate in activities outside of our home, such as the summer reading program at the library and girl scouts, that are reward based. Some parents are so into the no-reward thing that they make these kinds of things off limits.

I'm really happy with how it has worked out for my kids. They are lovely to be around and like helping out, reading, taking care of the pets, etc.

As far as self rewards, I think it is different because one always maintains the control. With parents and kids, the parent has the control over the child.

I think that having a routine -- such as after you brush your teeth we will read a book -- is different from using rewards. With rewards, the behavoir is optional. If you do X, then you get Y. With a routine, the emphasis is on getting the little things done that have to get done and then going to to something fun. It is a subtle difference. I really don't know that my kids will ever have "good intrinsic motivation" for dental hygiene, but it needs to be a habit.

Quote:

No one is suggesting that the child has to earn every treat that she receives. Is it still wrong to offer super-erogatory (extra) treats above and beyond these?
I think the problem lies in upward spiral of what kids need to get them motivated to do something. What ever you use as a bribe to get them do something becomes a barginning chip as they get older. If you, for example, give them money for cleaning, then when you ask them to clean something, their first thought is "what is it worth?"


----------



## Starflower (Sep 25, 2004)

Great thread!









Subbing since I've only had time to skim it so far.


----------



## LianneM (May 26, 2004)

Thank you for the post - I really enjoyed reading it. I hope to come back with some thoughts to add.


----------



## shelley4 (Sep 10, 2003)

what a great post! i have heard alot about Kohn, but have yet to actually read his work for myself (i want to). i do think that kids are over-praised and bribed these days, and i catch myself doing it sometimes and i'm really trying to stop (not entirely, just cutting down).. like instead of "what a beautiful picture! good colouring!"... i'd rather say "tell me about your picture".. this is especially helpful because if my ds thinks his picture is "less than what he imagined it would be" then he thinks my praise is insincere. so if i just ask him to tell me about it, i can get his thoughts on what he drew and why.

we tried rewards for potty training with my ds, and it so did not work at all! it also felt "not quite right" to either of us.

when i was little, i was in girl guides. i really liked the first year or two, but then i decided that i didn't want to attend anymore, but my mother pushed me to finish it. i think she offered me $20 or something. everytime i went, i didn't want to be there and didn't have a good time. it was all for her. i would have rather spent that time doing something meaningful to me (a different activity, perhaps). i think she just didn't want me to "be a quitter".

anways, great post, i really need to actually READ kohn instead of just reading about him!


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Quote:

I think that having a routine -- such as after you brush your teeth we will read a book -- is different from using rewards. With rewards, the behavoir is optional. If you do X, then you get Y. With a routine, the emphasis is on getting the little things done that have to get done and then going to to something fun.
I keep changing my mind about this. Sometimes I agree, and sometime I think I might be kidding myself.







I tell myself there is a difference between, "If you do X, then you will get Y" and "After we do X, we can do Y"...but then I don't always convince myself. KWIM?


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

Funny, Kohn himself struggles with this exact concept, as described in the afterword (or last chapter, or conclusion, or whatever is at the end) of Punished by Rewards. He says he will listen to himself say, "After your bath we can read a book," and then second-guess what he just said, and not have a clear idea whether he totally agrees with what he just said or not. At least, that's what I think he said. It has been 5 years since I read it!

And I, for one, am with loraxc... I use it, I question it, I have reached the conclusion that I don't know either way.







:


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

For me, "If you do X" means that there is a choice about doing X. I think that saying "if" when something isn't an option is lying. You are telling them they have a choice about something which they don't have a choice about it. It is dishonest. It is trying to convince the child they are choosing to do something when they really aren't. My kids _have_ to brush their teeth and I _am_ going to read to them. It isn't an "if then."

The nice things that I do for my kids (reading to them, giving them some of their own money, taking them out for pizza, etc.) are things that I do for my kids because..... well because they are my kids and love them and like to do nice things for them. They don't "earn" any of it.

One of the problems I have with rewards is that they are manipulative. If I'm going to make my kids do something (such as brush their teeth) I'm up front about it rather than manipulating them. _I think that when someone is constantly manipulated it is difficult for them to know what they really want or why they are doing the things they are doing_.

The more a child is manipulated into doing things, the less they can hear their own voice.


----------



## skueppers (Mar 30, 2005)

Having grown up in a reward/praise-free household, I feel like I have a bit of insight into what can go wrong with Kohn's recommendations. I actually agree with what he has to say about the negative effects of rewards and praise, and feel that the atmosphere I grew up in definitely helped me to think for myself and develop my own motivations.

However, I also think it's vital to maintain an overall atmosphere of acceptance and approval -- and to join your child in celebrating things they feel they've done well. Otherwise, they may find themselves in an atmosphere where they feel that anything they do well lacks value, since they only receive attention (negative, unfortunately) for things they don't do as well as the parent would like.

Kohn does address this a little bit when he talks about what to do instead of praising your child, but I'm always concerned that his ideas may be oversimplified (as generally tends to happen with any parenting idea) and lead to the kind of toxic, though well-meaning, environment I grew up in.


