A few days ago we talked about how uneducated the punishment can be. Today, following the same channel of methods that, rather than educating, harm children, I will speak of a cousin-brother of punishment: Rewards or rewards.
Many adults, parents or teachers, are against punishments and yet in favor of rewards. We agree that they are two opposing measures, however they are not completely contrary, because with the prizes the same is achieved as with the punishments: a temporary positive result that is motivated by the act that the adult executes without helping the Children to be responsible or learn to live from the conviction that what they do is the best.
In other words, with the prizes it is possible for the children to do what the adults want them to do but without internalizing the benefit of what they are doing, because what prevails for them is not what they do, but what they get by doing it An example I can offer is when, with all the good intentions in the world, my parents gave us money at the end of the year according to the notes we took (better grades meant more money and more money meant being able to buy more CDs, a game for the console , ...).
This reward meant that the already little stimulating task of studying became a simple process to get an extra payment at the end of the course. It's not that we want to learn more, it's that we wanted to get better grades to get a bigger reward.
The motivation was not intrinsic, it did not come from ourselves, but it was extrinsic, focused on something external, the money to receive.
The effects of the awards are not long lasting
Reward systems (with stickers, stars or positive points) are rarely useful for producing lasting changes in attitudes or behavior. The effects they produce last while there is a reward, which is what motivates the behavior sought.
If there is no prize, the child loses the incentive that motivated his way of acting and behaves again as he did before receiving the rewards ("I used to do it before and you gave me a prize. Now that you don't give me a prize, Why strive? ").
Several researchers have even discovered that Children whose parents make frequent use of these reward systems tend to be less generous than his companions
When someone pretends that another person modifies a behavior or a habit, it must be marked as an objective, not that the other does what they are told, but that the other wants to do what he is told to do.
It makes no sense that to a person who runs to the right, convinced that he wants to do so, we simply say that he now has to run to the left because it is better. What we have to achieve is that the person believes and feels that running to the left is better. Then she will be the one who will start running in that direction.
When we reward a behavior that we want to achieve, we are eliminating, in a way, the possibility that a child feels that the behavior is correct. By rewarding we are creating a too weak cause-effect system. Cause: you behave well. Effect: you receive a gift. The moment there is no effect (gift), there will be no reason for the cause to continue to occur.
At the time a prize is given, long-term interest is lost
In a representative study, 45 children between 3 and 5 years old were offered a drink they did not know called Kefir (fermented milk product) along with other beverages (a total of eight) and were asked to order them in order of preference .
Some of the children were asked to drink Kefir and were given a little more at the end by flattering them for doing so. Other children were asked to drink it, were given a little more and were offered a ticket for a children's movie (about 10 minutes, which they saw after taking the Kefir) if they drank more. A third group was given the drink, they were offered more at the end of the first without any pressure and then they could watch the same children's movie, without anyone establishing any relationship between drinking more Kefir and watching the movie (whether they drank or not to watch the movie as well).
Children who received awards and compliments they drank more and soon placed Kefir among their favorite drinks, as can be predicted, however, after four weeks of performing this action twice a week, Kefir lost "fame" and lost positions.
Children who were not offered a reward for drinking Kefir said, initially, that it seemed an acceptable drink (they positioned it as less preferred than those who received awards and compliments), however, after four weeks, Kefir escalated positions and ended up being considered a better drink for these children than for those who had received stimuli for drinking it.
In the following graph you can see what I comment (the triangulitos are the groups of children who did not receive stimuli to drink more):
The graph on the left represents the position that Kefir occupies among the rest of the drinks both at the beginning of the study and at the end. In the one on the right, the evolution of Kefir is observed in children who received stimuli and gifts and in those who did not receive them.
As you can see, the motivated and award-winning children (the squares) began placing the Kefir among the best and ended up leaving it somewhat behind. Children who could drink it without restrictions or motivations (the little triangles) eventually considered it tastier than at first.
