Today we will talk to you about the topic of "candy rewards".
When it comes to how to make children obedient, many parents have a clever trick like this: "If the child is not obedient, give him a piece of candy and he will obey."
Wa refused to pack up her toys, promised to give him a candy, and immediately obediently sorted it out by herself;
Wa refused to eat well, promised to give a chocolate after eating, and immediately took a big bite of soup.
Under such temptation, children not only do not cry, but also take the initiative to dress and eat and take the initiative to clean up toys. Don't worry too much.
But is it really a good way to make children obedient through such material rewards?
Why candy rewards
Seems to be really effective
First of all, we need to understand why children will be more obedient when they give sugar.
American psychologist Skinner's "operational conditioning" theory believes that people will get some results when they do a certain behavior.
Some results are not necessarily direct results, but if the results are beneficial to themselves, they will play a role in promoting and stimulating people to repeat the behavior.
The same goes for children.
When the child finds that as long as he does something that satisfies his mother, he can get a candy, then the child will repeat the same thing.
So, at the age of 0 to 3, the candy reward can really allow us to harvest quickly, a super obedient "angel baby".
But this is just a perfect illusion, because you will soon find that your child will become more and more "greedy", and a candy can no longer be able to handle the child.
A child may ask for two sugars, three sugars, or even more of a higher value material reward.
If always give sugar
Soon lapsed
Wasn't it quite effective to give sugar before, and why did it go useless?
Back in the 1870s, psychologist Edward Desi made a similar argument experimentally.
To study how much external rewards motivate people, he conducted an experiment.
Edward invited two groups of students of the same age, one A and one B, to solve the same puzzles in different rooms at the same set time. The entire experiment is divided into three phases.
In the first stage, the two groups of students solve the problem normally.
In the second stage, Edward told the students in Group A that they would receive $1 for each question they answered correctly, but the message was not told to Group B.
In the third stage, two groups of students can engage in 10 minutes of free time. The researchers judged whether the students were still solving problems during the break to evaluate the students' liking for problem-solving activities.
As a result, he found that the students in Group B who did not have dollars as a reward would continue to solve problems during breaks, while the students in Group A who received rewards would have fewer people to solve problems during breaks.
This set of experiments showed that group B, which did not have a dollar reward stimulus, was much more enthusiastic and fond of solving problems than group A with rewards.
This is the "Desi effect" known in psychology.
This experiment shows that when a person is participating in a challenging or interested activity, giving him a material reward will actually reduce the intrinsic attraction of the activity to him.
The same is true for children.
Children are originally driven by curiosity to explore eating and dressing. Now, due to external factors, that is, the intervention of "candy rewards", the child's internal interest is greatly reduced.
Eating and dressing is no longer a fun thing, it becomes a reward.
In the long run, the child's attention to "dressing" and "eating" itself will be reduced, and the child's eyes will only focus on rewards.
If one day you don't give candy, the result can be imagined.
If rewards come too often, the attraction to the child may also gradually fail.
At this time, parents will need to provide greater rewards and stimuli, such as toys, such as money, etc.
Crying without giving sugar, and making trouble without giving sugar will also become a new means for children to threaten adults.
What kind of rewards
is what really works
I know, hearing this, people will definitely say it. I don't want to give sugar, but there is no rut, the child does not give sugar and does not obey.
In fact, there is a better way to reward than material rewards, that is, to give encouragement and recognition to the child's behavior itself.
This is also the lesson of the "Desi effect": to reward children's internal motivation.
For example, when you see your child trying to put on your own socks, tell your child, "Mom saw that you were trying hard just now, putting your socks on your feet, although it was a little difficult, but in the end you succeeded, and you improved a lot compared to the last time."
Instead of simply saying "You're awesome" or giving you a piece of candy, it's over. The most important thing is to let the child recognize what he is doing, and truly feel the challenge and fun of the thing itself.
To put it simply, whether we want to recognize or encourage children, we must use as few material rewards as possible such as toys and candy.
Give your child more effective spiritual rewards, such as the right praise and companionship.
Stimulate and ignite children's innate curiosity and curiosity, so that children can experience success and fun again and again.
There's nothing more worth it than having a child be the master of his own behavior, you say?
Note: Some of the pictures and text are from the network, if there is infringement, please contact Xiaobian to delete.
Like you can pay attention to the little frog, there are more article updates waiting for you to see