----------



## Daffodil (Aug 30, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
I keep changing my mind about this. Sometimes I agree, and sometime I think I might be kidding myself.







I tell myself there is a difference between, "If you do X, then you will get Y" and "After we do X, we can do Y"...but then I don't always convince myself. KWIM?

I think there is a difference. But, you know, it probably doesn't matter much with this type of thing whether or not you're really offering a reward. We're talking about just trying to get some small routine thing done more quickly or more willingly, right? Things like tooth-brushing or picking up toys or getting dressed? What's the worst that could happen if the child did perceive it as a reward situation? None of the stuff we're really trying to avoid by avoiding rewards. I wouldn't worry that my kid would feel overly judged (and therefore worried about not keeping up her good performance and inhibited about taking chances), or that she would think I only loved her if she brushed her teeth quickly, or that she would lose her intrinsic motivation to brush her teeth, or lose sight of the real importance of tooth-brushing. It's an entirely different thing from rewarding her for, say, good grades or not hitting her brother.


----------



## ShaggyDaddy (Jul 5, 2006)

Natural consequences can sometimes seem like rewards, but I think it is important to let them happen.

We are not rigid bedtime people, but if your DC was taking a bath and they wouldn't get out for instance, I see no problem with saying "If you get out now, we will have time for a book before bed, but if not then it will be bedtime without a book because you are choosing to take a long bath"

Same scenario, same rules, same result, natural consequence instead of a reward.

Just as you would explain that since they poured their juice on the floor there is no more juice it is thrilling that you get to explain to them that because they helped you clear the table you have more free time to take them to the park.

Most of my son's "rewards" come in response to his communication efforts (he is only 16m) if he asks us for something and we can provide it, then he gets it... not really a reward, just a consequence of his budding communication skills.


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *skueppers* 
I also think it's vital to maintain an overall atmosphere of acceptance and approval -- and to join your child in celebrating things they feel they've done well. Otherwise, they may find themselves in an atmosphere where they feel that anything they do well lacks value, since they only receive attention (negative, unfortunately) for things they don't do as well as the parent would like.









:

Interesting! I was raised in a such a different way that I really starting from scratch with my own kids. It's great to hear from someone who has real life experience and tweak things!

DH and I are pretty amazed at how wonderful our kids are and would have a hard time not showing it. We try to stick with Kohn's recommendations for positive feed back by saying things that are specific. Rather than "you are such a great artist" we say things like "I really like the picture you made of a horse. It is so detailed and the face is realistic." To me, it seems like the difference between just rattling something off and really taking the time to think about what they have done.


----------



## ZeldasMom (Sep 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *skueppers* 
However, I also think it's vital to maintain an overall atmosphere of acceptance and approval -- and to join your child in celebrating things they feel they've done well. Otherwise, they may find themselves in an atmosphere where they feel that anything they do well lacks value, since they only receive attention (negative, unfortunately) for things they don't do as well as the parent would like.

I think AK would agree with this. He doesn't want you to zone out and not pay attention to/love to your child. After reading UP I have been focusing on being engaged with my chldren and what they are doing and finding ways to talk to them about it without constanting evaluating it. I was concerned that this might come off as cold, but I really don't think it does. I am hearing myself asking a lot more questions and finding our interactions a lot richer. I'm not being a freak about the praise thing.







I give compliments, but at the same time I am trying to be mindful about it and not go crazy with it. After I read the book I was amazed at how many times I heard "good job" coming out of my mouth. It was like I had this weird "good job" version of Tourette Syndrome.


----------



## ZeldasMom (Sep 25, 2004)

I buy the basic argument that extrinsic motivators can function to errode intrinsic motivation. My undergrad degree is in philosophy and in a class on the philosophy of ecomomics we read about how when people are paid to donate blood they actually donate less than when they are not paid because the payment degrades the value of the gift to the person who gives the blood. I think this is discussed in one of Dan Hausman's books on philosophy of economics (I can go look for the reference if you like). Or maybe it is in this book. Actually, the more I think about it, I think it is the second one--which I really enjoyed by the way.

I don't feel like I need proof to go along with the AK approach. If you can make things work in your family without extrinsic motivators, why not do it? Do I think someone is evil if they need to use other things? No. But I just don't think it should be your remedy of first resort.


----------



## Mizelenius (Mar 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *skueppers* 
However, I also think it's vital to maintain an overall atmosphere of acceptance and approval -- and to join your child in celebrating things they feel they've done well. Otherwise, they may find themselves in an atmosphere where they feel that anything they do well lacks value, since they only receive attention (negative, unfortunately) for things they don't do as well as the parent would like.


ITA. I differentiate largely between praise and being excited with my children. For example, my younger DD gets so happy and claps when she clicks her seat belt. I don't ignore that. I get just as excited with her. I think children naturally celebrate and if we go along with them (with sincerity) they know it.