If we substitute Kefir for "doing homework," "being generous," "reading stories," "playing in the room," or what we think our children should do, it seems obvious to think that The moment we add a reward to any of these behaviors, the easier it is for the child to create a dependency relationship between what he has to do and the prize and lose interest in doing so when the prize disappears.
In a way it is perfectly logical: "If they give me a prize to take it, very good it doesn't have to be".
He who expects a prize can hurry to get it
Another risk of rewarding behaviors or what we want a child to do is to get him to act solely with the objective of receiving the prize, doing things with less interest and passion.
Some research seems to show that Children who expect something in return do things faster and worse than those who do without expecting any reward.
To exemplify this I return to the subject of studies: it is not the same to study to get good grades in order to obtain money, than to study for the pleasure of learning. The second will produce more joy and satisfaction to the person who does it (because he enjoys doing it), while in the first case getting good grades is no more than the means to receive what one expects.
In the second case the learning will surely be greater and the subjects will be more consolidated while in the first case they will easily forget: "it is easier to learn what one wants to know than to learn what others want you to know."
It is observed in other studies that children who expect to be rewarded (and adults too, of course), try to do the job in the most effective way or taking the fastest and safest way.
In other words, prizes can get children to put aside creativity and risk. The person who invents, who is creative and who "wastes" time with new ideas runs the risk of being wrong. The one who is wrong has to rectify on his way going back to solve the errors with new solutions. Going back makes you not the first, from which it is concluded that making mistakes makes it take longer to do things. Doing things in a longer time means that you are less efficient and the one that is less efficient gets no reward.
Perhaps you will think that the one who is wrong and rectifies will do a better job. Surely yes and it is fair that you get a greater prize for having devoted more time to your work. Seen this way the awards could work for a while. However, little by little, the child will receive the prize to receive and look for the fastest way to get it.
Let's say that, with a prize, the possibility of doing something to have fun is largely lost, since what motivates and rejoices is not the way to go, but the place to be reached.
It is curious, but at the cognitive level and at the level of child development, the ideal is that children make mistakes and make mistakes, since this opens the door to the logical thinking of children. Every time they miss a new question it reaches their heads and the need to find a solution appears.
If instead of accompanying them on the path of learning, in which they can enjoy a lot with each new achievement as they are wrong, we pave the way for them to do things because yes, to obtain an external benefit, we will be making our children beings who value what is achieved, but not the way it is achieved, who will want to reach the goal faster and faster, giving less and less importance to how to get there (something similar to what is intended to be avoided when it is said “is that young people now value nothing, they want everything and the sooner the better” ).
Children must internalize the values
It is very common (it has happened to me often) to hear some parents say to their children: "I buy it if you behave" or "I buy it because you have behaved".
These phrases are quite misguided because, although they have a positive educational reinforcement intention, they are subjecting good behavior or what is expected of them to receiving or not receiving gifts.
In other words, “I buy it if you behave well” leaves the child free to behave badly in exchange for not receiving a gift: “Son, if you behave badly, I don't buy it for you”, “I don't care, I don't want it . I can behave badly. ”
Child must behave well (It would be necessary to define what it means to behave well, but this is another topic that I will deal with in the next few days) because you feel you should do it. You do not have to hit others because that is not done. He does not have to insult his parents because respect comes first. You do not have to take toys from children because they are not yours.
Everything has a reason that children must internalize. Not to do something because that way they get a prize is to take away the value and importance of not doing it, because when there is no prize for such behavior there will be a free way to do what you want.
Punishments and rewards are similar
From all the comments it is concluded that punishments and rewards or rewards are not contrary, but go hand in hand in the objective and in the results.
The two strategies are intended to modify someone's behavior, with the difference that punishments make the child ask “what do others want what they do and what will happen to me if I don't do it” while the prizes make them wonder “ what do others want me to do and what they will give me if I do it. ”
Neither of these two actions helps the child to shape his personality intrinsically or to answer the key question: "What kind of person do I want to be?" (It is not the same to be who I want to be, to be who they want me to be).