----------



## kayshajon (Jul 29, 2005)

I was struck by a workplace experience when I read Kohn. . .my former boss made it his policy to pay his employees 50% salary 50% bonus, with the thought that the bonus would inspire folks to be high achievers. I observed morale drop in every single employee he did this to. They would get their first bonus check and be really happy with the plan (because everyone works hard in the first few months of any job!). But if the bonuses didn't get bigger and better each time, then they felt cheated. And if my boss was ever inconsistent, like deciding not to bonus someone even though their performance was still good but hadn't changed since the last bonus, then he lost the heart of that employee forever. He turned people who weren't motivated by money intrinsically into disgruntled care-only-about-that-bonus-check kind of people. I also saw that he would pin an already earned bonus on another future deliverable, so in essence people would have to earn the same money over and over again.

I've also been in workplaces where the atmosphere was caring, fun, exciting and the people worked really hard without caring at all about their paycheck (other than they got one & could pay bills, of course - everyone cares about a paycheck!) I totally agree with a pp that said the atmosphere of the home is really important. I think that if you create a loving, accepting, and fun atmosphere at home - it probably doesn't matter so much whether or not you are saying "good job" too much. Let children have some say in the management of their daily life, take them seriously, inspire them by being motivated yourself. They really learn so much from just observing how we deal with everything.

I appreciated reading Kohn because he made me question WHY I said certain things. I do try hard not to tell my daughter she's being such a good girl when I realize I'm saying that because she hasn't asked anything of me for an hour. She's inherently good. But I'm not sure I can look to Kohn as the answer to child raising - he's got some good ideas I can ponder but they aren't entirely the answer for me.


----------



## BellinghamCrunchie (Sep 7, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kayshajon* 
I was struck by a workplace experience when I read Kohn. . .my former boss made it his policy to pay his employees 50% salary 50% bonus, with the thought that the bonus would inspire folks to be high achievers. I observed morale drop in every single employee he did this to. They would get their first bonus check and be really happy with the plan (because everyone works hard in the first few months of any job!). But if the bonuses didn't get bigger and better each time, then they felt cheated. And if my boss was ever inconsistent, like deciding not to bonus someone even though their performance was still good but hadn't changed since the last bonus, then he lost the heart of that employee forever. He turned people who weren't motivated by money intrinsically into disgruntled care-only-about-that-bonus-check kind of people. I also saw that he would pin an already earned bonus on another future deliverable, so in essence people would have to earn the same money over and over again.

That's a great example. Come to think of it, I had similar experiences in the workplace. It really does shift the focus from the work you are doing to the rewards instead, and when the rewards aren't as expected, people start feeling resentful.


----------



## msiddiqi (Apr 28, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ZeldasMom* 
I think AK would agree with this. He doesn't want you to zone out and not pay attention to/love to your child.

I just finished reading UP and I agree with most of it. I didn't get the impression either that you can't celebrate with your children. I think it's more about why you are celebrating...are you trying to get them to do something or are you genuinely happy and excited. I would never hold back my feelings from DS when I feel excited about something he's done. What I AM trying to do is check my intentions behind everything now.

Also, I agree with saying something more thoughtful and detailed instead of "Good Job". So DS knows I'm being sincere. (Not that I think it's a hard fast rule that you can never ever ever say "Good Job". I just think most times there are better things to say and sometimes it's better to say nothing at all)


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

Thank-you everyone for your responses! I've found them so helpful!!! I'd like to speak to individuals, but I'm pressed for time! Hopefully I'll get a chance to write more of a response later.


----------



## lula (Feb 26, 2003)

The problem I have with Kohn is that I "praise" other people in my life. For eg. I tell my sister that she did an amazing job on her new welding project. I tell dh that he is an amazing human being for cleaning the garage. None of these are very accurate, detailed praise tailored specifically. They both appreciate the effort.

I also enjoy praise, for e.g. when dh tells me "You did a good job today babe." it makes me really happy in general and I feel it helps our relationship. Maybe I am crazy but I find it odd to engage in praise behaviors with others that I/they find enriching but I don't do the same behaviour with my child.

I also wish that my parents had praised me more so this issue has been difficult for me to process.

I know that I have hit up Google Scholar for some really good articles on children and praise. When I was visiting my friend (Ph.D. student who had access to tons of the articles it was really fun!)

Here are a few notes I have in an email to myself when I was researching this:

Article Title: Praise for intelligence can undermine children's motivation and performance.
Abstract
Praise for ability is commonly considered to have beneficial effects on motivation. Contrary to this popular belief, six studies demonstrated that praise for intelligence had more negative consequences for students' achievement motivation than praise for effort. Fifth graders praised for intelligence were found to care more about performance goals relative to learning goals than children praised for effort. After failure, they also displayed less task persistence, less task enjoyment, more low-ability attributions, and worse task performance than children praised for effort. Finally, children praised for intelligence described it as a fixed trait more than children praised for hard work, who believed it to be subject to improvement. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved)
Authors
Mueller, Claudia M.; Dweck, Carol S.
Source
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 75(1), Jul 1998, 33-52.

http://academic.reed.edu/motivation/...aiseReview.pdf

I also found some interesting articles on "person criticism/praise" and "process criticism/praise."

There were also some interesting articles that showed that different children respond to praise differently; (imagine that!) I found a few papers interesting for eg. one paper showed that for children who stutter and receive the following a. praise for non-stuttering speech and correction of stuttering speech there is marked improvement.

Another paper spoke specifically to autism and praise, i.e. examining avoident behavior of some autistic children to direct praise.

I will try to find my more detailed notes, my computer is such an insane blend of files with odd titles that it could take days...argh.


----------



## ZeldasMom (Sep 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lula* 
The problem I have with Kohn is that I "praise" other people in my life. For eg. I tell my sister that she did an amazing job on her new welding project. I tell dh that he is an amazing human being for cleaning the garage. None of these are very accurate, detailed praise tailored specifically. They both appreciate the effort.

Kohn says praise functions differently between adult peers who aren't dependent on oneanother the way a child is on a parent. I think it is important to keep sight of teh parent/chld factor when looking at the praise issue.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lula* 
I also wish that my parents had praised me more so this issue has been difficult for me to process.

I think Kohn would say this is because you were conditionally parented. I was also, so I know what you mean about how it is hard to let go of that way of thinking.

Also, you don't have to be a PhD student to gain access to academic research articles. Get a reference librarian to help you. A lot of places have tons of tools available online now and also have chat-based reference which is way cool.


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ZeldasMom* 
It was like I had this weird "good job" version of Tourette Syndrome.









Me too!!! Sometimes it still comes out but at least I always hear myself say it and reconsider.

What really bugs me is when MIL constantly uses "good girl." She does it out of love and habit, so I don't get too upset, and I have explained to her why not to use it and she does agree, but she still does it. I think she just can't help it.


----------



## Scarlet's Mom (Aug 3, 2006)

I was just lamenting to my dh tonight that b/c of the way I was raised, with a lot of rewrds, praise, and punishment, I have to keep up those systems with myself as an adult in order to feel worthy or just. I have a "Wellness Chart" on my cork board where i check off things each night that I am trying to cultivate in my life. I withold treats from myself if I haven't taken my walk. I completely relate to a previous poster who talked about quitting smoking being more like a game--that's how it is with me and my sugar addiction. I really feel sad that I don't seem to have the motivation to do things because they are good for me or my family, community, etc. I do them so I can get my metaphorical gold star at the end of the day. I have just been turned on the AK approach and I have a good friend who uses it with her daughter so I am able to see the way it works with her. I feel grateful to have discovered it--and I want to create an atmosphere where my child's accomplishments are celebrated and where so-called misdeeds are addressed in a meaningful way.


----------



## lula (Feb 26, 2003)

"Quote I think Kohn would say this is because you were conditionally parented. I was also, so I know what you mean about how it is hard to let go of that way of thinking."

Yes, that is his response but I don't feel like I was conditionally parented. (as a child at least!)My parents didn't believe that they should praise their children because it would harm our ability to establish self-direction. (also my parents don't believe children can be "bad" so they avoided that word like the plague)

I was offered very specific feedback and it wasnt' negative. One comment (or the equivalent) I heard often was "You worked really hard on that project and seem very pleased with the outcome." "This aspect (x)really is interesting to me and I think you have given insightful argumentation." (I wrote tons of argumentative crap for my Mock Trial/ law classes and they always had great feedback but frankly at some point I just wanted to hear "good job the teacher is an idiot if you don't get an A. I thought this way so much that by law school I didn't even discuss my projects with them)

Other fun comments: "I see that you are very excited about <insert X>" or "You have met your goal." It drove me insane, no damnit I was VERY VERY GOOD at things, I did things very well, I did well at things I cared nothing about occasionally and I didn't try hard at everything I cared about or excelled doing.

To this day I still want to hear my parents say that I do a good job at a few things, or hear that I am smart, <insert other generalized comments here> I want to hear this not because I always think I am doing these amazing things but just because they are my parents and not other people. I want the generalized praise regardless of how I measure my outcomes etc.

I know this is a personal issue but it is the sort of thing that worries me about Kohn. I think my parents would love Kohn. I am trying to balance my experiences with what I read in Kohn and have yet to come up with an outcome!

Sorry if this went off topic but this internal debate has really spurred my research on children/praise.


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lula* 
I tell dh that he is an amazing human being for cleaning the garage.

I couldn't not pounce on this one. If you really do tell your dh that he is "an amazing human being" for cleaning the garage, then I'm sure you both recognize the hyperbole involved. I mean, he may be "an amazing human being" but not specifically for his garage-cleaning powers, right? If he hadn't cleaned the garage, he would still be "amazing" to you, right? And I'm assuming you both recognize this.

See, if kids hear a lot of, "Wow, you're a fantastic dancer." "Holy Cow, you are the best painter I know." "Man alive, you are a piano-playing genius." What are they going to think? First, maybe one day you'll find out that Suzie next door is a better dancer/painter/piano-player, and you'll think less of them, because their worth is all tied up with their abilities. Second, they might think you're only saying that to pump them up, because they know (or think) they really aren't that great at whatever it is, and they won't take anything you say at face value. Third, they may conclude that you really have no idea what good piano playing sounds like, and your opinion is worthless. Fourth, maybe they believe you, and one day have a rude awakening when the entire world doesn't agree with your assessment. I'm sure there are more possibilities but these just immediately come to mind.

If you give your dh an over-the-top compliment, you have an understanding as adults as to what is really being said. Kids don't yet have the ability to decipher shades of sarcasm, implications, running jokes, etc that are a part of adult conversation. When as teenagers they start to, and can handle compliments like, "You drive like a professional!" or "This report ought to be published in a peer-reviewed journal" (assuming in each case that the compliments are a little over-the-top, not that we have a truly exceptional driver or report-writer) then fine, they can join the world of adult repartee. (I'm so sure I misspelled that.) But so often little kids are given these compliments, and its really something too big for them to live up to. I hear it all the time, and I don't think its good for them.

Oh, and while I'm quoting and responding to 1% of your total post, I should add that the rest of your post is really interesting and I'm going to read it again and look at that stuff you're refering to!


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Lurking...


----------



## lula (Feb 26, 2003)

momileigh said:


> I couldn't not pounce on this one. If you really do tell your dh that he is "an amazing human being" for cleaning the garage, then I'm sure you both recognize the hyperbole involved. I mean, he may be "an amazing human being" but not specifically for his garage-cleaning powers, right? If he hadn't cleaned the garage, he would still be "amazing" to you, right? And I'm assuming you both recognize this. QUOTE]
> 
> See the thing is I really do think dh is an amazing human being specifically because he does clean the garage! He may be a bit less amazing to me if he didn't....jk
> 
> ...


----------



## ZeldasMom (Sep 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lula* 
"Quote I think Kohn would say this is because you were conditionally parented. I was also, so I know what you mean about how it is hard to let go of that way of thinking."

Yes, that is his response but I don't feel like I was conditionally parented. (as a child at least!)My parents didn't believe that they should praise their children because it would harm our ability to establish self-direction. (also my parents don't believe children can be "bad" so they avoided that word like the plague)

I was offered very specific feedback and it wasnt' negative. One comment (or the equivalent) I heard often was "You worked really hard on that project and seem very pleased with the outcome." "This aspect (x)really is interesting to me and I think you have given insightful argumentation." (I wrote tons of argumentative crap for my Mock Trial/ law classes and they always had great feedback but frankly at some point I just wanted to hear "good job the teacher is an idiot if you don't get an A. I thought this way so much that by law school I didn't even discuss my projects with them)

Other fun comments: "I see that you are very excited about <insert X>" or "You have met your goal." It drove me insane, no damnit I was VERY VERY GOOD at things, I did things very well, I did well at things I cared nothing about occasionally and I didn't try hard at everything I cared about or excelled doing.

To this day I still want to hear my parents say that I do a good job at a few things, or hear that I am smart, <insert other generalized comments here> I want to hear this not because I always think I am doing these amazing things but just because they are my parents and not other people. I want the generalized praise regardless of how I measure my outcomes etc.

I know this is a personal issue but it is the sort of thing that worries me about Kohn. I think my parents would love Kohn. I am trying to balance my experiences with what I read in Kohn and have yet to come up with an outcome!

Sorry if this went off topic but this internal debate has really spurred my research on children/praise.

What you say they said sounds cold and analytical, not very warm and engaged, which is what I think AK advocates. I didn't see any questions in your examples of what they said, just descriptions. It doesn't sound like your emotional needs were met, which to me is a deeper thing than not getting sufficient praise. A book I think you might really like is Parenting from the Inside Out by Daniel Siegel and Mary Hartzell. One of the early chapters is about being emotionally present and aware with your children, which I have found helpful (this is probably the book that has been most helpful to me in terms of parenting--it is really good for helping you work though your own childhood stuff).


----------



## lula (Feb 26, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ZeldasMom* 
What you say they said sounds cold and analytical, not very warm and engaged, which is what I think AK advocates. I didn't see any questions in your examples of what they said, just descriptions. It doesn't sound liek your emotional needs were met, which to me is a deper thing than not getting sufficent praise. A book I think you might really like is Parenting from the Inside Out by Daniel Siegel and Mary Hartzell. One of the early chapters is about being emotionally present and aware with your children, which I have found helpful (this is probably the book that has been most helpful to me in terms of parenting--it is really good for helping you work thourhg your own childhood stuff).

Sorry to derail. My parents really were loving people, they were supportive for the most part etc. and I know they were/are excited for me etc. I don't want to portray them as these stone people.They were authentic in how they reacted to me etc. We just didn't connect on some levels regarding what I view as "adequate feedback." This is why I find Kohn fascinating.

I own Parenting from the Inside Out. Great book.

ok, back on topic!


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

I'm loving this discussion and continuing to get so much out of it!!!

I'll have to look in to Google Scholar. I've never heard of it before!

I guess my parents were good dog trainers -- at least in regards to randomizing prase, not in any other way -- because they certainly didn't dole their praise out generously, it was really hit-and-miss with them. Hey dad, look, 98% on this test! Dad: "Oh. Not bad. What could you have done to get 100%" (that actually happened). He's really come around in recent years though, thankfully. Criticism and avoidance were the main flavours of the way I was raised. My parents would give lip service to the claims that I could be anything I wanted to be (so long as it was a doctor or a lawyer), but I never felt that they were being genuine. I didn't actually think that I could do much of anything. I had a part-time job, e.g., and really wanted a car, but it never dawned on me that it was possible for me to save up enough money to buy one. I guess this speaks for the value of genuine praise and the dangers of contrived utterings. As has been said already, kids aren't stupid. I knew dang well when my mom and grandma were talking extra loud and saying nice things about me that they knew I was eavesdropping and wanted to stroke my ego.

Anyway... examples of how I feel conditional parenting has affected me: I'm ridiculously anxious when I send e-mails to my supervisor. She is amazing and personable. I really have no reason to fear her. Even so, I feel like if I say something stupid, her positive view of me is going to change entirely and she's going to tell me that she no longer feels that she should supervise my work. The same is often true with my friendships. I'm forever worried about saying the wrong thing and having my friends go running for the hills. I've had that happen to me and it's left a huge welt on my psyche. So I could probably benefit from some therapy... though I like to be my own counsellor. Actually, I think that might have something to do with conditional parenting too. I feel like a counsellor would be a threat to my competence. Perhaps I think I'm "an idiot" if I can't figure things out on my own.

On the other side of conditional parenting: If my work is praised, accepted for publication, or to present at a conference, I'm on top of the world and unstoppable. I'm amazing and going to be an awesome, successful academic -- at least until I'm faced with some minor criticisms, don't make enough progress for awhile, or whatever the case may be -- something else sets me back and leads me to re-calibrate my sense of self worth and potential. It's really quite sad. I'm neurotic.

The more I think about it, the easier it is to make sense of my neuroses. It takes little more than an off-look from my husband for me to shift from an inflated sense of excellence and potential to a flailing and insecure mess of self-doubt and self-loathing. I was raised with a sense of distrust and hatred for whatever is "average". I've overcome this now (I think/hope) and have finally realized that so-called average people are anything but. (Well, at least as "average" has been defined throughout my childhood.) My mom in particular was and still is of the opinion that it's important to be better than other people. Whenever someone acts in a way that doesn't fit her stringent and nonsensible standards, there is something hopelessly wrong with them. Let me tell you, this is a horrible way to live.

Unfortunately, I'm far too sensitive to Simon's moods too. He had a fantastic day yesterday. I was on top of the world. CL was utterly amazing. Today sucked (I think because he was reacting to too much junk food, which he doesn't usually have). As far as sucky toddler days, this one was peanuts, but I wasn't in a good state to begin with as a lot of little things have been piling up on my lately. So, in this down day, all of the things that stress me out in relation to parenting were bobbing around in my head, with razor-sharp blades of guilt. It's a wonder I didn't pull my hair out. At the same time, I knew that I'm doing a great job with my son, that any things I'd like to change if I could do it all over again are so minor, and that I'd feel better after he went to sleep for the night. Neurotics need not be consistent and they need not be rational. I know that tomorrow, even now, CL is great again, but at the moment, I was playing in my head: Well, if he were raised in a different environment, . . . and then imagining my sweet, sweet boy without the difficuties that we have (mainly relating to eating healthy foods and brushing his freekin' teeth, and a bit of anxiety when I read about other children his age who are extremely verbal and seem to be skateboarding, reciting poetry, and climbing mountains). So I start to worry that if only we stuck with JUST healthy foods and were more consistent about introducing them. . . If only we were more into the continuum concept and stood back more when he took physical risks. . . if only we spent more time out of the house, . . . if only we listened to more music . . .. I can usually think... yah, next time there are a few minor things I'll do differently, but overall I'm a fantastic mom. Drop in a critical look at me and a Simon who isn't happy, laughing his day away, and whoa, what have I done!

I think a fear of being judged, and particularly of being misjudged, prevents me from socializing as much as I should. This makes sense given my condition. I guess it's self-preservation. I know that if I go out and things go well, I'll be soaring, but if some child yanks a toy from Simon's hands one too many times and Gawd-forbid I even suspect that someone -- even a judgmental curmudgeon of a person -- will see an unhappy sliver of his life and think that I'm damaging him to the core. . . Should that happen, I have to find a way to rebuild my confidence all over again. It's exhausting.

What I can say is that the combination of an anxious disposition, which I'm pretty sure I inherited, and conditional parenting is particularly damning. Aside from minimal and unpredictable praise, whenever I did the slightest thing that my mom didn't find convenient she'd call me an idiot or something like that. I knew from a very young age that she didn't actually mean that I was an idiot, that was just her way of talking, but sheesh!!!! It is so not nice for me to have her "you idiot!" in my head whenever things go slightly wrong.

Though the way I was parented was rotten, it does seem to hold a lot of resemblance to the competitive and behavioristic methods of parenting that seem to be the norm today, even if the praise and shunning/punishing are doled out in more acceptable clothes. So the adults of the future can think to themselves at every wrong turn: That is completely unacceptable! I deserve to be punished and shunned. And when they get things right: Yay!!! Applause, applause!!! I'm the best!; I'm such a good X!!! It's not a nice mental space in which to live!

So I'm not talking specifically about the merits or shortcomings of Kohn's position, but I felt like unloading.


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

oops. double post.


----------



## traceface (Feb 17, 2003)

Quote:

CL was utterly amazing.
what is CL?

thanks!

This is an interesting discussion, by the way!


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *traceface* 
what is CL?

thanks!

This is an interesting discussion, by the way!


CL: consensual living.

I'm enjoying it too.







I'm feeling a boosted sense of self-worth because of it.





















: [I need some sleep!]


----------



## Benji'sMom (Sep 14, 2004)

Gosh I didn't get through the whole post, but...

Quote:

I recently was reading something about the science of happiness in which one of the leading researchers in the field -- Michael Fordyce -- bluntly indicates that there is a huge amount of research in learning theory that proves that reinforcements work to change not only short-term behavior, but one's long-term internal motivations as well. After a time, he noted, a person who is positively reinforced for doing X will want to do X and will likely enjoy doing X without any further reinforcements. Clearly, this is an overgeneralization -- I'm sure Fordyce would agree. He didn't offer any citations to back up his claims. His position is the opposite to what Kohn indicates. What gives?
You will learn in any child development class in colleges across the country right now that you *have* to give external praise to a young child, so the young child will eventually transition from external motivation to internal motivation. The exact opposite of Kohn, as you mentioned. It's taught as a given, as a known fact, as "the way things are." So to believe Kohn, you have to completely disbelieve everything that is accepted as "fact" right now. I just find it kind of strange, personally, that anyone could believe that children are born without any internal motivation at all. But, that's the excepted theory, I guess.

But I also agree with this:

Quote:

I'm still convinced of his position in broad strokes but I'm wondering if he overstates things and comes down harder on all rewards and deliberate reinforcements than perhaps makes sense.
I think maybe Kohn says to never give rewards because he's trying to write about the OPPOSITE of the accepted theory. (Because the accepted theory just doesn't feel right, so the "truth" must be something else.) And the excepted theory is that children have NO internal motivation, so the exact opposite must be that they have perfect internal motivation and if you give any external motivation you are screwing the kids up big time.

I fall in between, I think. I give complements to my kids, but only as much as I'd sincerely compliment anyone else. I don't think they *need* compliments to create self esteem, but I don't think they *shouldn't* get any compliments/rewards/value judgments at all, either. I'm a moderate rewarder.








(And you mentioned potty training rewards. We actually do give Benji stickers for using the potty. He doesn't seem damaged. He gets to pick which sticker, he really likes the bug stickers best.







)


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

I think one of the reasons* I have not been able to click with Kohn is that his method seems cold, not given the kind of loving interaction that AP means to me. IMO every child deserves to know they are awesome, incredible, amazing people. While I see the point of not saying "good job" every time your kid farts, I think both kids and grown ups need good strokes (Yes, I know what Kohn would say to that. No, I don't agree)

*note- his remarks about Judeo-Christian thought being condidtional-I remember someone here quoting him- would be the #1 reason I could not click with him.


----------



## skueppers (Mar 30, 2005)

After becoming a parent, one of the most shocking experiences I had was listening to people constantly tell their children "good job!" -- and telling my child "good job!" I really had no idea people did this until I started spending time with people who had toddlers.

Which isn't to say that I never provide my kid with feedback that might be construed as "praise" or "rewards". For example, when I ask her to do something, and she does it, I thank her. This seems natural to me, since I also thank my husband and other people in my life in similar situations, and I think it's appropriate to observe social graces with one's children. Saying "please" and "thank you" seem like things which are best learned by modeling.


----------



## Venice Mamacita (Dec 24, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momileigh* 
What really bugs me is when MIL constantly uses "good girl." She does it out of love and habit, so I don't get too upset, and I have explained to her why not to use it and she does agree, but she still does it. I think she just can't help it.

Tell her if your DD can be a "good" girl then at some point she can also be a "bad" one . . . and she won't need anyone to say she's "bad," she'll come to that conclusion all on her own . . . which is why it's important to comment on the _behavior_, not the child.

I love AK & UP -- but, like anything, I've taken what works for our family and left the rest alone. I have a master's in psychology and love to do research, but ultimately I rely on my gut. I mean, if I read a study that stated how well physical violence works as a motivator (and you know there's one out there!), I still wouldn't start hitting my son, yk?


----------



## sphinxie (Feb 28, 2006)

My feeling is that in parenting and similar relationships, a reward system is very disengaged. Giving a value judgement or reward for something is a minimal form of participation when compared with joining in the play, sharing joy and feeling, and so on. What are sweets and colorful stickers besides little objects meant to stimulate an imitation of the love and happiness that comes through sincere loving and happy interaction? What are repetitive praises but a pale reflection of real celebration and especially understanding/empathy, shared feeling?

So my thought is that the presence of praise & rewards aren't the problem, the problem is the absence of full engagement which a child craves. This full engagement is a part of being a complete human being, even if there is more navigation and discernment involved for adults.

My 2c


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *warriorprincess* 
I think one of the reasons* I have not been able to click with Kohn is that his method seems cold, not given the kind of loving interaction that AP means to me. IMO every child deserves to know they are awesome, incredible, amazing people. While I see the point of not saying "good job" every time your kid farts, I think both kids and grown ups need good strokes (Yes, I know what Kohn would say to that. No, I don't agree)

*note- his remarks about Judeo-Christian thought being condidtional-I remember someone here quoting him- would be the #1 reason I could not click with him.

Have you spent much time around people who love his work? I can't speak for others, but I can say that it's probably common for mainstreamers to think that I'm constantly and sickeningly dripping and oozing love all over Simon. Our relationship is anything but cold and distant. I took 106 pictures of him today. He knows that I think he's the world, and then some.


----------



## oregongirlie (Mar 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Linda on the move* 
_I think that when someone is constantly manipulated it is difficult for them to know what they really want or why they are doing the things they are doing_.

The more a child is manipulated into doing things, the less they can hear their own voice.

I really like how you put this and agree. I think manipulative parents risk having insecure children.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

First, a big fat







: to what *Linda on the Move* said about choice and manipulation

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lula* 
I was offered very specific feedback and it wasnt' negative. One comment (or the equivalent) I heard often was "You worked really hard on that project and seem very pleased with the outcome." "This aspect (x)really is interesting to me and I think you have given insightful argumentation." (I wrote tons of argumentative crap for my Mock Trial/ law classes and they always had great feedback but frankly at some point I just wanted to hear "good job the teacher is an idiot if you don't get an A. I thought this way so much that by law school I didn't even discuss my projects with them)

Other fun comments: "I see that you are very excited about <insert X>" or "You have met your goal." It drove me insane, no damnit I was VERY VERY GOOD at things, I did things very well, I did well at things I cared nothing about occasionally and I didn't try hard at everything I cared about or excelled doing.

To this day I still want to hear my parents say that I do a good job at a few things, or hear that I am smart, <insert other generalized comments here> I want to hear this not because I always think I am doing these amazing things but just because they are my parents and not other people. I want the generalized praise regardless of how I measure my outcomes etc.

I'm very interested in what you have to say on this. It sounds like your parents were very close to what Kohn suggests.
The conclusion that I've come to is that I won't use praise unless ds WANTS my value judgement (and it's not manipulative, and in line with how he feels about "job").
Because I do like to be praised sometimes. (but then I also grew up with a TON of praise). But when I work hard and the house looks good, I like dp to say that the house looks clean. But that's specific praise, on how *he* is experiencing my work. I don't want to hear "good job cleaning" or even that I'm a "good cleaner" lol. Just that HE thinks the house looks clean. Does that make any sense?


----------



## PrairieBohemian (Aug 31, 2004)

Praise junkie posting here...

Sorry I haven't read the whole thread yet but I grew up in a household where good behaviour/performance = love. If I played by the rules and excelled in school, I would be "loved". This sick belief has plagued me my whole life so whenever I screw up, I feel completely and utterly unlovable. That's enough to convince me rewards don't work!


----------



## Emmom (Sep 11, 2005)

*To praise junkies everywhere:*
My mom is a strict adherent to behaviorist philosophies. She really actively believes in making the best use of behaviorist techniques for children. I was a horrible, horrible praise junkie up until a year ago. What has "saved" me







is reading on unschooling yahoo groups and forums. Regardless of whether you send your kids to school, or plan to, or whatever, reading about "deschooling" yourself could really, really cure you of your "problem." It cured me. Somehow reading about unschooling families is like seeing Kohn's ideas in their most concentrated form, and has helped me to own my own life, and create my own goals and definitions of success. Reading _Unconditional Parenting_ helped, too, I guess







.
Some example sites:
www.sandradodd.com/unschooling
http://home.earthlink.net/~fetteroll/rejoycing/


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

It's interesting to read about how other people were raised and how they view this issue!

My father believed that I should always be pushed to do better, so if I brought home an A, he asked why I didn't get a 100%. If I got 100%, he asked if there was extra credit. I learned quite young that I would never be good enough. This was reinforced by my parents' fundementalist religion. (I spent most of my 20's in therapy!)

One thing I want my kids to know deep in their bones is that who they are is separate from what they do. They are wonderful, amazing people, but when they make/do something cool, it doesn't validate them as a person because they were already are worthy of love and respect. Likewise, sometimes they will try things that flop completely and it doesn't make them any less loved or amazing.


----------



## PrairieBohemian (Aug 31, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Linda on the move* 
One thing I want my kids to know deep in their bones is that who *they are is separate from what they do*. They are wonderful, amazing people, but when they make/do something cool, it doesn't validate them as a person because they were already are worthy of love and respect. Likewise, sometimes they will try things that flop completely and it doesn't make them any less loved or amazing.

This is it right here. This is the golden key. Thank you Linda for this reminder tonight.


----------



## hipumpkins (Jul 25, 2003)

I am so loving this discussion b/c I am reading Kohn right now. I am really taking in wht everyone is saying.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Bumping.

Pat


----------

